Definitely a threat of a Rajput caste forming, though I wonder if that is a worship of the military by civilians, especially by nationalists. Most active/vets I've spoken with really dislike the fetishization of soldiers because they are just normies with jobs. Pete Buttigege and John Kerry don't get soldier's deference.
The fetishization is in fact the jarring thing (actually CCP tries to copy that in China, moderately successful for a long time, but recently backfired a bit). It's a very very common trope indeed since the beginning of modern industrial nationalism. But vet worshipping is indeed not really that big among actual servicemembers. The big thing is that western nations have long forbidden even the thought of Nguyen Giap like tactics such as launching one disastrous offensive after another just to defeat the enemy psychologically. The civil-military "red line" works both ways.
I'd actually argue that the natural conclusion of American "forever wars" is America turning into an Iran-like state with a civil state and a deep state. JSOC/CIA/State Department will be the new Pasdaran.
Actually I'd argue the US failure in Vietnam is what led to the downfall of deep state 1.0. Really, Iranians in Syria has a lot of parallel to Americans in Vietnam. The direct result was the degeneration of CIA into an bureaucracy that made Soviet top spy Aldrich Ames to the top of counterintelligence. The true Deep State was a Roosevelt-Nixon thing when they can drug random people for pseudoscience. (the reason people keep hearing about Deep State is usually when it's at the end of life cycle, if it's going strong they will be like UFOs to the general public). Generally speaking the big sign that the Deep State going strong is when US foreign policy includes any form of longstanding commitment and is not apparently braindead while trying to tone down public involvement.
I doubt the Trump assassination is a "deep state" striking. Again, if you want to observe a deep state in the wild you should start reading about Iranians and Syria. That's how a deep state works.
The telling trait for a military that comes with a shadow government that is borne out of foreign commitment is a two tier force system with one branch that is one and only funded for expeditionary work (they may still pretend they are for internal defense, and as their masters still want internal influence they may as well operate a bloated militia that carries political clout), and the "conventional" army branch that is perpetually underfunded and underequipped. Most Iranians in Syria are either the Special Operations related or proxy/"irregulars" that are all volunteer and in some circumstances consists of non-citizens. The most cynical of them is the cannon fodder units made up of refugees in Syria.
There’s no question they blew themselves up to get Nixon and just did it again in 2020. On the Butler hit the lone gunman wasn’t alone.
I agree they’re done (for now) but here’s what happened IMHO (and the historical record): American government reacted to external and domestic threats by standing up organizations that are never stood down- which is typical of American government. An interest, career path, budget in DC never goes away. See TSA.
The rise of Communism, Fascism and Nazism and the very effective subversion and intelligence services of the Communists, The International and to a lesser extent the Nazis required organizations to counter in kind. Hoover is a lawyer in the government when the Anarchists are setting off bombs and shooting returning troops from Europe. There’s of course the ever present danger to any government that if the government fails the people self organize into defense (American Legion) and in America this an eternally acute danger. Later as the Nazis rise and into 1940 Hoover-FBI are drawn into counterintelligence against Nazi subversion combined at that time with the Communist International agitation against England in America, Hoover reluctantly agreed to move from making cases into intelligence/counterintelligence. At this time also the Air War over England is deeply in doubt to the point an exile British government and yes Intelligence station is set up in Rockefeller center. This became the British/Canadian nucleus of the OSS and then later CIA.
Now it certainly has gone through several skins but as long as the interest domestically exists and the foreign entanglements to justify…
We must end the Alliances especially NATO to end the Empire.
The US military doesn’t rule America from behind the scenes, but the US Intelligence Community frequently meddles from behind the curtain… the French had their Gray Cardinals but we have Gremlins… and they keep breaking things (they can’t rule) but not governing.
OK, want to hear my more "cynical" take? The thing is that the cult of infantryman is always there. I actually know a book called "An Intimate History of Killing", infantry is always a death cult, when is the last time a private stepped into the first battle of an attritional major war and returned home in one piece?
By the end of 19th century every European nation has a up-and-running death cult called nationalism, how else will you make people die for the nation?
We’re the same families, same people as the police BTW.
If only volunteers are serving and generationally (same families) and this indeed is our situation- what is to be expected? Caste is an inaccurate word for America (indeed outside India) but yes a warrior class has formed as usually happens when societies are in constant wars- but all societies that aren’t slaves or vassals usually are at war frequently.
As far as warriors inspiring the American people- Good ! It will safeguard their freedom and dignity in their own hands.
The south was purely a military camp. While the North the soldiers were scholars and trades people smart and able. Wishing to finish the fight to return to productive work. -Grant
The problem is that back in the days the north has an actual industry that can be rapidly mobilized into lethal effects. These days? I'm always a cynic
A very thoughtful analysis and set of prescriptions. You mention this, but I think the "American Bushido" is more the military manifestation of what has happened to every institution in America due to social media, smart phones, and institutional failures. The "brand" becomes a hyper-intense and extreme version, made to go viral, and geared to appeal to humans' most tribal instincts. But the brand then gets pretty disconnected from reality. I don't doubt that the sort of Bushido dynamic has grown more salient over the past 20 years, but I think if we talked with most service-members and maybe even most Americans, I'm not sure we would see as vast a difference pre / post GWOT culturally and attitudinally as one might think. As much as the Army marketing might at times emphasize the operator, it just as much emphasizes the engineer and problem-solver.
Thus we have the Bushido narrative, grounded in some real proof points in terms of the increased focus on special operations type activities but otherwise somewhat disconnected from reality. Yet it has material impacts on our polarized political conversation, enabled by a public which--as you point out--has largely grown disconnected from the military as an institution and detached from a meaningful sense of citizen responsibility.
My theory is that American operator culture is increasingly resembling the kind of radicalization that gripped Chechnya after 1996.
I'd classify Chechnya as a tale of reverse Red Dawn. In 1994 it was young, fearful recruits doing what they must to defend their homeland, sometimes hard decisions and made and some of the worst people climb to the top, but such is the face of war.
However, as the war ends and with the destruction of the country's political institution through Dudayev's assassination and the destruction of the country's economy thing quickly turned different. The young recruits have become heroes, they are able to shoot bad people, and this makes them good. With such mindset come the idolation of violence above all and is increasingly associated with a "warrior class". Give a farmer a seed he will create food, give a musician a melody he will create music, give a warrior an enemy and he will create nothing, he will only destroy.
One thing people often forget is that the reason why jihadists win is because Sharia law is better than no law. Their codes are clear cut and there's more than enough men willing to die for it. Given a ground like Chechnya where so many men has been into foxholes, there's plenty of willing recruits.
In 1999 when Russians come again the young men who fought to defend their homeland had become utterly delusional, violent psychopaths that no one would fight to defend. There could be no total defense or any form of real mobilization, commands become totally fragmented and worse, it is the actions of the war heroes that pushed Chechnya out of any international recognition.
This could as well happen here, we have a generation of traumatized men, many with neurological and moral injuries, who believe shooting bad people makes them good. And they may as well not be shooting bad people, just people who happen to be on the bad camp. We have politicians cynically manipulating such men, creating a world and a class for such "warriors". We have the eerily high rate of religious fundamentalism among SOF circles, from former Ranger Reconnaissance Company member Mike Edwards rambling about a "Synagogue of Satan" (OK, at least he's not shilling for Israel) to Shawn Ryan and his lunacies. You really should be looking at a mirror.
But I'd even argue earlier all the way back to the 70s and 80s when US army looked into the Wehrmacht and accepted the bloody legacy. You need to understand how much the root goes, and did I mention the Lind-Creveld Cabal? Might elaborate on it one day.
This admiration of the warrior hero is every society on earth that isn’t slave or vassal, er “ally.” This is human nature and history.
In America we had frontier and so frontier culture for 3 of our 4 centuries, that’s hardly pacifist. The Citizen Soldier of Stephen Ambrosia (spelling deliberate) has never existed … except perhaps in hastily gathered badly trained levees that are usually slaughtered and routed. See war of 1812, and they were a lot tougher than people now.
I’m at a loss to understand what people including the author think is even possible, never mind what they want?
Our debacles and defeats of WW2 and Korea convinced the government and professionals of the need for trained standing armies - and our alliances require same. Require, not stipulate- although the consequences of near rabble were discovered in Korea 1950.
As to the above examples of Iran and France- the Kinda requires significant stretching. Both had professional militaries as their core and base. In Iran’s case against Iraq the attack of the holy cannon fodder was to tie down the Iraqi army so the Iranian (shah’s) army could maneuver. In France’s case the levees fell in on the best army in Europe with a deep bench of leaders- although patriotic fervor helped.
Yeah, there's always the professionalized core in the case of Iran. The core of Pasdaran consists of former insurgent fighters and commandos who fought for Palestinian cause back in the days. However one must remember the Iranian SOP changed drastically over the course of the war, in the early days it's literally just a mob of angry men with G3s.
Also Artesh indeed made significant contributions with the air force and helicopters, however Artesh is always sidelined by the general public an the clerics. It was indeed a "people's war" in the first year of the conflict.
I’m referring in particular to one major battle and campaign where the rabble soaked up Iraqi fire so the regulars could maneuver.
In general I think peoples wars are a very valuable facet to war and a total effort when supported by and major battles won by regulars- and I think the Peninsula war, Clausewitz, Mao, Vietnam supports this- on their own they are very unlikely to win.
Really, I think for any form of frontline units it's actually a good idea if the officer has a ranger tab. Being physical fit is never a bad thing, and again it's a leadership school, it's about thinking clearly under stress and fatigue. Also some land navigation and stuff is important, in a lot of times people of all kinds end up bugging out on foot.
Nicely said, Defsec. Another aspect of the disconnect of the military from the civilian is the complete abandonment of Congress’s constitutional authority to declare war. Now the use of the military is completely in the hands of the president. This has lead to the worst kind of adventurism and sets the country up for martial law.
Probably something here also in how both Japanese and American Bushidos 'success' in warfare early came less from their own abilities but in the reluctance or hollowed out state of the states they were operating in.
I'm not sure about Japanese but from talking to soldiers in our time there's always this hint of insecure self awareness creeping in around the actual wars they were 'warriors' in actually were like from an opposition perspective
To the point about how American Bushido has entrenched itself into the culture at large - just consider how there's basically a whole sector of the civilian economy dedicated to it. Not just in terms of film, video games, podcasts, etc., but actual physical goods - especially ones geared towards men. And, to further this point, what these men are like to be around (at least the ones I've interacted with).
Take, for example, the litany of brands that use the Spartan helmet as their logo. It's deeply ironic to see this displayed on peoples' t-shirts, coffee mugs, whatever as a symbol of a valiant, unbreakable warrior because the Spartans... lost. Our whole cultural perception of the Spartans as great warriors is almost entirely shaped by the movie 300 - a movie which only shows the other Greeks who fought at Thermopylae once in the whole runtime, and ultimately a movie about a battle which they lost. Thebes, a city-state most Americans do not know about, was the one that ultimately conquered Sparta. And by Roman times, Sparta was a sort of Disneyland for Romans.
Here's a fun exercise to do that takes like 30 seconds: look up shopping options for men vs women. The ones for women are practical, maybe brightly colored, whatever - the ones for men are identical to the plate carriers you have in Warzone. What is being evoked here? What is the marketing behind the scenes? What is the angle? I think it's pretty obvious - the weighted vest looks like that so dudes feel like they're some brave warrior out in a combat zone.
And just on an interpersonal level - these guys don't know what the hell they're talking about, they live in a different reality. I used to work a white collar office job in local government no less, and the finance guy on my team had a fuckin armor plate in his backpack. Why? Who are your opps, accounting? It also is probably important to mention that he's likely in a militia group, darkly funny because he's a member of a racial minority (and I'm pretty sure I know exactly what group it is). He's only a few years older than me, zero military experience like me, but would talk about how he and his buddies would do exercises up in the mountains, on guys properties, all that shit. You think your ragtag group is actually going to be able to take on "the government"? After seeing how fragile his temper was, I see more of a Kyle Rittenhouse type situation unfolding!
All of that to say that what this is doing to civilian culture at large, especially among men, is fomenting a "warrior culture" where none is needed. Where these guys see themselves as junior partners to those actually serving, despite coming off as a dumbass to the first non-SOF veteran they meet.
Very interesting, and it rings true on an anecdotal level, from the look and feel of some ICE raids and the new imagery out of the FBI, all the way down to the stupid "tacticool" aesthetic. To me it feels like an uncomfortable echo of the relationship between Prussian Military Culture and Fascism.
Apologies if this has been noted before, but I think the best point in support of the American Bushido critique requires us to consider who might be most lethal and effective military force operating in the world today.
I vote for a bunch of 40-something tradesman, entrepreneurs, waiters, and bus drivers hiding in barns while they pilot drones that rain hell down on a foreign invader. Ukraine should teach us all the virtues of the Citizen Soldier. True Democratic Republics have no need of a Warrior Class: we'll all fight when it is right to do so, and we absolutely need to.
Just went back and reread this after Hegeth's most recent missive on Bushido. This article hits the issue on the head, and focuses a bright light on Hegeth's lack of intellectual depth and thought.
“Third, public discourse must challenge the mythology of the warrior by honoring service without glorifying violence.”
Oh. Public discourse.
Author I’m getting your aim is demoralization.
Perhaps I’m unjust.
I doubt this, and the snark about Hegseth detracts from the dignity otherwise in the article which the subject of a warrior ethos is psychoanalyzed - however detached from the reality that shaped it.
There is nothing in the American military that has happened ever to my knowledge and certainly my lifetime and 23 years of service that isn’t reflective of American society at large, the choices the voters and so politicians made. You certainly are dealing with a free, armed and frontier society from inception to now … and one where Citizen Soldier meant running out the door to fight from 1602-1890.
The same society elected politicians who chose to make us an Empire in the 20th century. The same elites who send us to war are yes pumping us full of warrior ethos through every channel of media the entire 20th century, indeed warriors a long staple of history. There’s something about war that has always appealed to boys and men and always will- looking at human nature and blaming the present men in uniform… not to be taken seriously.
The people are becoming militarized by their own choice, they are certainly armed and arming and training out of pocket and on their own time, to put this on the military- 1% of society and only 15-20% with all the veterans is absurd. The people are quite making their choice- and the military certainly doesn’t control Hollywood.
As it’s been unwise policy since ancient times to use conscripts for wars abroad as opposed to volunteers or mercenaries the all volunteer force was proposed in “This Kind Of War” by a Korean War veteran. Still at the top of every reading list in the military. Ferenbach never says we’re an Empire not democracy… but the point was taken.
“This kind of War” by Ferenbach is a far more authoritative reference than schmaltzy Ambrosia from Stephen Ambrose.
As far as the concept of the Citizen Soldier- the American concept is that of the militia or anglo saxon fyrd - not the Prussia America dreamed of by Upton… although mind you the acolytes of Prussian America have certainly had the 20th century to their credit.
Conscription has been the exception in our history and was never popular. Nor wise IMHO.
One of the problems with these Citizen Soldiers of the temporary militia is their level of proficiency is so low particularly against highly trained professionals that they are usually slaughtered and often defeated. This was very noticeable in the American army of WW2.
Again you’re looking at a minority of society with no influence on popular culture and critiquing it for the choices of others,
Mad Dog Mattis for example did play to the media… he certainly didn’t invent their business model.
I’m left uncertain at the end what exactly is to be done with all these citizen soldiers? Except perhaps to follow around the soldiers… upbraiding them for being too macho? Certainly they’re not to fight… just… serve?
OK, that's the funny thing, citizen soldiers tend to be a continental Europe thing where there's a huge threat of getting wiped out by your neighbour at any moment. And it is the totalness of the wars, the sheer form of moral bankruptcy and mass violence that gives birth to the ideal of the citizen soldiery and the modern sense of "popular will". Basically speaking the ideal form of war in this way resemble Iran during Iran-Iraq war, just rush men to their death. (This is actually how Revolutionary France won it's first wars). However more often than not the need for proper operational art eventually induces a militant technocracy...
The whole "American democracy" schtick is an unholy blend of everything continential and commonwealth. It's delightfully messed up
Well we’re not Europe in so many ways. This was lost on 19th century reformers enthralled by Prussia’s achievements. Look at our education system and what it morphed into, the Frankfurt school, and yes Upton. Prussia of course is your ne plus ultra example but this was done to survive as a small state surrounded by enemies. America was and still is a settler nation surrounded by Oceans, Tundra and to the south feudal fragmentation riven by deserts, mountains, jungles.
Upton and the rest are in this sense all “Progressives” however they don’t and didn’t understand their own history… not outside the University.
Put bluntly, our mothers won't tolerate thousands of us coming home in bags. We have to make up the difference in numbers with tech and the training is too long for conscripts to be useful
I believe when the Secretary Hegseth speaks to 'warrior ethos," he's talking about removing women from the combat arms and Special Forces - where they don't belong. And removing senior officers who spend a year at the National level War Colleges, pontificating on the existential threat of "climate change."
Definitely a threat of a Rajput caste forming, though I wonder if that is a worship of the military by civilians, especially by nationalists. Most active/vets I've spoken with really dislike the fetishization of soldiers because they are just normies with jobs. Pete Buttigege and John Kerry don't get soldier's deference.
The fetishization is in fact the jarring thing (actually CCP tries to copy that in China, moderately successful for a long time, but recently backfired a bit). It's a very very common trope indeed since the beginning of modern industrial nationalism. But vet worshipping is indeed not really that big among actual servicemembers. The big thing is that western nations have long forbidden even the thought of Nguyen Giap like tactics such as launching one disastrous offensive after another just to defeat the enemy psychologically. The civil-military "red line" works both ways.
I'd actually argue that the natural conclusion of American "forever wars" is America turning into an Iran-like state with a civil state and a deep state. JSOC/CIA/State Department will be the new Pasdaran.
That already happened.
That’s who got Kennedy, Nixon and Trump 1.0.
Nearly got Trump 2.0 at Butler… but went cheap on sniper. Needed 3-5.
It happened, it’s over.
It’s ending.
In fairness the author may indeed be seeing its replacement… and it’s to the good it’s a movement of the people.
Actually I'd argue the US failure in Vietnam is what led to the downfall of deep state 1.0. Really, Iranians in Syria has a lot of parallel to Americans in Vietnam. The direct result was the degeneration of CIA into an bureaucracy that made Soviet top spy Aldrich Ames to the top of counterintelligence. The true Deep State was a Roosevelt-Nixon thing when they can drug random people for pseudoscience. (the reason people keep hearing about Deep State is usually when it's at the end of life cycle, if it's going strong they will be like UFOs to the general public). Generally speaking the big sign that the Deep State going strong is when US foreign policy includes any form of longstanding commitment and is not apparently braindead while trying to tone down public involvement.
I doubt the Trump assassination is a "deep state" striking. Again, if you want to observe a deep state in the wild you should start reading about Iranians and Syria. That's how a deep state works.
The telling trait for a military that comes with a shadow government that is borne out of foreign commitment is a two tier force system with one branch that is one and only funded for expeditionary work (they may still pretend they are for internal defense, and as their masters still want internal influence they may as well operate a bloated militia that carries political clout), and the "conventional" army branch that is perpetually underfunded and underequipped. Most Iranians in Syria are either the Special Operations related or proxy/"irregulars" that are all volunteer and in some circumstances consists of non-citizens. The most cynical of them is the cannon fodder units made up of refugees in Syria.
There’s no question they blew themselves up to get Nixon and just did it again in 2020. On the Butler hit the lone gunman wasn’t alone.
I agree they’re done (for now) but here’s what happened IMHO (and the historical record): American government reacted to external and domestic threats by standing up organizations that are never stood down- which is typical of American government. An interest, career path, budget in DC never goes away. See TSA.
The rise of Communism, Fascism and Nazism and the very effective subversion and intelligence services of the Communists, The International and to a lesser extent the Nazis required organizations to counter in kind. Hoover is a lawyer in the government when the Anarchists are setting off bombs and shooting returning troops from Europe. There’s of course the ever present danger to any government that if the government fails the people self organize into defense (American Legion) and in America this an eternally acute danger. Later as the Nazis rise and into 1940 Hoover-FBI are drawn into counterintelligence against Nazi subversion combined at that time with the Communist International agitation against England in America, Hoover reluctantly agreed to move from making cases into intelligence/counterintelligence. At this time also the Air War over England is deeply in doubt to the point an exile British government and yes Intelligence station is set up in Rockefeller center. This became the British/Canadian nucleus of the OSS and then later CIA.
Now it certainly has gone through several skins but as long as the interest domestically exists and the foreign entanglements to justify…
We must end the Alliances especially NATO to end the Empire.
The US military doesn’t rule America from behind the scenes, but the US Intelligence Community frequently meddles from behind the curtain… the French had their Gray Cardinals but we have Gremlins… and they keep breaking things (they can’t rule) but not governing.
OK, want to hear my more "cynical" take? The thing is that the cult of infantryman is always there. I actually know a book called "An Intimate History of Killing", infantry is always a death cult, when is the last time a private stepped into the first battle of an attritional major war and returned home in one piece?
By the end of 19th century every European nation has a up-and-running death cult called nationalism, how else will you make people die for the nation?
Rajput? A Warrior caste?
Well yes, it’s done.
We’re the same families, same people as the police BTW.
If only volunteers are serving and generationally (same families) and this indeed is our situation- what is to be expected? Caste is an inaccurate word for America (indeed outside India) but yes a warrior class has formed as usually happens when societies are in constant wars- but all societies that aren’t slaves or vassals usually are at war frequently.
As far as warriors inspiring the American people- Good ! It will safeguard their freedom and dignity in their own hands.
The south was purely a military camp. While the North the soldiers were scholars and trades people smart and able. Wishing to finish the fight to return to productive work. -Grant
The problem is that back in the days the north has an actual industry that can be rapidly mobilized into lethal effects. These days? I'm always a cynic
Good news- we already are… there’s a manufacturing labor *shortage* and even real estate for factories getting tight.
Problems we want to have…
A very thoughtful analysis and set of prescriptions. You mention this, but I think the "American Bushido" is more the military manifestation of what has happened to every institution in America due to social media, smart phones, and institutional failures. The "brand" becomes a hyper-intense and extreme version, made to go viral, and geared to appeal to humans' most tribal instincts. But the brand then gets pretty disconnected from reality. I don't doubt that the sort of Bushido dynamic has grown more salient over the past 20 years, but I think if we talked with most service-members and maybe even most Americans, I'm not sure we would see as vast a difference pre / post GWOT culturally and attitudinally as one might think. As much as the Army marketing might at times emphasize the operator, it just as much emphasizes the engineer and problem-solver.
Thus we have the Bushido narrative, grounded in some real proof points in terms of the increased focus on special operations type activities but otherwise somewhat disconnected from reality. Yet it has material impacts on our polarized political conversation, enabled by a public which--as you point out--has largely grown disconnected from the military as an institution and detached from a meaningful sense of citizen responsibility.
My theory is that American operator culture is increasingly resembling the kind of radicalization that gripped Chechnya after 1996.
I'd classify Chechnya as a tale of reverse Red Dawn. In 1994 it was young, fearful recruits doing what they must to defend their homeland, sometimes hard decisions and made and some of the worst people climb to the top, but such is the face of war.
However, as the war ends and with the destruction of the country's political institution through Dudayev's assassination and the destruction of the country's economy thing quickly turned different. The young recruits have become heroes, they are able to shoot bad people, and this makes them good. With such mindset come the idolation of violence above all and is increasingly associated with a "warrior class". Give a farmer a seed he will create food, give a musician a melody he will create music, give a warrior an enemy and he will create nothing, he will only destroy.
One thing people often forget is that the reason why jihadists win is because Sharia law is better than no law. Their codes are clear cut and there's more than enough men willing to die for it. Given a ground like Chechnya where so many men has been into foxholes, there's plenty of willing recruits.
In 1999 when Russians come again the young men who fought to defend their homeland had become utterly delusional, violent psychopaths that no one would fight to defend. There could be no total defense or any form of real mobilization, commands become totally fragmented and worse, it is the actions of the war heroes that pushed Chechnya out of any international recognition.
This could as well happen here, we have a generation of traumatized men, many with neurological and moral injuries, who believe shooting bad people makes them good. And they may as well not be shooting bad people, just people who happen to be on the bad camp. We have politicians cynically manipulating such men, creating a world and a class for such "warriors". We have the eerily high rate of religious fundamentalism among SOF circles, from former Ranger Reconnaissance Company member Mike Edwards rambling about a "Synagogue of Satan" (OK, at least he's not shilling for Israel) to Shawn Ryan and his lunacies. You really should be looking at a mirror.
But I'd even argue earlier all the way back to the 70s and 80s when US army looked into the Wehrmacht and accepted the bloody legacy. You need to understand how much the root goes, and did I mention the Lind-Creveld Cabal? Might elaborate on it one day.
Also on Rhodesia fetishisation and spetsnaz fetishisation
If you spent two decades oppressing other nations, you start turning into an oppressor, period. You are what you do.
Yes, and you do what it takes to survive, have dignity and freedom.
Or to gain ill gotten riches, such as Africa’s mineral wealth without any real obstacles. Certainly not Africans.
That’s our decolonization policy- aka Rhodesia.
Who by the way… weren’t colonists, but settlers like Americans.
This admiration of the warrior hero is every society on earth that isn’t slave or vassal, er “ally.” This is human nature and history.
In America we had frontier and so frontier culture for 3 of our 4 centuries, that’s hardly pacifist. The Citizen Soldier of Stephen Ambrosia (spelling deliberate) has never existed … except perhaps in hastily gathered badly trained levees that are usually slaughtered and routed. See war of 1812, and they were a lot tougher than people now.
I’m at a loss to understand what people including the author think is even possible, never mind what they want?
Hastily gathered and badly trained is actually Iran Iraq and Revolutionary France, and they worked... Kinda...
If their leadership didn't went batshit insane and turn the objective from "defending the revolution" into "spreading the revolution by force".
Our debacles and defeats of WW2 and Korea convinced the government and professionals of the need for trained standing armies - and our alliances require same. Require, not stipulate- although the consequences of near rabble were discovered in Korea 1950.
As to the above examples of Iran and France- the Kinda requires significant stretching. Both had professional militaries as their core and base. In Iran’s case against Iraq the attack of the holy cannon fodder was to tie down the Iraqi army so the Iranian (shah’s) army could maneuver. In France’s case the levees fell in on the best army in Europe with a deep bench of leaders- although patriotic fervor helped.
Yeah, there's always the professionalized core in the case of Iran. The core of Pasdaran consists of former insurgent fighters and commandos who fought for Palestinian cause back in the days. However one must remember the Iranian SOP changed drastically over the course of the war, in the early days it's literally just a mob of angry men with G3s.
Also Artesh indeed made significant contributions with the air force and helicopters, however Artesh is always sidelined by the general public an the clerics. It was indeed a "people's war" in the first year of the conflict.
I’m referring in particular to one major battle and campaign where the rabble soaked up Iraqi fire so the regulars could maneuver.
In general I think peoples wars are a very valuable facet to war and a total effort when supported by and major battles won by regulars- and I think the Peninsula war, Clausewitz, Mao, Vietnam supports this- on their own they are very unlikely to win.
Excellent read, thank you 👍
Note the author has no ranger tab
Ranger school is a leadership school since forever (actually ranger and ranger school are two different thing).
It's always a thing for officers to get some weird qualification so he/she/they can flex to the NCOs. Kinda necessary honestly.
Note this commenter also has no ranger tab
Really, I think for any form of frontline units it's actually a good idea if the officer has a ranger tab. Being physical fit is never a bad thing, and again it's a leadership school, it's about thinking clearly under stress and fatigue. Also some land navigation and stuff is important, in a lot of times people of all kinds end up bugging out on foot.
Nicely said, Defsec. Another aspect of the disconnect of the military from the civilian is the complete abandonment of Congress’s constitutional authority to declare war. Now the use of the military is completely in the hands of the president. This has lead to the worst kind of adventurism and sets the country up for martial law.
Probably something here also in how both Japanese and American Bushidos 'success' in warfare early came less from their own abilities but in the reluctance or hollowed out state of the states they were operating in.
I'm not sure about Japanese but from talking to soldiers in our time there's always this hint of insecure self awareness creeping in around the actual wars they were 'warriors' in actually were like from an opposition perspective
To the point about how American Bushido has entrenched itself into the culture at large - just consider how there's basically a whole sector of the civilian economy dedicated to it. Not just in terms of film, video games, podcasts, etc., but actual physical goods - especially ones geared towards men. And, to further this point, what these men are like to be around (at least the ones I've interacted with).
Take, for example, the litany of brands that use the Spartan helmet as their logo. It's deeply ironic to see this displayed on peoples' t-shirts, coffee mugs, whatever as a symbol of a valiant, unbreakable warrior because the Spartans... lost. Our whole cultural perception of the Spartans as great warriors is almost entirely shaped by the movie 300 - a movie which only shows the other Greeks who fought at Thermopylae once in the whole runtime, and ultimately a movie about a battle which they lost. Thebes, a city-state most Americans do not know about, was the one that ultimately conquered Sparta. And by Roman times, Sparta was a sort of Disneyland for Romans.
Here's a fun exercise to do that takes like 30 seconds: look up shopping options for men vs women. The ones for women are practical, maybe brightly colored, whatever - the ones for men are identical to the plate carriers you have in Warzone. What is being evoked here? What is the marketing behind the scenes? What is the angle? I think it's pretty obvious - the weighted vest looks like that so dudes feel like they're some brave warrior out in a combat zone.
And just on an interpersonal level - these guys don't know what the hell they're talking about, they live in a different reality. I used to work a white collar office job in local government no less, and the finance guy on my team had a fuckin armor plate in his backpack. Why? Who are your opps, accounting? It also is probably important to mention that he's likely in a militia group, darkly funny because he's a member of a racial minority (and I'm pretty sure I know exactly what group it is). He's only a few years older than me, zero military experience like me, but would talk about how he and his buddies would do exercises up in the mountains, on guys properties, all that shit. You think your ragtag group is actually going to be able to take on "the government"? After seeing how fragile his temper was, I see more of a Kyle Rittenhouse type situation unfolding!
All of that to say that what this is doing to civilian culture at large, especially among men, is fomenting a "warrior culture" where none is needed. Where these guys see themselves as junior partners to those actually serving, despite coming off as a dumbass to the first non-SOF veteran they meet.
Very interesting, and it rings true on an anecdotal level, from the look and feel of some ICE raids and the new imagery out of the FBI, all the way down to the stupid "tacticool" aesthetic. To me it feels like an uncomfortable echo of the relationship between Prussian Military Culture and Fascism.
Apologies if this has been noted before, but I think the best point in support of the American Bushido critique requires us to consider who might be most lethal and effective military force operating in the world today.
I vote for a bunch of 40-something tradesman, entrepreneurs, waiters, and bus drivers hiding in barns while they pilot drones that rain hell down on a foreign invader. Ukraine should teach us all the virtues of the Citizen Soldier. True Democratic Republics have no need of a Warrior Class: we'll all fight when it is right to do so, and we absolutely need to.
Just went back and reread this after Hegeth's most recent missive on Bushido. This article hits the issue on the head, and focuses a bright light on Hegeth's lack of intellectual depth and thought.
“Third, public discourse must challenge the mythology of the warrior by honoring service without glorifying violence.”
Oh. Public discourse.
Author I’m getting your aim is demoralization.
Perhaps I’m unjust.
I doubt this, and the snark about Hegseth detracts from the dignity otherwise in the article which the subject of a warrior ethos is psychoanalyzed - however detached from the reality that shaped it.
There is nothing in the American military that has happened ever to my knowledge and certainly my lifetime and 23 years of service that isn’t reflective of American society at large, the choices the voters and so politicians made. You certainly are dealing with a free, armed and frontier society from inception to now … and one where Citizen Soldier meant running out the door to fight from 1602-1890.
The same society elected politicians who chose to make us an Empire in the 20th century. The same elites who send us to war are yes pumping us full of warrior ethos through every channel of media the entire 20th century, indeed warriors a long staple of history. There’s something about war that has always appealed to boys and men and always will- looking at human nature and blaming the present men in uniform… not to be taken seriously.
The people are becoming militarized by their own choice, they are certainly armed and arming and training out of pocket and on their own time, to put this on the military- 1% of society and only 15-20% with all the veterans is absurd. The people are quite making their choice- and the military certainly doesn’t control Hollywood.
As it’s been unwise policy since ancient times to use conscripts for wars abroad as opposed to volunteers or mercenaries the all volunteer force was proposed in “This Kind Of War” by a Korean War veteran. Still at the top of every reading list in the military. Ferenbach never says we’re an Empire not democracy… but the point was taken.
“This kind of War” by Ferenbach is a far more authoritative reference than schmaltzy Ambrosia from Stephen Ambrose.
As far as the concept of the Citizen Soldier- the American concept is that of the militia or anglo saxon fyrd - not the Prussia America dreamed of by Upton… although mind you the acolytes of Prussian America have certainly had the 20th century to their credit.
Conscription has been the exception in our history and was never popular. Nor wise IMHO.
One of the problems with these Citizen Soldiers of the temporary militia is their level of proficiency is so low particularly against highly trained professionals that they are usually slaughtered and often defeated. This was very noticeable in the American army of WW2.
Again you’re looking at a minority of society with no influence on popular culture and critiquing it for the choices of others,
Mad Dog Mattis for example did play to the media… he certainly didn’t invent their business model.
I’m left uncertain at the end what exactly is to be done with all these citizen soldiers? Except perhaps to follow around the soldiers… upbraiding them for being too macho? Certainly they’re not to fight… just… serve?
OK, that's the funny thing, citizen soldiers tend to be a continental Europe thing where there's a huge threat of getting wiped out by your neighbour at any moment. And it is the totalness of the wars, the sheer form of moral bankruptcy and mass violence that gives birth to the ideal of the citizen soldiery and the modern sense of "popular will". Basically speaking the ideal form of war in this way resemble Iran during Iran-Iraq war, just rush men to their death. (This is actually how Revolutionary France won it's first wars). However more often than not the need for proper operational art eventually induces a militant technocracy...
The whole "American democracy" schtick is an unholy blend of everything continential and commonwealth. It's delightfully messed up
Well we’re not Europe in so many ways. This was lost on 19th century reformers enthralled by Prussia’s achievements. Look at our education system and what it morphed into, the Frankfurt school, and yes Upton. Prussia of course is your ne plus ultra example but this was done to survive as a small state surrounded by enemies. America was and still is a settler nation surrounded by Oceans, Tundra and to the south feudal fragmentation riven by deserts, mountains, jungles.
Upton and the rest are in this sense all “Progressives” however they don’t and didn’t understand their own history… not outside the University.
Put bluntly, our mothers won't tolerate thousands of us coming home in bags. We have to make up the difference in numbers with tech and the training is too long for conscripts to be useful
I believe when the Secretary Hegseth speaks to 'warrior ethos," he's talking about removing women from the combat arms and Special Forces - where they don't belong. And removing senior officers who spend a year at the National level War Colleges, pontificating on the existential threat of "climate change."
Ways, Means, Ends.
The author has a problem with Ways…
I ask- what are the ends?
What are his desired Ends?
He has a desire for a different way… “citizen soldier” -
I politely point out that’s how we got here, and we’re still in Europe 80 years later.