Nicholas Zilhaver

Professor Smith

ENGL 101

10/17/16

An Insight Into The Human Condition As Explored By The Berlin Crisis

Over the relatively insignificant span of time mankind has existed on the earth, conflict and division typically spawned from differences of opinion, have been a consistent, universal, and core theme regarding human nature. Nature in of itself is chaotic, feral, yet ordered. Watching a wolf devour a hare simply out of hunger and bloodlust may be shocking to watch, however in the grand scheme of life, it is a necessary principle in the preservation of life. In the deepest depths of our depravity our kind relates to nature in that same respect, however our accursed higher intelligence makes us uniquely susceptible to a savagery which dictates our very nature in defiance of its original design: Difference of opinion and belief. Furthermore, mankind has taken this defiance and chaos and escalated it to vast and complicated geopolitical complexes far beyond the comparatively petty squabble between the wolf and the hare. In short then, our capability for advanced thought spawns unassailable conflict between opposing ideas, and no conflict in recent history is able to portray this tension like the cold war, where the ideologies of the western world clashed with those of the east resulting in no direct armed conflict, due to the potential for mutually assured destruction. Within this grand conflict, the Berlin Crisis of 1961 was an episode which saw some of the greatest tension of the entire war. Soviet and American tanks faced off at the border of East and West Berlin. The photographic image of this event revealed a number of elements which supported and established not only the historical event photographed, but also an element of the human condition. Our higher intelligence allows us to form individual opinions, and group together with others who revere similar ideologies. As a result of this division, a lack of acceptance for opposing ideas is borne simply of our innate inability to accept others. When scaled to a global level, this inability causes conflict between differing ideologies. Therefore, three distinct contextual elements are deployed by this image to establish a greater understanding of the political environment of the time period. 

The first and most blatant element in the image is the subject: The tanks. Two opposing columns of these fighting vehicles stand prepared to fire at one another with only a thin stretch between them. Tanks are undeniably symbols of war. They have only one purpose: Efficient and systematic elimination of opposing individuals. They were spawned out of necessity, to bring an end to the innumerable loss of life of the great war, and used for the exclusive purpose of killing. Their presence sets the tone of the situation, and the serious dedication each power has to defending themselves and eliminating their opposition. Furthermore, many countries do not possess the wealth or technology to deploy these vehicles, so their mutual deployment on this would be field of battle illustrates the wealth, prosperity of each power and their dedication to defensive action. In fact, according to the federal budget, during the years of the cold war, US military defense spending averaged approximately 10% of its GDP. To put this measure into perspective, the defense expenditure of 2015 was approximately 5% of the GDP (Office of the President). It is clear how this element contributes to the greater meaning of the visual text. Two technologically advanced weapons of war stare each other down from opposing territories. One column of tanks stands ready in West Berlin, the champion of democracy and capitalism, whereas the other column of tanks stands fast across the border in East Berlin, a model city for communism. The difference of opinion between two distinct communities boils down to machines of war standing at the ready to annihilate one another should there be a need other than paranoia or hatred. In the context of the cold war, people in both the USSR and the United States, separated only by a difference of belief, had a profound and unjustified fear and hatred for one another which resulted in over 50 years of paranoia and rash action. All of these sub elements combine to paint a broader picture pertaining to the political atmosphere of the time. This broader picture is epitomized by two very powerful opponents lavishing wealth to out-spend and out-perform one another in the most dangerous game of chess ever played. 

The second and perhaps understated element is the border. Berlin was separated into two halves after the second world war, with the Soviet Union occupying the east and the allies occupying the west. While the tanks featured in the image are representative of the tension between the opposing ideologies, the border itself represents the division between them. Typically, without a division, there is no difference in opinion or thought, and thereby an inability to generate the conflict mankind is uniquely capable of. It is therefore important to consider the division between the two worlds, as lack thereof would in all likelihood prohibit any generation of conflict. A blatant lack of space, also known as no man’s land stands between the two superpowers. It is the defined division between the east and the west. More infamously it was known as the berlin wall. Clearly written in multiple languages are the words, “You are leaving the American sector”. Clearly then, the division is not simply physical, but rather political and social. It is also important to note that the border is a physical manifestation of something on a much broader scale. The border between the west and the east not only hindered the movement of people, but also the movement of money, materials, culture and ideas between the two superpowers. The border then, is a completely impermeable membrane. This barrier is so powerful, that it is able to completely stop the movement of even ideas. Finally, flags stand on either side’s border as physical manifestations of nationalism and opposing beliefs, which only further entrench the division between the two sides. All of these details combine to form the sole element of division within the visual text, which as mentioned previously defines clearly a difference in belief and opinions. If you scale this up to a political level, it is considered an opposition of ideologies. 

The third element which supports the purpose of the text is the demeanor of the individuals presented in the text. On either side of the border, stand civilians and soldiers alike. While the tanks aim their guns at one another, many of the officers and civilians pictured simply stand relaxed and watching the spectacle. This demeanor is symbolic of normal life within the conflict. While politically and idealistically the two sides stand opposed and ready for war, the civilian population does not. The berlin crisis lasted for several days, far too long for life to simply cease. As time passed, the soldiers standing guard and the civilian population generally became more relaxed and less eager. The visual text portrays several officers and civilians watching the conflict and moving freely. Furthermore, the photo is shot from above, much in the same way someone would view a game at a stadium. This then simply is representative of how this daunting potential for war simply became a reality of life which people naturally adjust to. We live in much the same way today. Upon boarding a plane in our post 9/11 world, you realize that there is always a potential threat from radical Islamic terrorists. However, this is merely an aspect of modern life and not nearly significant enough for us to inconvenience ourselves by not utilizing travel by airplane. On a deeper level however, this is a final tie to the political environment of the time. Continuing with the plane analogy, it is important to note that statistically at least, the plane is more likely to crash due to pilot error or mechanical failure. Due to the political environment of the 21st century however, the threat from radical Islamic extremists is taken into great consideration in the minds of all who live in the world. Returning to the visual text, the collected coolness displayed by average civilians establishes a revelation: That division and conflict between opposing ideas is as natural to mankind as eating or drinking. If this sort of conflict had not been of human nature, the scene would have been very different. People would be in mass panic. However, as violent conflict between opposing ideas is so entrenched in our nature, it is even endorsed by our political system. The conflict comes as no surprise then to the mass of people viewing this conflict. 

In conclusion, the photograph of the Berlin Crisis in 1961 was not only documentation of a historical event, but also a glimpse into the political environment of the time. Three elements, contextual in nature, are deployed by the photo to establish three distinct themes to support this central idea. The berlin wall establishes the division between ideologies, the tanks establish the conflict between opposing ideologies, and the collective calm of the people viewing establishes how this concept is ingrained into our culture and political system. While the political conditions of the world change due to the dynamic nature of our progression one eventuality remains static. Mankind is uniquely burdened with higher intelligence and as a result of which, is uniquely burdened with problems. So long as humans continue to exist on earth, conflict between opposing ideas, and changing political environments, will never disappear. 

Works Cited

United States, Office of the President. The Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 1985. Government Printing Office, 1984.

United States, Office of the President. The Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 2016. Government Printing Office, 2015.

Stivers, Don. Stand Off at Checkpoint Charlie. 9 Nov. 1961. Berlin, Germany.