40
40
0
“I don’t want to go! It’s not for me!”
This past holiday season brought the annual war over religious service attendance. Our inter- and multi-faith loved ones squabbled over the need to go, together, to this annual social tradition. It was a typical scene—our family’s certainly not the only one in which congregational conflict has become common. Sociologists tell us that generational norms are shifting with the rise of the Millennials, and participation in religious community events has fallen, sharply. Martin Luther King Jr. once noted that Sunday’s church hour was America’s “most segregated”—today, for many struggling to cope with this social trend, Sunday has become the family’s most separate hour.
It’s not just church—several of America’s social institutions are fraying—unions at work, PTAs at school, bowling leagues for fun: all have suffered nation-wide declines. The recent national election put a political exclamation point on this social trend. Consider the tow truck driver in North Carolina that arrived, then drove away and refused to provide aid because the stranded motorist had a bumper sticker featuring the other political party. Or the local police in California that publicly announced they’d rather not provide protection to an NFL-event over the political actions of one player on the field. When first responders won’t respond, that’s a sign—America’s social fabric is in tatters.
Armies don’t fight wars; societies do. Society is the arsenal of America’s democracy. The people provide the resources for the fight. The people provide the decision for the fight. The people provide the guidance for the fight. And so, at a moment when we’re so divided, it’s worth asking: Can America fight wars that matter anymore? A war for national survival? A war for a truly vital interest? A war against a peer competitor, like, say, a belligerent China or a bellicose Russia? A war that gets bloody—beyond what America’s experienced in generations?
Fighting such a war requires a nation to be all in, or nearly all in. That’s not the same as saying every citizen must be in perfect agreement (there is massive value in a loyal opposition). More specifically, there must be some national consensus. The subordination of self to the national interest. During the Second World War, actors and athletes willingly pulled on the uniform. Jimmy Stewart saw so much air combat he suffered what we’d call PTSD today; Ted Williams fought to get in the service, fought in the war, came home, and then fought again to go to fight in Korea. Would today’s celebrities take a leave of absence from the screen or the field to do the same?
Which raises another important question: Could our society get there? What could bring us together? It may well be that we’re so divided, so little unites us today, socially, that even such a traumatic event (another Pearl Harbor or 9/11) might not be sufficient to bridge these canyons of separation. If correct, that is truly dangerous for the survival of our democracy.
There is a glue, a sinew, a stitch—to each society. Some are stronger; others are not. It has many facets and faces, but one common trait: it binds society together. It provides an essential common bond, and America’s is a little different from the rest of the world. “To be an American is an ideal,” Carl Friedrich wrote, “while to be a Frenchman is a fact.” This is our national strong point and what got us through the hard times before—E pluribus unum; out of many, one.
We need it again. We need some basic level of social generosity. We need a faith in the good will of other Americans different in some small way from ourselves. We need to bring back the sing-song sentiment in “And crown thy good with brotherhood From sea to shining sea.” Because, I fear, if we don’t—we’ll lose a lot more than a war over how to spend an hour on Sunday.
--
Major ML Cavanaugh is a US Army Strategist, a Non Resident Fellow with the Modern War Institute at West Point, and looks forward to connecting on RallyPoint, Twitter @MLCavanaugh, or you can find more of his writing at MLCavanaugh.com.
This essay is an unofficial expression of opinion; the views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of West Point, the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or any agency of the US government.
This past holiday season brought the annual war over religious service attendance. Our inter- and multi-faith loved ones squabbled over the need to go, together, to this annual social tradition. It was a typical scene—our family’s certainly not the only one in which congregational conflict has become common. Sociologists tell us that generational norms are shifting with the rise of the Millennials, and participation in religious community events has fallen, sharply. Martin Luther King Jr. once noted that Sunday’s church hour was America’s “most segregated”—today, for many struggling to cope with this social trend, Sunday has become the family’s most separate hour.
It’s not just church—several of America’s social institutions are fraying—unions at work, PTAs at school, bowling leagues for fun: all have suffered nation-wide declines. The recent national election put a political exclamation point on this social trend. Consider the tow truck driver in North Carolina that arrived, then drove away and refused to provide aid because the stranded motorist had a bumper sticker featuring the other political party. Or the local police in California that publicly announced they’d rather not provide protection to an NFL-event over the political actions of one player on the field. When first responders won’t respond, that’s a sign—America’s social fabric is in tatters.
Armies don’t fight wars; societies do. Society is the arsenal of America’s democracy. The people provide the resources for the fight. The people provide the decision for the fight. The people provide the guidance for the fight. And so, at a moment when we’re so divided, it’s worth asking: Can America fight wars that matter anymore? A war for national survival? A war for a truly vital interest? A war against a peer competitor, like, say, a belligerent China or a bellicose Russia? A war that gets bloody—beyond what America’s experienced in generations?
Fighting such a war requires a nation to be all in, or nearly all in. That’s not the same as saying every citizen must be in perfect agreement (there is massive value in a loyal opposition). More specifically, there must be some national consensus. The subordination of self to the national interest. During the Second World War, actors and athletes willingly pulled on the uniform. Jimmy Stewart saw so much air combat he suffered what we’d call PTSD today; Ted Williams fought to get in the service, fought in the war, came home, and then fought again to go to fight in Korea. Would today’s celebrities take a leave of absence from the screen or the field to do the same?
Which raises another important question: Could our society get there? What could bring us together? It may well be that we’re so divided, so little unites us today, socially, that even such a traumatic event (another Pearl Harbor or 9/11) might not be sufficient to bridge these canyons of separation. If correct, that is truly dangerous for the survival of our democracy.
There is a glue, a sinew, a stitch—to each society. Some are stronger; others are not. It has many facets and faces, but one common trait: it binds society together. It provides an essential common bond, and America’s is a little different from the rest of the world. “To be an American is an ideal,” Carl Friedrich wrote, “while to be a Frenchman is a fact.” This is our national strong point and what got us through the hard times before—E pluribus unum; out of many, one.
We need it again. We need some basic level of social generosity. We need a faith in the good will of other Americans different in some small way from ourselves. We need to bring back the sing-song sentiment in “And crown thy good with brotherhood From sea to shining sea.” Because, I fear, if we don’t—we’ll lose a lot more than a war over how to spend an hour on Sunday.
--
Major ML Cavanaugh is a US Army Strategist, a Non Resident Fellow with the Modern War Institute at West Point, and looks forward to connecting on RallyPoint, Twitter @MLCavanaugh, or you can find more of his writing at MLCavanaugh.com.
This essay is an unofficial expression of opinion; the views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of West Point, the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or any agency of the US government.
United States
Warfare
Patriotism
Society
Command Post
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 25
5
5
0
Great article MAJ (Join to see), thank you for sharing. My opinion on war goes back to High School boy behavior. Your always going to have those popular kids with all their followers behind them. When differences get in the way it's always the followers who seem to fight for the popular kid.
After it's all said and done the popular kids shake hands and become friends again and the followers go home with a few shiners and scraped up knees and elbow.
Only difference is when the popular kids shake hands after war, some of those kids don't get to come home. And the ones that do start wondering what it was we were fighting for in the first place?!...
everything starts off with a "cause", but in the end, when theirs no real gain and more loss?..
We can talk unity all day long, but in my opinion, unity is a mans fairy tale utopia. Nothing but words in a book.
Thank you for the article Sir., and your service.
After it's all said and done the popular kids shake hands and become friends again and the followers go home with a few shiners and scraped up knees and elbow.
Only difference is when the popular kids shake hands after war, some of those kids don't get to come home. And the ones that do start wondering what it was we were fighting for in the first place?!...
everything starts off with a "cause", but in the end, when theirs no real gain and more loss?..
We can talk unity all day long, but in my opinion, unity is a mans fairy tale utopia. Nothing but words in a book.
Thank you for the article Sir., and your service.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
If this is about national unity I think one just needs to look at history for the lesson. There have always been a sizable portion of Americans that were against the prevailing norms of the citizenry starting with our founding when America was divided between the loyalists to England and the King verses the new Americans that wanted their own freedom and a new system of government by the People. That division continued when the States went to war in our own Cilvil War. We have seen this division continue to when New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania was attacked and politics soon divided a Nation that was united for a short period of time. And now today, with kinetic operations and targeted HVT drone operations in Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Pakistan the People have been in the longest war period since the Revolutionary War Period and the citizenry is fatigued of war, conflict, and division.
I think the Opposition of the past is no longer. It used to be called the Loyal Opposition. I think that is what we are experiencing. We are no longer loyal to the principles of America but we are seeing a shift toward loyalty to political ideologies.
I think the Opposition of the past is no longer. It used to be called the Loyal Opposition. I think that is what we are experiencing. We are no longer loyal to the principles of America but we are seeing a shift toward loyalty to political ideologies.
(5)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
LTC (Join to see) Good points. I think those past eras with the loyal opposition may have missed some of the population that no one bothered to ask. Hard to say whether the percentage of fracture is higher or lower when the sample size hasn't been consistent over time.
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see) Excellent article sir. It depends on your values and beliefs. Vietnam mattered. I enlisted because helping South Vietnam was a just cause. In 1973, the Paris Peace Accords were signed. When North Vietnam invaded the South, our government discontinued support and we abandoned the ARVN and South Vietnamese people. When I returned home, I did not recognize our country. Part of it is a failed education system. We have too many folks that want our government to provide things to them, while having hate for America and what it stands for.
My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. John F. Kennedy
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/johnfkenn109213.html
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/paris-peace-accords-signed
My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. John F. Kennedy
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/johnfkenn109213.html
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/paris-peace-accords-signed
"My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." - John F. Kennedy quotes from BrainyQuote.com
(3)
(0)
Cpl Vic Eizenga
and we did When President Kennedy was assassinated I enlisted in the Marine Corps as soon as I could get my mother to sign the papers. I was 17
(1)
(0)
Great article. I think for me, we must start by working together. Sure we do not need to agree on everything. In fact, I think the best solution often comes out of the different point of views. But what we need to do is to stop finding a way to separate us and find ways to unite us.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
Thanks for posting this essay. I would answer your question (Can America Fight Wars that Matter Anymore?) with a resounding Yes. America has never fought a war with 100% backing of its people. Patriot's who are willing to serve, and fight, and to die for their country have always come from a relatively small minority of American Society and I do not believe that that group is smaller today than it was in the past.
Your article pointed out that our society and our social institutions are changing and that is absolutely true. I would suggest that America is in the midst of a silent war for the "Hearts, Minds, and Voice" of its people. However, this war is less a battle between the Left vs the Right or Communist/Socialist vs Capitalist, it is a battle between the stranglehold of political correctness and the ability of the American People to speak freely (even in its Churches) and to maintain an open dialog between those who have differing opinions. It's as potentially life changing as the culture wars of the 1960's. America's social mores changed dramatically when the hippies of the 1960's became the school teachers and college professors of the 1970's. They consolidated their control over our schools, media, and entertainment to a level that has more in common with the McCarthy era than the "Peace and Love" they had once professed.
What is happening now is an unorganized group of Americans from both the Right and the Left, Hillary Clinton called them the "Deplorable class" has gained a voice of its own, they have a like-minded President, and have become immune to the verbal attacks that used to make them cringe and run away in fear (i.e. being called Nazi, or racist, or misogynist, often by people who did not even know the meaning of the words they were using). They ignore or even make fun of the "narrative of control" used by the mainstream media. Their use of computers, smart phones. and social media ensures instant access to validate or invalidate the days Narrative/News stories. Just look at this mornings "narrative" that our AG Sessions had "nefariously" met with the "evil" Russians before the Presidential election. The morning shows were not even over before there were thousands of tweets and internet postings showing the hypocrisy of the story (Such as HRC had met with the Russian Ambassador 3 times in the same time period, but that was OK).
What gives me hope for the future is that the "Deplorable Class" is spread throughout America (even in California). Their one connection is a desire for facts and reality to win out over false narratives and political correctness and their numbers are way larger than the hippies of the 1960's. In the not to distant future they will quietly gain control of the Schools, the Universities, the Churches, and even the old media. Imagine an America whose basic Social Mores are linked to Truth...next will come Justice and the American way.
Your article pointed out that our society and our social institutions are changing and that is absolutely true. I would suggest that America is in the midst of a silent war for the "Hearts, Minds, and Voice" of its people. However, this war is less a battle between the Left vs the Right or Communist/Socialist vs Capitalist, it is a battle between the stranglehold of political correctness and the ability of the American People to speak freely (even in its Churches) and to maintain an open dialog between those who have differing opinions. It's as potentially life changing as the culture wars of the 1960's. America's social mores changed dramatically when the hippies of the 1960's became the school teachers and college professors of the 1970's. They consolidated their control over our schools, media, and entertainment to a level that has more in common with the McCarthy era than the "Peace and Love" they had once professed.
What is happening now is an unorganized group of Americans from both the Right and the Left, Hillary Clinton called them the "Deplorable class" has gained a voice of its own, they have a like-minded President, and have become immune to the verbal attacks that used to make them cringe and run away in fear (i.e. being called Nazi, or racist, or misogynist, often by people who did not even know the meaning of the words they were using). They ignore or even make fun of the "narrative of control" used by the mainstream media. Their use of computers, smart phones. and social media ensures instant access to validate or invalidate the days Narrative/News stories. Just look at this mornings "narrative" that our AG Sessions had "nefariously" met with the "evil" Russians before the Presidential election. The morning shows were not even over before there were thousands of tweets and internet postings showing the hypocrisy of the story (Such as HRC had met with the Russian Ambassador 3 times in the same time period, but that was OK).
What gives me hope for the future is that the "Deplorable Class" is spread throughout America (even in California). Their one connection is a desire for facts and reality to win out over false narratives and political correctness and their numbers are way larger than the hippies of the 1960's. In the not to distant future they will quietly gain control of the Schools, the Universities, the Churches, and even the old media. Imagine an America whose basic Social Mores are linked to Truth...next will come Justice and the American way.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
MAJ (Join to see) Thanks for writing this post and being the creator of one of the rare topics worth treating seriously here anymore. Below please find my thoughts.
When was the last time the USA fought a war that mattered?
-GWOT/Iraq Afghanistan? Nope, vengeance poorly executed and/or low level continuous struggle to moderate effect unlikely to yield insights on cost-benefit analyses. Just or defensible reasons? Of course, but impactful movement against those reasons? I have strong doubts.
-Cold War? Maybe, but only in so much as we and USSR managed to avoid ending civilization, were the deployments and cost in blood and treasure essential to survival? Hard to parse.
-WWII? Maybe but probably not (big oceans and strong Navies meant that was more a balance of power move than survival).
-WWI? Definitely not, an ego move with our entangling alliances.
-Spanish American war? Pure imperial ego.
-Civil War? Yeah, I'll call that one necessary. It's that our fracture the union once, and who knows how many times after. Our national penance for our national original sin.
-The unending Indian wars? Another original sin.
-Mexican-American? Probably not, domestic threat or expansionist power grab?
-1812? Possibly, freedom of navigation to fledgling maritime dependent nation?
-Revolution? Definitely, almost a tautology, no USA as such without the AmRev (unless Canada's outcome is enviable, and maybe it is).
Are we likely to face similar conditions and requirements in the future? If we are can we follow a similar model to the one we did when we fought the last war?
Or a more subversive question: is the nation-state still the right answer to the question of how best to organize to protect individual liberties, maximize human civilization survival and promote human flourishing?
When was the last time the USA fought a war that mattered?
-GWOT/Iraq Afghanistan? Nope, vengeance poorly executed and/or low level continuous struggle to moderate effect unlikely to yield insights on cost-benefit analyses. Just or defensible reasons? Of course, but impactful movement against those reasons? I have strong doubts.
-Cold War? Maybe, but only in so much as we and USSR managed to avoid ending civilization, were the deployments and cost in blood and treasure essential to survival? Hard to parse.
-WWII? Maybe but probably not (big oceans and strong Navies meant that was more a balance of power move than survival).
-WWI? Definitely not, an ego move with our entangling alliances.
-Spanish American war? Pure imperial ego.
-Civil War? Yeah, I'll call that one necessary. It's that our fracture the union once, and who knows how many times after. Our national penance for our national original sin.
-The unending Indian wars? Another original sin.
-Mexican-American? Probably not, domestic threat or expansionist power grab?
-1812? Possibly, freedom of navigation to fledgling maritime dependent nation?
-Revolution? Definitely, almost a tautology, no USA as such without the AmRev (unless Canada's outcome is enviable, and maybe it is).
Are we likely to face similar conditions and requirements in the future? If we are can we follow a similar model to the one we did when we fought the last war?
Or a more subversive question: is the nation-state still the right answer to the question of how best to organize to protect individual liberties, maximize human civilization survival and promote human flourishing?
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
I like your second part. But I see it as a fight between the question you posed and then which political party wants to (replace organize above with control) control individual liberty, maximize human civilization.....
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
We will soon see, now that Mattis is in charge. I have full confidence our military is the finest in the world, all they needed was leadership that wasn't colored by politics and the PC agenda.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
IMHO: In essence, not anymore......unless some country literally tries to invade the US or does an attack on the scale of 9/11 or worse. Too much today, any and all actions by the military are dictated by those that are so concerned about what the news outlets and social media think and perceive that it's almost impossible for the military to do anything that people will/can agree on. In order to fight a war that matters, the PEOPLE of the US need to be united on one single front to engage and destroy the enemies we face. Until that happens (which hasn't really happened since WW2), no war will ever matter to everyone except those that have to fight it. Look at 9/11. For a brief moment, the entire country was united to face the enemy and crush them. Which was great. We all put aside our differences for that moment because we were hit. We were hit hard. So no one had issues (minus one or two politicians) to deploy to war. But sadly, the vast majority of people seem to forget that people die in war. And the minute the first reports of US casualties coming in from the war(s), people started getting in an uproar and screaming to bring our people home. Until such time as the PEOPLE work for that united front, to stay the course, to be understanding that sacrifices are made, to see the mission done.....no war will ever matter anymore.
(1)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
MSG (Join to see) Fair points. Couldn't it be argued that such a condition is appropriate? That the people should only commit to wars that are required to respond to civilizational or survival threats?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google