The U.S. military-civilian split (1)

Front Page Magazine has just published a review by Patrick Poole of a new bipartisan book (Roth-Douquet and Schaeffer, AWOL: The Unexcused Absence of America’s Upper Classes from the Military) which presents evidence showing that "the children of the cultural elite—whether from families involved in politics, business, academia or the media—have almost entirely abandoned the military, leaving the defense of our Country and our freedoms to the children of the working class." This reflects not merely indifference, but contempt towards the military among many in the cultural élite, who regard the whole idea of the use of military force as a vestige of the primitive pre-liberal mentality. Elite universities, for example, now frequently obstruct ROTC recruitment on campus.

Such a development has "significant political ramifications", Roth-Douquet and Schaeffer observe. Most members of the military now consider themselves Republican, while the civilian élite is overwhelmingly Democrat. At some point, such a political division could have "catastrophic implications".

Our elected leaders and our cultural leaders depend on the health of the military to protect a huge array of vital interests. A military that distrusts the decision making of those civilian leaders could potentially undermine their leadership, by withholding information, tailoring actions, or otherwise acting too independently. One can hardly image a worse scenario in a democracy than to have an unbridgeable gap develop into an us-and-them mentality between the military and the civilian culture and leadership. (p. 173)

The contempt may be mutual. There is at least one study showing that both officers and enlisted men now regard themselves as forming a class superior to civilians. Combined with the divergence of political views between the military and the civilian élites, such an attitude threatens civilian supremacy over the military, and thereby the democratic political system.