Soldiers and Carers

Many military people do an admirable job. For whatever country they serve, they tend to be well-organised, disciplined, work well in teams and courageous. In many places they offer a beacon to more corrupt branches of society and they offer comfort to citizens. The military also provides solid jobs and great life training for kids who otherwise might struggle to succeed.

I am also proud to honour those who have died in conflicts. I prefer not to be selective about which nation they were fighting for, and also to extend the honour to those whose lives have been damaged by PTSD or serious physical injury, and even the mental trauma associated with defection. And I would add in those many civilians caught up in conflicts, either killed or displaced or bereaved. Many people suffer from conflicts. Conflicts are bad. We should rejoice that the world has fewer conflicts than at any time in history, although we have such a long way still to go.

So let us indeed honour veterans and active military personnel. It is not a job I would do well, and I’m pleased that others are ready to take it on. However, let us also keep a sense of balance, and look out for the dangers from idolising the military at the expense of other groups.

I am astonished at the revered place the military have within US society. Everyone loves serving military and veterans. I know one family whose entire rationale for voting for Trump was that he said he would do more for veterans. Politically, it is an untouchable subject. No one can run for office without doffing their cap to the military and veterans. Challenging a military budget is political suicide. Even an incident like Abu Ghraib has to be finessed. Guantanamo is still open because most voters want it that way.

Partly this is due to the PR efforts of the military themselves. They don’t miss a trick, with bands in communities and anthems at sporting events. The whole of November is full of military veneration in the NFL, and it is very slick. When I learned that the NFL was paid many millions by the Department of Defense and National Guard for this, and that the total such budget for the DoD was $53m, it gave me pause. After all, this is taxpayer money, as is the money for frequent TV ads. This is fair enough if the purpose is to attract recruits, but I have my doubts whether the motivation is not in fact much wider, a branding exercise that succeeds only too well.

Much of the branding is based around sentimental stories about the sacrifice of soldiers, especially those who give their lives in battle. The premise for these stories is disingenuous. While patriotic, service to country is not the main reason people join up; instead it is to a good job with good pay and good prospects. Then in battle, surveys suggest that going the extra mile into danger is motivated more by supporting a team than a flag.

There are many downsides to an unqualified reverence towards the military. Start with scrutiny. The military are massive procurers of equipment, and massive spenders on salaries and pensions, all from the public purse. Lovers of small government paint pictures of wasteful bureaucrats in offices or lazy welfare scroungers, but far bigger sums go on military spending. In the UK, proper scrutiny found that equipment programmes were very wasteful indeed. Beyond an early sound bite challenging the costs of an aircraft programme, the third-rail nature of the military prevents similar scrutiny of a far larger US budget.

It is a similar story for personnel costs. Veterans have their own (albeit badly run) department for healthcare while many Americans have no healthcare at all. Pension ages and benefits are generous as well. They should indeed be generous, but in keeping with affordability compared with other priorities.

Another downside is that the military tends to do some things well and others badly. If you end up with too many military-minded people in government, it can lead to bad policy. People take comfort from the so-called “adults in the room” surrounding Trump, who are largely ex-military, but that is a dangerous attitude. Previous situations where the military carried too much sway led to Vietnam, Iraq and the continuing disgrace of Cuba. That is just in the US – for the UK, add in Suez, and for France, Algeria.

The reason is that military training tends to emphasise threats, as well as campaigns and secrecy. It can also lead to a blinkered stubbornness and damaging over-simplification. The quagmire of Vietnam and the shame of torture post 9-11 are examples of the former. The recent one-dimensional focus on eliminating ISIS from Syria and Iraq is probably an example of the latter – unintended consequences include strengthening Iran, betrayal of the Kurds, and even endangering the homeland, as ISIS may refocus on terrorist spectaculars.

This connects directly to the third major risk of military veneration, the military mind-set percolating to the general population. This can cause arrogance, insularity, a treatment of foreigners as threats, and an excessive trust in a projection of power as policy. Further, it is patriarchal, and open to propaganda – like Hollywood movies always casting the US military as heroes. It can also lead to domestic militarisation, as seen with the gun culture and the heavy-handed approach of some police.

This is made worse whenever militarism and religiosity are mingled. I hate the hypocrisy of church services using patriotic colonial hymns and nationalist prayers while supposedly preaching an inclusive gospel. The idea that our own side is always right or superior is damaging. Ads lauding soldiers “who died to protect our freedoms” confuse universal values with a nasty sort of tribal jingoism.

I have a small proposal to that could help to start the rebalancing process. In the US, we have Veterans Day, Memorial Day, and, to a large extent, Independence Day as days when military parades and attitudes dominate. The first of these honours a war that ended 99 years ago now, one for whom few people have direct recollection of anyone who died. So let us merge Veterans Day and Memorial Day, and replace the former with Carers Day.

Carers make sacrifices too. Think of the parent of a disabled child or child of a bad-ridden parent, who sacrifices their own prospects to care, with no financial compensation at all. Further, professional carers tend to be paid poorly and have little job security, yet they do a job that we all need and will need even more in the future. Paying for all care, including domestic care, would transform society for the better.

Carers suggest a far more useful set of values than the military as well. Carers highlight the costs of violence rather than its benefits. Carers are more often female. Carers mend things, things often broken by the military. And carers look to humanity rather than their own tribe.

So let us make November 11^th Carers Day. The chances of this happening under the current administration are 0.00%, but in these times we have to dream.