Comments on: The American Military Class

By: The American Military Class « Hidden Unities

The American Military Class « Hidden Unities — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 04:17:40 +0000

[...] The American Military Class June 3, 2007 Posted by EB in Uncategorized. trackback Curzon of Coming Anarchy is asking for input to a reader’s comment about “Should we be cultivating the notion of a military class in the US?” [...]

By: Kurt9

Kurt9 — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 18:29:03 +0000

We also have a significant geographic defensive advantage in that we have a continent that we share with Canada and Mexice, which means, for practical miltary purposes, we have our own continent.

In the modern age, a professional military is necessary for a republic in that we need an effective blue-ocean navy, which cannot be met by a citizens’ militia. The job of the blue-ocean navy is to keep the enemy away from our shores (we need effective border security as well, but we seem to neglect this even more). However, a republic does not need a large professional occupying force. This is the stuff of empires. However, if we are to have an empirial (interventionist) foreign policy, we need a different professional military than the one we have. In addition to fighting forces, we need constabulary forces as well as a foreign legion. We also need an effective system of pro-consuls (to effectively rule the territories we seek to occupy). Our current military and diplomatic systems have none of these.

Also, an effective empirial foreign policy requires that we be far more ruthless than we have been willing to be these last few decades. Such ruthlessness should include reprisal killings and even large-scale extermination campaigns, if necessary. It is far better to be feared than loved. Fear is a more elemental emotion than love.

Needless to say, I do not believe in our interventionist foreign policy. Americans do not have the stomach to deal with the more unpleasant aspects of creating and maintaining an empire.

By: Hamilton

Hamilton — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 06:42:37 +0000

Kurt, you comments are spot on for the 1770s, in the modern age a citizen militia is hardly sufficient to defend most countries. The Swiss by the way have a marvelous professional force, that is backed up by it’s citizen levies, and the Swiss have significant Geographic defensive advantages.

By: Kurt9

Kurt9 — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:15:44 +0000

The founding fathers did not believe that a professional military was necessary because they intended to create a “trading” republic. They did not believe in an interventionist foreign policy. If you do not have an interventionist foreign policy, then the only need for a military is to prevent occupation of your land by a foreign government. A citizens’ militia is sufficient for this purpose. The founders definitely believed in a citizens militia, which is why the created the 2nd constitutional amendment.

There were cases when foreign force projection was necessary such as stopping the “white slave” raids from the Medditerranian Sea, which is why the Marines were created. However, we did not engage in foreign interventionism as a policy until Teddy Roosevelt came along. Interventionist foreign policy requires force projection in foreign lands. This, in turn, necessitates the creation of a professional military, because citizens’ militia (which are good for defending against foreign invaders) are not useful for foreign military adventures.

In short, a republic that does not engage in foreign interventionism (we are the friends of liberty everywhere but defenders of only our own) have no need for a professional military. A Swiss (or early American) citizens’ military is sufficient. However, a country that believes in foreign interventionism absolutely requires a professional military as well as a constabulary force, pro-consuls, and the like.

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 00:36:19 +0000

It’s worth noting that the ROTC program was created around the turn of the last century precisely to avoid West Point from having too great an influence on military culture — since ROTC, one could rise with a military background from any college, not just West Point.