The Paradox of the Military Ideology

It is almost axiomatic in American politics that the military constituency is on the right. This fact can be attributed to several factors: the idea of American Exceptionalism that the military promotes, our history of fighting wars against the totalitarian left, the United States’ military flexing against the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and the code of an absolute morality that motivates the citizen to be willing to sacrifice himself for country. Conservative positions all.

Yet, the military organization itself is about as far to the left as any could be. In fact, it resembles a veritable communist society, one that Orwell couldn’t have caricatured any better.


In the division of labor, management has total control as it might in some socialist commissar’s office, with none of the efficiency.

There are brain workers and laborers. The latter mustn’t ask too many questions of the former, lest they be labeled “enemies of the people.”

We have a strict rationing of resources that party leaders wisely calculate.

Party leaders have a way of getting better goods than do the proletariat. Perks above and beyond what are deemed suitable for the common man are set aside for party elders—the senior officer corps. If one disrespects a Party Man, he invites the wrath of the machine upon him.

All the while my fidelity to the cause is judged less by my effort to do a good job than by how snappy I am with a salute or citing regulations about uniform wear.

We still fight for the best way of life human history has ever recorded, but if we ever had to defend it against a socialist army, it might be difficult to distinguish our brand of fighting for freedom from our foes', much as Orwell himself declared, “the creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”

Why?

It’s a powerful question.

Good teachers relish it, poor ones loathe it.

So it is in the Army—trainers and leaders ought to understand the potential that this query brings. It is a gift, an opportunity for them to instill in Soldiers an understanding, and a better fighting ability, than they would otherwise have.

Sadly, too many Army leaders are afraid of the question, “why?”

Why?

Glad you asked. It is because they misinterpret it as a sign of dismissive disrespect. They see it as a challenge to their authority. Having taught high school for several years before enrolling, in my thirties, as a freshman into the School of the Army, I can empathize with the view that experts should be trusted.

When I explain to my students the best way to tackle a complicated problem, or how best to work in teams, I shouldn’t be afraid to have to justify it. I should, and usually do, recognize it as either a desire to get down and dirty with the issue, or a chance to share and improve on a method.

George Santayana called skepticism “the chastity of the intellect.” According to his aphorism, there aren’t many virgins in the Army.

Too many Soldiers refuse to understand why they do what they do. The powers that be have a stake in creating the culture that despises understanding, similar to the way that Frederick Douglass’ slave master feared his slaves’ education.

Soldiers are often held in intellectual bondage. But our masters have no need to fear—we are here voluntarily! We can be trusted! Please, tell us why we do what we do!

When I get back to the classroom, I will encourage students to ask “why.” It makes for better learning, better students, and better citizens.
The Army should do the same—it will make for better Soldiers.

Cookies

A few days ago, a friend mentioned that she thought I was sarcastic. Before you wholeheartedly agree with her, she said that, specifically, my mention of cookies as one of the best Army perks was sarcastic.

Here's the deal. There are a lot of things about the Army that I love. I made a whole list of them. And, yes, I did include the Camp Bondsteel chocolate chip cookies on that list.

In a rare moment of sobriety, I was not being sarcastic. I hereby defend my original declaration that "the cookies are amazing."

I even offered to my commander that, if they ever took the cookies away, he'd have to take my weapon. A bit of a scare erupted when the next day the good folks who do the baking at CBS substituted a new caramel cookie for the original, amazing, chocolate chip ones.

I almost flipped.

But the perks were back the next day, and I have been happy since. To respond publicly to the accusation that an otherwise serious Soldier would claim the cookies as an Army best sarcastically, I have two things to say.

First. The cookies are really good.

Second, there are only about nine things better.

Cookies rule.

Protecting the Force from Common Sense

It's hazardous to our safety here to have trash receptacles near our barracks.

If it doesn't make much sense to you, then clearly you haven't been in the Army. Or long enough, like me.

One day, the dumpsters that had successfully received our refuse for months were gone. They must be getting cleaned or replaced, right? Well, as it turned out, no... they were removed to save our lives.

Setting new lows for risk tolerance, someone or some committee decided that it was safer to remove the dumpsters to a location unknown. It's an OpSec thing. I have heard that these dumpsters are just too tempting for bomb setters.

So, there are many dumpsters available around the work areas and the chow hall, but now we have to walk twice as far to throw things away. I suppose that they think we either need more exercise, or this is some sort of tax that they hope will result in the production of less trash. My guess is that folks will simply let it pile up higher in their rooms-- I think we need a Risk Assessment done on that.

Anyway, now what we get is a pile of trash at the former dumpster site. You couldn't hide a bomb in that, could you? What about all the grills-- perfect hiding places for explosive devices, right? (What's the over-under on how soon a policy letter will be released to regulate leaving lids off the barbecues?)

Instead of telling us what was going on, and giving us proposed alternatives, they just wanted us to guess at what happened to the dumpsters. After all, if the ordinary Soldier had a clue about what was happenning and why, we could start acting independently and making decisions for ourselves. And that's the biggest threat to the "Force."

The Flag Question Answered

This was a can of worms. I will attempt to pack the slimy things back in and seal it up nicely without getting any slime on me. Many good points were made. Isn’t open debate wonderful?

First, my assessment of the situation.

There is undeniably a lot of antipathy in the United States towards Mexican immigrants. No need to open a new can of worms with a lengthy explanation. But Canadians aren’t immigrating by the hundreds of thousands, and even if they were, it wouldn’t be very apparent, given their language, customs, and complexion.

Having said that, I personally love the contributions of Mexican culture to our own. I just enjoyed a scrumptious meal of: one beef enchilada, one taco, and some strange potato dish that claimed to be part of the Mexican fare. That meal-—a refreshing change at the Camp Bondsteel D-FAC—-would have been unlikely but for the Mexican influence in the United States.

Alright, first is the point oft-made that Army Soldiers should pay homage to one flag. Agreed. But flying another doesn’t have to take away from the fidelity rendered to Old Glory, does it? The real issue behind some of the comments is that of sameness.

Army leaders—-leaders of any organization, for that matter, but especially Army types—-can’t stand individuality. They want to look over their dominions and say, “what a nice, tidy, uniform bunch of people I have.”

Anytime a leader makes a general rule to address a specific situation, he is overreaching and overreacting.

Better the attitude, I think, to (pardon the bumper sticker phrase) “celebrate diversity.” A leader should be saying, “Look here, I have 1500 troops that represent dozens of cultures, religions, language preferences, and sports teams, and we are all in unity as to the mission.

“Unity of Effort,” is, in fact, one of KFOR’s mottoes. Not “Unity of Thought” or “Unity of Appearance.”

Some in the Army can’t get past their fetish for conformity in appearance. The uniform is one thing, but there are many who can’t stand anything that deviates from their preferences or point of view.

So the Soldier who wants the Mexican flag taken down may be the most patriotic person in the force, and he may have friends who have died in combat, and he may send his grandmother flowers every week. But he’s the same guy who wants me trim back my bushes because they’re unsightly, or wants me to wash my car more often because it makes the neighborhood look trashy, or wants me to wear a tie to church because he doesn’t want others to get the impression that we all, God forbid, think differently.

Flying a flag of your choice doesn’t impede the mission.

Let’s not confuse tacky with right. It may be tacky to fly a Mexican flag. Hell, I live in downtown Oakland—not exactly the most military-friendly locale in the state—and fly an Army flag from my front porch. Most of my neighbors, and the radicals who pass by my busy street daily, think that’s tacky. Let ‘em.

I think Army leaders would be more comfortable if Mexican flags weren’t flown, and they wouldn’t have to worry about it. It’s reminiscent of a dialogue from the should-be classic The Breakup.

Vince Vaugn’s character: “Do you want me to do the dishes?”

Jennifer Anistons’ character: “I want you to want to do the dishes.”

Instead of trying to enforce a cult-like fanaticism of their preference for “Unity of Appearance,” they should spend a little time instilling the values that lead one to want to fly the American Flag. Then they can worry about regulating its size, fabric, etc.

So here’s a recap:

 Should a U.S. Soldier be allowed to fly a Mexican flag from his porch on a forward military base? YES
 What if the flag was Canadian or British? YES and YES
 Should the command craft a policy letter prohibiting offending flags? NO
 How would you deem which flags are prohibited, given the fact that the forward base is home to seven NATO nations? WHATEVER IS IN EXISTING MILITARY CODE: HATE GROUPS ETC., WOULD BE BANNED
 Would state flags be subject to the same regulations? What about athletic team flags? EVERYTHING GOES, EXCEPT FOR THE LAKERS AND YANKEES

A Return to Cynicism

My wife recently told me that, after rereading all my posts on this blog, she saw an evolution in my attitude from resentment to contentment. Well that just made me mad! A content Army muckraker seems oxymoronic; so, in the spirit of resentment...

But perhaps there is a strain of resignation in my attitude, not from contentment, but from the numbing resignation that comes from working in a system designed to beat one into submission.

OK, that’s enough of that. This week, a particularly delicious ethical query was brought to my attention, and I’d like to test the engagement level of my tiny audience. Please post your comment on the blog! Many of you reply to me, and, as much pleasure as I take from corresponding with you, I think your fellow blog readers will benefit from your wit and wisdom.

Here we go! Keep in mind that this particular ethical query is based on actual events.

Should a U.S. Soldier be allowed to fly a Mexican flag from his porch on a forward military base?
Now, many of you will, no doubt, have reflexive responses to this question. I REALLY want to read your comments, and I am VERY curious about their variety.

Before you type out your answer, consider these additional thought-provoking questions:

 What if the flag was Canadian or British?
 Should the command craft a policy letter prohibiting offending flags?
 How would you deem which flags are prohibited, given the fact that the forward base is home to seven NATO nations?
 Would state flags be subject to the same regulations? What about athletic team flags?

I hope this has been a fun and exciting experience. Remember, the experience isn’t over until you post your thoughts.

And for you die hard seekers of truth, I will post the correct answers to all questions next week.

(Photo of the actual flag under controversy by me)