Fewer American Snipers, More American Workers and Builders

Role model to young men?
Role model to young men?

 

W.J. Astore

Former Army Ranger Rory Fanning has a thoughtful article at TomDispatch.com on why young men should not join the Army to fight the war on terror in distant lands.

Here’s an excerpt:

Believe me, it [the Afghan War] was ugly. We were often enough targeting innocent people based on bad intelligence and in some cases even seizing Afghans who had actually pledged allegiance to the U.S. mission… I know now that if our country’s leadership had truly had peace on its mind, it could have all been over in Afghanistan in early 2002.

If you are shipped off to Iraq for our latest war there, remember that the Sunni population you will be targeting is reacting to a U.S.-backed Shia regime in Baghdad that’s done them dirty for years. ISIS exists to a significant degree because the largely secular members of Saddam Hussein’s Ba’ath party were labeled the enemy as they tried to surrender after the U.S. invasion of 2003 … Given the reign of terror that followed, it’s hardly surprising to find former Baathist army officers in key positions in ISIS and the Sunnis choosing that grim outfit as the lesser of the two evils in its world.  Again, the enemy you are being shipped off to fight is, at least in part, a product of your chain-of-command’s meddling in a sovereign country. And remember that, whatever its grim acts, this enemy presents no existential threat to American security, at least so says Vice President Joe Biden. Let that sink in for a while and then ask yourself whether you really can take your marching orders seriously.

Fanning makes persuasive points here: How the U.S. military bungled its wars of choice in Iraq and Afghanistan; how often Iraqi and Afghan innocents were killed due to bad intelligence and the usual deadly mistakes associated with war; how the wars fed, and continue to feed, a cycle of violence that is perpetuated by new U.S. troop deployments and weapons sales (with respect to weapons sales, see this excellent article by Peter Van Buren, which details how the U.S. is hawking M1 Abrams main battle tanks to the Iraqis).

Yet persuading young American men against joining the military, let alone convincing them not to strive to be elite Rangers, is not, sadly, an exercise in logic.  In American society today, young men, especially from the working classes, seek an identity and a status that affirms masculinity.  They want to earn the respect of their peers, parents, and prospective dates (and mates).  American society provides few options for such men, especially if they’re living in straitened circumstances in dead-end jobs.  Consider that many physical jobs, such as working in a warehouse, pay only slightly better than minimum wage, with weekly hours curtailed so that employers don’t have to provide health care.

Military service, which exudes masculinity while conveying societal respect (and free health care, among other benefits), is in many ways the most viable option for working-class men (and more than a few women, obviously).  Like it or not, young men often aspire to being “the biggest and baddest,” or at least serving with a unit of such men.  They seek community and a sense of belonging within unapologetically masculine settings.  They may also have dreams of being heroes, or at least of proving themselves as capable within a community of likeminded tough guys.

American society bombards such impressionable young men with images of soldiers, often deified in movies like “Act of Valor” or “Lone Survivor.”  Consider the popular success of “American Sniper,” with its depiction of the resolute sniper as avenger and punisher.  Movies like this are powerful in persuading impressionable youth to sign on the dotted line as volunteers for military service.

Military service, which conveys personal dignity, adds a dash of grandeur.  By joining the military, you become part of something much larger than yourself.  A sense of masculine challenge, especially in elite units like the Army Rangers or Navy SEALs, combined with societal respectability prove alluring to young men.  Sadly, no amount of logic about the lack of wisdom and efficacy of America’s war on terror will convince them otherwise.

Some will say there’s nothing wrong with this.  Why not encourage young men to join the military and to fight in foreign lands?  Yet if those fights serve fallacious causes that amount to strategic folly, our troops’ sacrifices amount to little.

One thing we can do: American society should provide more jobs for young men that convey respect within masculine codes but which don’t require donning a uniform and killing an enemy overseas.

For nearly a decade, I taught working-class students, mostly young men, in rural Pennsylvania.  My students came to class wearing camo fatigues.  Many looked like they had just climbed down from a tree stand in the woods (a big holiday for my students was the first day of rifle deer season).  They drove pickup trucks, listened to country music, dipped Skoal or smoked Marlboros.  They’re not guys who aspire to be metrosexuals sipping lattes at Starbucks.  They’re looking for a job that screams “man,” and sometimes they find it: in welding, as a heavy equipment operator, in residential construction, and so on.

But for those who can’t find such “masculine” vocations that provide decent pay and benefits, military service is powerfully alluring, and almost impossible to resist, especially when there are so few alternatives.

In September 2008, I called for a revival of the Civilian Conservation Corps, national service that is dedicated to rebuilding America.  We need to instill an ethic of national service that goes beyond war and killing.  An ethic that inspires young men with patriotic pride and that conveys societal identities that appeal to them as men.

What we need, in short, are fewer “American snipers” and more American workers and builders.

9 thoughts on “Fewer American Snipers, More American Workers and Builders

  1. You sir, need to reread that mans excerpt. Everything taught in the military which is no longer patriotic, and should never be based on self-interest is dead. We serve corporate america for corporate interests not for our freedoms. No man should serve nor join tyranny. Instead, fathers should give off their asses, grow some balls, train their sons, not have nor ship them off to the government. God your post sounds one of dependency. Government is over. Now we must take it back.

    Like

  2. We don’t need to discuss botched strategies in “wars of choice”: the issue is precisely that these ARE wars of choice, not a necessary defense of the territorial integrity of the USA and the lives of its citizens. I will oppose such wars to the end of my days and will recognize no “glory” accreting to anyone who participates in these wars. I will not be patronizing Mr. Eastwood’s movie about this sniper or any other wretched propaganda movies.

    Like

  3. Mr. Fanning does an excellent job of identifying the reasons young men and women take the military option and how culture almost manipulates them to do so. If his article had gone deeper and also identified the reasons such foreign wars are initiated and fought – natural resources, wealth, control, markets, military equipment sales, etc. – the piece would have been even more powerful as an exposition of the too-rarely-found truth about military conflicts.

    Like

  4. It is a good article, but you missed a major point, employment of Americans in the military industrial complex. I believe the figure is about 600,000…in the US? Who knows outside in all the bases. No one in government can afford to ignore this fact and stop wars. US AID goes to support this employment as well…80% of USAID has to be spent on US products, most of which are military purchases. The money doesn’t even go to the countries involved. Egypt directs an account in Virginia to send the money to Boeing, etc., for Apaches…etc. Thus, fomenting of war is critical to the US economy. It is a terrifying fact.

    Like

    1. Yes, you’re right. The reality is that the military-industrial complex is not going to be reined in quickly for political as well as economic reasons, as you note. But it’s certainly possible to shift resources from the Complex to the civilian sector over time, perhaps a decade or so. Lots of studies have shown that a billion dollars spent in the civilian sector creates more jobs than a billion spent on “defense.” So if job creation is the goal (a political reality for Congress), we’ll get more bang for the buck if we stop directing money to things that go “bang.”

      It requires a change in mentality and strong leadership — lots of forces arrayed against it, true, but not impossible.

      Like

    2. Christine,
      Your comment reminded of Oliver Stone’s documentary “South of the Border”. In one segment he was talking to late Argentine President Nestor Kirchner about a personal meeting with George W. Bush. Kirchner told Stone on film that Bush told him “wars are good for the economy”. People can find the film on YouTube. Terrifying indeed, and equally saddening.

      Like

      1. Today’s Senate confirmation hearings for Ashton Carter to become new War Czar are a perfect example of what we’ve been talking about! (I believe the pundits have him as a shoo-in, no significant GOP opposition expected.) Mr. Carter’s major pitch apparently was “We’ve got to end the ‘sequestration’ of Federal funding! It’s just KILLING the Pentagon’s ability to ramp up spending on new war toys and reward our friends in the War Industry with still more juicy contracts!!” [That was, of course, a paraphrase/translation into what an honest person would say. But, we’re dealing with politicians here, aren’t we? So it will never be stated like this in public.]

        Like

  5. The military is a sort of pseudo-father to many people. Do this, do that. Go here, go there. Structure, rules, knowing where you stand. The brotherhood that is forged can become the family that many young men never had. On the flipside: People who joined and do not mesh well are outsiders (tribal instincts run deep). If you have a low estimation of yourself, the incessant micromanagement and overbearing bureaucratic BS can leave a person ready to scream. If you hold individuality or creatively doing things in an unorthodox manner, prepare to live a life of grinding monotony. For many, it’s a ticket out of their existing shitty condition with the hopes of growing into a better one. This works for some. Others won’t make it and are steadily losing faith in the system, the broken VA process and any of the empty platitudes offered up by empty suits in Washington who are completely beholden to their corporate benefactors. “Expect nothing and be pleasantly surprised when you get pennies.”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s