Lit Circle Letter 3: World War Z

The final third of World War Z focuses mostly on humanity's fight against the worldwide undead threat. At this point, it is the "First Strike" against the enemy after being knocked down in the ring. Most of the included interviews now tell stories of people fighting due to politics more than circumstance.

The stories stem from a Chinese nuclear submarine crew that desert their country out of desperate fear, the members of the International Space Station stuck in orbit with little chance of rescue, or the clearing of the underground sewage tunnels of Paris.

Each of the stories never ceases to instigate the human element within the reader, with a story of pity and sorrow, or courage and valor. We sympathize with them because we realize that these situations may never happen in our lives, and that these people deserve our respect for having survived an unlivable war. It's a good reminder to honor the veterans of past and current wars.

All of this serves to be part of the larger conflict, on which a general comments on quite clearly:

You've heard of the expression "total war"; it's pretty common throughout human history. Every generation or so, some gasbag likes to spout about how his people have declared "total war" against an enemy, meaning that every man, woman, and child within his nation was committing every second of their lives to victory. That is bullshit on two basic levels. First of all, no country is ever 100 percent committed to war; it's just not physically possible. You can have a high percentage, so many people working so hard for so long, but all of the people, all of the time? What about the malingerers, or the conscientious objectors? What about the sick, the injured, the very old, the very young? What about when you're sleeping, eating, taking a shower, or taking a dump? Is that a "dump for victory"? (272)

I can't think of a stronger anti-war message in the book. Understand that this fictional general is describing an impossible total war because they have no choice; the entire world has been plunged into chaos by a common enemy. They can't just stand idle because time is not on their side. The undead army they face are supernatural and inhuman, an army that requires no sustenance to survive or fight. As more humans die, the zombies can only grow stronger, while humanity can only grow weaker.

What is being described here is the impossibility of a total war, even in peacetime, without the prospect of undead roaming the world. If total war is impossible, why fight it? And for what reason?

These are the questions that World War Z asks you because you are not facing this fictional zombie threat. You have the choice to become that soldier, the conscientious objector, that general who decides that war is not the option, even if is contradictory to who you are. You can be afford to live in a world that is not plagued by zombies.

Instead, you live in a world with trigger happy politicians and idiot leaders. If there is one lesson to learn from this book, it's that world governments are no better than the dead: mindless husks that constitute zombies. They are the greatest enemy when it comes to peace and its opportunities. More importantly, their only mission is to kill and consume, for death incarnate is indiscriminate in its mission.

The anti-war message is also summed up in the context setting of World War Z. As the book takes place after the war, the interviews expose the consequences of the conflict and its after effects on humanity. Thus, the consequences of fighting a war willingly or unwillingly are never justified. Perhaps a quote can sum it up:

We lost a hell of a lot more than just people...That's all I'm going to say. (339)

When you rationalize any risk or situation you've fought yourself out of, you always end up losing. In war, it's your blood, your friends, your base camp, or even your life. In everyday life, the least you can lose is your time, something you will always lose no matter what.

The unspoken truth in every modern war is that any government creates it for self sustenance. More and more these days, war is never being fought for a good cause, and if it is, it's never worth the price. It's when you willingly kill that you can't live with yourself. It's knowing that if you ever become a soldier or a pacifist, you may regret your choices.

It is this mentality that must bring out the greater side of people when countries come together to save humanity. It should take much less than Armageddon for humanity to cooperate.