|
Yes, but
why be silent about it? kwc A military-industrial
complex produces this sort of outcome. Isn't it what we might expect? arthur Good Morning.
First, the ad I saw was in Newsweek, not Time, but of course could be
many places. Second, I am not denigrating the process by which men
and women are recruited or trained in this discussion. I am concerned with the end product
use. If we accept that there is a new direction and
application of US power and resources, specifically in regards to a Pax
Americana or new American Empire, it seems to me that we are undergoing a shift
away from idealizing the educated to idealizing the well-trained, who it seems
by current propaganda and political appointments, must be associated with the
military or its Establishment system. Long ago, Americans admired the self-made man,
whether humble or not. It used to
be that men and women of intelligence who wrote well were admired for their
vision of what this country should be.
Now, in simple terms, if Kaplan and others are allowed to be the only
voices, have the biggest megaphone, we will look simply to problem-solvers,
"go-to guys" and players in the system. If foreign policy and vision for the future can be
relegated to Ten Simple Rules, we have evolved to not just a List Society, but
one where, as the author suggested, the citizen soldier, able to train others
or kill them, is the ideal. That
leads to a whole area of discovery for the rest of us who are not citizen
soldiers. KWC Military
people are sent to ALL colleges in the country. They practice equal
opportunity hiring and they send you to whatever school you are eligible for or
in the area of. Their education policies will send you to
Harvard if you qualify. For me it is an issue of
performance. We largely have a non-performance intellectual driven
type form of work that doesn't produce much of ultimate significance other than
keeping people at work doing things that subvert their talents and
potential. My experience of most of the private sector is that it
resembles uncomfortably the movie the Matrix in which people are asleep and
dreaming about performance and living but are surrounded by "ghosts"
who seem to indicate that there is so much more. The military has
some rather sinister purposes but it still operates on a more honest mandate
than world business. REH As if to prove my point,
that today's measure of success is portrayed in uniform; while scanning the new
issue of TIME magazine with dinner tonight, lo and behold a full-page ad next
to the back cover: Photo of a handsome, intent
mature black man in suit and tie, sitting at a CEO desk, inset photo as if one
of his shoulders was still in uniform, heavily decorated. SENSE OF MISSION Mark "Ranger"
Jones. United States Army
1986-2003 "Security is a
critical issue these days.
Especially for high profile leaders and dignitaries. No one understands this better than
Mark Jones, founder and CEO of a security-consulting firm. Mark is a man who earned the title of
'go-to-guy' by being entrusted to jump from 13,000 feet with a former U.S.
President. A man responsible for
meeting different heads of state while serving as a Senior Aide to the 14th
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Someone who started out as a cook but quickly learned to convert one
challenging task after another into opportunity. A Master Sergeant from the US Army Rangers who, day after
day, brought honor to three simple words: "Complete the mission." The qualities you acquire
in the military are qualities that stay with you forever." TODAY'S MILITARY See it for what it really
is. 1.866.VIEW NOW.
www.todaysmilitary.com Agreed, Ray, but would we
want all our political leadership to come from one Ivy League school or just
the Midwest, etc? My concern is the recent
tendency to place military people in diplomatic posts at NATO, in the Middle
East, the Far East. While I
realize in some places a former military man will command more respect from
some cultures as opposed to an academic or just another well-heeled party
fundraiser, it is troubling to me that men in uniform are becoming spokesmen
and the face of America overseas. KWC REH wrote: Karen and Ed, I would remind you all that the military is the only truly equal
opportunity employer in the nation and admits all religions, cultures and only
discriminates against Gays and that is beginning to be questioned.
It might be good for the rest of society to question how children from trailer
parks and Louisiana bayous can become generals as often as Ivy League school
graduates. It may very well be that the most democratic institution
in America is the military. Like the arts, the military is
performance oriented and not build upon the European aristocratic model.
Prejudice against the military is unseemly and we should not carry that
prejudice over into creating the kind of anger carried by the
police. We pay the military poorly but train them well and
demand much from them. They, more than any other Americans, can
truly speak to the values of equality and equal opportunity. As
they say in the Army, A "F...k up is a F....k up" no
matter where you were born. And no one wants to follow a fool
simply because he was born with a silver spoon. They may have
loved Bush but Iraq will change that quickly. The words from the
hinterland is that there is a lot of anger and hostility out there.
I smell a change coming. It seems that the Yale Drama school is the
only place producing serious work these days while the other departments are working
the legacy routine. Legacy doesn't mean anything in the
theater unless you can produce. Ed, when I read this piece
earlier it struck me as you mention, that Kaplan was writing about these events
as if he had created them into being.
He glorifies the soldier as the epitome of the modern democratic
ambassador, a highly trained, deadly working representative of the superpower. Hemingway had such an effect, did he not, on a generation of
men and women and war? Meanwhile, more retired
military fill former diplomat-only posts around the globe and increasingly,
multinational corporations with ties to the military industrial technology
complex. Have we undermined public
education so much or lost all confidence in it that we only trust the military
to train our leaders? KWC The current
issue of Atlantic contains an article by Robert Kaplan entitled "Supremacy
by Stealth". I've read most of it, but it's the kind of article that I
find difficult to finish. It sets out ten rules that America, as the new Rome,
should use to govern the world and make it safe for freedom and democracy,
American style. I first
encountered Mr. Kaplan a few years ago in an article entitled "The Coming
Anarchy", also in Atlantic. The message there, seeming entirely credible at
the time, was that the world was going to hell in a handbasket. The message in
the current article is anything but credible. It's that, yes, the world could
go to hell in a handbasket, but it won't because America is there to prevent it
from doing so. And it can even be fixed up if America but follows Mr. Kaplan's
ten simple rules. It must, for
example, produce more Joppolos, the central figure in John Hersey's second
world war novel "A Bell for Adano". Apparently, Mr. Joppolo knew
exactly how to win the trust of the townspeople he had to deal with. As Iraq
and Afghanistan have demonstrated, it would be nice to have people like that,
but they don't come around very often. And, by being "light and
lethal", you can accomplish great things, like helping the Bolivian
government track down and kill Che Guevara in 1967. (Sorry, Mr. Kaplan, but
some of us still remember Che as the eternal revolutionary and a force for
liberating the oppressed. I for one do not see tracking him down and killing
him as a good thing. It's a bit like the Romans bragging about tracking down
and killing Christ!) Or, like the British, and the Romans before them, by
speaking Victorian and thinking pagan you can try to persuade people of the
wisdom of your ways, but, if you can't accomplish that, you do have other
means. What Mr.
Kaplan suggests is that American forces have already followed his ten simple
rules, though perhaps not consistently enough. He says they have done a very
good job at times, as when they trained Salvadorian counterinsurgency forces,
but he doesn't then mention is that these forces became government death squads
and killing machines that brutalized the countryside and cost thousands of
people there lives. The image
that Mr. Kaplan presents in his ten points is a clean, tidy and efficient one
that, like B52 bombers, flies high above the messy, dirty world of his earlier
article. Sorry, Mr. Kaplan, it just doesn't figure. Ed Weick |
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ed Weick
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ray Evans Harrell
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ray Evans Harrell
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple ru... Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] One simple ru... Brad McCormick, Ed.D.
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ed Weick
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Cordell . Arthur
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Stephen Straker
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ray Evans Harrell
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules jerome schatten
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ray Evans Harrell
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Brad McCormick, Ed.D.
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ed Weick
- RE: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Karen Watters Cole
- Re: [Futurework] Ten simple rules Ray Evans Harrell
