Not having had much experience with a wide and varied group of military people in their own environment and context, I can't speak to the group as a whole. But having known one person in the military very well, I can glean some aspects. I don't think that it's quite accurate to say obligation for the sake of obligation, because obligation isn't always a free-standing or innate concept. In terms of the military, it comes from other concepts and feelings--among many, the desire to protect, to give back, to preserve and to grow. These necessitate, and complicate, the subsequent obligations (need to obey, etc).
It's hard for me to think of such people as generally unquestioning, because from the very beginning they confront and answer a question that most evade--is all the above worth the sacrifice? Not just the possible sacrifice of life in the physical sense but the near-definite sacrifice of life in the emotional form that everyone else has the liberty to view it: stability, family, connections, home.
Even though you didn't want to go into this topic, I wanted to acknowledge that I think your discomfort (granted, what I'm guessing it to be based on the bit you wrote) is understandable and has grounds when viewing the military in a certain light. Yes, I think you can point to an individual and say that he is unquestioning. But I find it hard to point to an institution that's based in more complex ideas than just whether or not to follow orders, and say that its capacity to foster bad by mindlessly obeying obscures its capacity to foster good by having to make hard decisions on a daily basis.
Though it may not sound that way, I'm not advocating one view over another in regards to the specific things you were talking about. Just had a reaction to the quote encompassing something like that. And writing's much about reactions, no?
React all you want, it gives me more to read. :) I imagine you as calm, anyway, and if I didn't hope for something to be said in return, I would have dodged the option digitally.
I'm not going to try to excuse my gross generalization, but this is also why I tried not to "go into" the topic. I always somehow forget to write an all-encompassing disclaimer on how no, I don't mean to say that all members of the military personnel/particular race/school of thought is "like that." My bad. Moving on.
I have limited experience with members of the military, too. It's oddly skewed. It's my deceased Grandpa who I love whose military membership I can't grasp in comparison to the few younger current officers I know who seem... difficult for me to understand and reason with. I say reasoning is difficult for me because on those hot topics where military affiliation even comes up, we often approach an issue from two different points that will never meet in the middle.
And admittedly, I'm a little hyper-PC and I try to find the middle in arguments where there simply isn't one.
I don't think all of the military is unquestioning. But I do think there are portions who serve who followed the path because it was something to do, just like college was something to attend, just like working at McDonald's is a job, et cetera. Et cetera. I do believe that some military people do not question when they go through the ranks. I also believe that even for those who joined because of a commitment to allegiance or protection (or other values), there is a point where their moral decisions are based more on obligation than any other value. Not all of them will encounter a situation where they have to make such a weighty choice, but I think military people in general have a higher commitment to obligation than average citizens. (And they should. I understand why they're "taught" it or why they come to be equipped with it.)
I'm not trying to bow out of something it seems I've overlooked and nor am I trying to instigate anything in disagreement. (It's really lame for me to pull this card, but,) I graduated with a degree in Ethnic Studies. I know how easily snippets of recorded thought about a group of people are translated into one huge overstatement. I just want to assure you that I do know better. :P
I don't know if I'm supposed to apologize, but perhaps my problem was just posting within a brief time window on something that should have been said in 10x as many words. I just neglect to "apologize" in advance when I write things like that. Forget adding "some" as a prefix every time a group is mentioned and things are easily misconstrued.
I understand how the message was written/taken. It just seemed that you had a general discomfort but perhaps you meant with a particular aspect/occurrence. I appreciate your taking the time to clarify/expand.
More importantly--it sounds like you're doing well and I'm glad. :o)
It's hard for me to think of such people as generally unquestioning, because from the very beginning they confront and answer a question that most evade--is all the above worth the sacrifice? Not just the possible sacrifice of life in the physical sense but the near-definite sacrifice of life in the emotional form that everyone else has the liberty to view it: stability, family, connections, home.
Even though you didn't want to go into this topic, I wanted to acknowledge that I think your discomfort (granted, what I'm guessing it to be based on the bit you wrote) is understandable and has grounds when viewing the military in a certain light. Yes, I think you can point to an individual and say that he is unquestioning. But I find it hard to point to an institution that's based in more complex ideas than just whether or not to follow orders, and say that its capacity to foster bad by mindlessly obeying obscures its capacity to foster good by having to make hard decisions on a daily basis.
Though it may not sound that way, I'm not advocating one view over another in regards to the specific things you were talking about. Just had a reaction to the quote encompassing something like that. And writing's much about reactions, no?
Reply
I'm not going to try to excuse my gross generalization, but this is also why I tried not to "go into" the topic. I always somehow forget to write an all-encompassing disclaimer on how no, I don't mean to say that all members of the military personnel/particular race/school of thought is "like that." My bad. Moving on.
I have limited experience with members of the military, too. It's oddly skewed. It's my deceased Grandpa who I love whose military membership I can't grasp in comparison to the few younger current officers I know who seem... difficult for me to understand and reason with. I say reasoning is difficult for me because on those hot topics where military affiliation even comes up, we often approach an issue from two different points that will never meet in the middle.
And admittedly, I'm a little hyper-PC and I try to find the middle in arguments where there simply isn't one.
I don't think all of the military is unquestioning. But I do think there are portions who serve who followed the path because it was something to do, just like college was something to attend, just like working at McDonald's is a job, et cetera. Et cetera. I do believe that some military people do not question when they go through the ranks. I also believe that even for those who joined because of a commitment to allegiance or protection (or other values), there is a point where their moral decisions are based more on obligation than any other value. Not all of them will encounter a situation where they have to make such a weighty choice, but I think military people in general have a higher commitment to obligation than average citizens. (And they should. I understand why they're "taught" it or why they come to be equipped with it.)
I'm not trying to bow out of something it seems I've overlooked and nor am I trying to instigate anything in disagreement. (It's really lame for me to pull this card, but,) I graduated with a degree in Ethnic Studies. I know how easily snippets of recorded thought about a group of people are translated into one huge overstatement. I just want to assure you that I do know better. :P
I don't know if I'm supposed to apologize, but perhaps my problem was just posting within a brief time window on something that should have been said in 10x as many words. I just neglect to "apologize" in advance when I write things like that. Forget adding "some" as a prefix every time a group is mentioned and things are easily misconstrued.
Reply
More importantly--it sounds like you're doing well and I'm glad. :o)
Reply
Leave a comment