After closing the curtains of a hectic day, feeling the soft veil of tranquillity embracing your weary body on a warm afternoon, your fingers gently touch the little smartphone in your pocket: instinctively, they seek a temporary refuge from the fast-paced reality for their owner. It all happens automatically, and, without giving it a second thought, you soon find yourself immersed in the intricate universe of video games. What if you were being told instead that behind your war-themed game lies a strategic message from the US Army, aiming to encourage you to see this simulation as the only viable option for tackling international crises?
BY DENISA DAMIAN
Introduction
After closing the curtains on a hectic day, feeling the soft veil of tranquillity embracing your weary body on a warm afternoon, your fingers gently touch the little smartphone in your pocket: instinctively, they seek a temporary refuge from the fast-paced reality for their owner. It all happens automatically, and, without giving it a second thought, you soon find yourself immersed in the intricate universe of video games as time seems to be kinder to you and stands still for a little while. A warm feeling invades your senses as you successfully complete tasks in the game, and everything falls into place as the adrenaline kicks in when you tactically shoot at your virtual enemies. What if you were being told instead that behind your war-themed game lies a strategic message from the US Army, aiming to encourage you to see this simulation as the only viable option for tackling international crises? Recognised as being an integral part of the military-entertainment complex , military videogames have received little scrutiny from the scholars within the field of security. Against this backdrop, this article aims to analyse the militarisation of US society through the lenses of virtual militarised spaces.
What is militarisation and how does it connect to video games?
Whilst militarism implies that a society prioritises “warlike values” [1], the militarisation theory outlines the idea that subtle operations behind the scenes prepare a society for an imminent violent conflict [2]. In such instances, our contemporary societies are covertly infused with war discourses, images and various narratives that can turn any individual into a passive or active consumer of violence. Perhaps one of the most relevant examples that outlines this is the military’s close affiliation with the gaming industry, especially in the US.
The flourishing military-entertainment complex can be traced back to the 1990s when the close ties between the Pentagon, the US military and the entertainment industry materialised in the establishment of The Institute for Creative Technology (ICT). This research institution, affiliated with the University of Southern California and actively funded by the US Army, is responsible for creating simulations and training programmes for the military establishments through games. The ICT has been described as a wide network that brings together Hollywood’s best screenwriters, former and active military personnel, toy manufacturers, and reputable scholars to brainstorm any potential crises-like scenarios to develop the best war-themes games. [3] These could be related to terrorist plots, psychological operations or some of the most innovative combat strategies that could be deployed during warfare. Once such scripts are finalised, the game-makers are tasked to bring them to life. Having noticed that the recruitment targets reached record low levels in the 1990s, these games have been used to reshape the US Army’s public image in the aftermath of the wars waged by America in Iraq and Afghanistan, aiming to attract the youth.
Military video games and associated implications
One of the main things linked to these games is the fact that they present a sanitised version of combat operations, whilst violence is being used as a source of pleasure and entertainment. This is done in a controlled manner “to legitimise a dominant ideology and role” [4] tied to the interests of the US. From a first-person shooter perspective, embracing the role of a hypermasculine US soldier fosters an emotional connection to the game: in a world of actors labelled as the ‘dangerous other’- irrational, unorganised and barbaric - a Western protagonist in a war-themed game outlines the constant battle propagated by the figureheads: the classic ‘good vs evil’. It plays on the present fears and anxieties of individuals, whilst, at the same time, it perpetuates the idea that the only response to any crisis is armed conflict. In this virtual space, there is no space for diplomacy, dialogue, or mediation, regardless of the nature of the crisis (natural disasters, violent conflicts, etc).
For example, Medal of Honour, America’s Army or Call of Duty resort to this ideology: the player must adhere to the rules of engagement and the core values of the US Army, but any attempts to deviate from the predetermined goals of toppling the enemy or if they accidentally take the lives of civilians will incur a significant loss of points. The faceless enemies based in some exotic places gives them a further impetus to naturalise the idea of violence as a solid solution to a crisis, as the distance and dehumanisation of the other is shown to increase the likelihood of using brutality [5]. There is a strategic choice behind the visuals: the streets are either empty with no civilians in sight. Equally, the wounded bodies of enemies and the bodies of the injured soldiers are “strategically obscured” [6]. This reduces the complexity of the lived experiences of those on the ground to mere seconds on the screen where bodies vanish with no trace.
The messianic role of the US in the dirty world of draconian people is further emphasised in games that renegotiate the geopolitical dimensions of reality. For example, the game Kuma/War allows the players to re-experience in their own time a step-by-step process of murdering Osama Bin Laden by the US Navy Seals, or the death of Muammar Gaddafi. What this does instead is to displace the arrows of the moral compass of the players with enthusiasm and reinforce the adoption of military ideologies in exchange for entertainment. As such, around a third of young Americans adopt a positive view towards such dynamics after playing these games [7]. This is a case of “procedural rhetoric” [8] which refers to the fact that games shape individuals’ opinions and geopolitical viewpoints, effectively distorting the original narrative and enforcing the militarisation of daily life. What is more, it has been shown that 60% of those that joined the army admitted to having been playing such games, citing them as a motivation for pursuing a military career [9].
Conclusion
In conclusion, war-themed video games constitute a significant aspect of contemporary popular culture, influencing societal perceptions and attitudes towards militarisation, particularly within Western societies. Through immersive gameplay and realistic depictions of warfare, these games serve as potent tools for propagating militaristic ideologies and values. The nuanced interplay between media representation, technological advancements, and cultural dynamics underscores the complex relationship between video games and societal militarisation.
References
Berents, Helen, and Brendan Keogh. "Dominant, damaged, disappeared: imagining war through videogame bodies." Australian Journal of Political Science 54, no. 4 (2019), pp. 515-530. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2019.1663402.
Gagnon, Frédérick. "“Invading Your Hearts and Minds”: Call of Duty and the (Re)Writing of Militarism in US Digital Games and Popular Culture." European Journal of American Studies 5, no. 5-3 (2010), pp. 1-20. DOI: 10.4000/ejas.8831
Godfrey, Richard. "The politics of consuming war: video games, the military-entertainment complex and the spectacle of violence." Journal of Marketing Management 38, no. 7-8 (2022), pp. 661-682. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2021.1995025.
Hirst, Aggie. "Videogames Saved My Life”: Everyday Resistance and Ludic Recovery among US Military Veterans. International Political Sociology 15, (2021), pp. 482-503. https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olab018
Martino, John. "Video games and the militarisation of society: Towards a theoretical and conceptual framework." 10th International Conference on Human Choice and Computers (HCC). (September 2012), pp.264-273. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-33332-3_24.
Parkin, Simon. “Call of Duty: gaming’s role in the military-entertainment complex”, October 22, 2014. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/22/call-of-duty-gaming-role-military-entertainment-complex.
Robinson, Nick. "Militarism and opposition in the living room: The case of military videogames." Critical Studies on Security 4, no. 3 (2016), pp. 255-275. https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2015.113049.
Robinson, Nick. "Videogames, persuasion and the War on Terror: Escaping or embedding the military—entertainment complex?." Political Studies 60, no. 3 (2012), pp. 504-522. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2011.00923.x
Schulzke, Marcus. "Military videogames and the future of ideological warfare." The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 19, no. 3 (2017), pp. 609-626. DOI: 10.1177/1369148117704173
Schwartzburg, Rosa. “The US military is embedded in the gaming world. Its target: teen recruits”, February 14, 2024. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/14/us-military-recruiting-video-games-targeting-teenagers
