Mariscal and Astore both raise a number a points in their articles that no doubt play a significant role in the motivation of young men and women to join the military. There are two specific points though, one raised by each, that I found particularly pertinent. These deal with the issues that each author seems to take most seriously. In Mariscal's case, it is the motivating factor of altruism and how the military, and more importantly how political leaders, exploit good intentions to wage unjust and destructive wars. In Astore's case, it is the idea that many young American men have come to see American culture as overtly feminized and view the military as the best outlet for certain aspects of their masculinity. I would like to explore both of these points and see what you guys think about them.
To begin with Mariscal, I would like to note that I found his argument claiming that many young people join the military because they seek to make something of themselves and also to improve the world very compeling. Everyone wishes on some level to do these things, and for those who lack few other options, the military certainly might be one way to do them. Mariscal points out that many working class youth choose this rout simply because it seems the only one available to them. I see the logic in this argument, though I don't see why joining the military must necessarily be a last resort. Those in better economic situations who do have alternative options to affect the world for the better might choose the military nonetheless. If many assume that the military is a substandard option it seems that from Mariscal's point of view that this is because they realize that it is in fact a poor outlet for altruistic intentions. Yet, nonetheless, the poor choose it. This raises the question of why those in poor economic conditions are fooled and not others, and can be seen as being a somewhat elitist argument. I also feel that Mariscal over-emphasises the extent to which the good intentions of the young are unjustly and calously exploited by those seeking "imperialist fantasy". This is cartainly true to a degree. However, to suggest that a "military caste system" is taking shape in our country is, I feel, a little much. Many of those in the military think that the wars that they are engaged in now are in fact making the world a better place, and while I would personaly agree with Mariscal that they are not, it is wrong to suggest that those who join the military are somehow unaware of what it is they will get involved in. If they join to do good, then they think the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are good or they live in a hole.
I see the wisdom of Astore's point concerning the military as outlet for masculinity as well. All in all, perhaps it is an argument with less flaws than Mariscals. I personally know members of the military who certainly did have other options, such as college. They did not join because it was their only choice, and certainly countless others did not as well. While I would argue that our society does have other outlets for masculinity, such as sports and some jobs performing manual labor, it is perhaps true that these are less viable career options than the military. If one wishes to express their masculinity in their career, the military seems the best road. Astore also points out that many young men enlist because of the way society treats violence as taboo, likening it to sex during the victorian era. Because of this, the military is one of the few acceptable outlets for violence in our society. However, unlike sex, violent urges are something that must be seriously repressed, and so Astore concludes correctly that we must find another means of satisfying masculine urges. It would be foolish to misunderstand the need for young men to express their masculinity, and so Astore's argument should be taken very seriously.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I definately agree with you that these points raised by Mariscal and Astore were the strongest arguments in each of these essays. For me, I found Mariscal's discussion of recruiters not necessarily targeting the poor, but still targeting those with very few options, particularly compelling. To these people who cannot easily get a high-paying, skill-requiring job and cannot afford an education, the military provides an easy solution: it allows them work experience, and has benefits such as paying for education after years of service. Even for someone like me, who can (sort of) afford a $40,000+ college, this seems like a great offer. For someone who cannot afford college at all, this may seem like the perfect solution, so even if the recruiters did not target the less wealthy, I think they would still have a large part of this demographic joining the military because of these benefits. Although Astore makes a good point in discussing the military as a sure way to prove masculinity, I find this reasoning a bit silly. I don't think that someone who did not have a serious interest in the military to begin with, or someone who has other options would join the military just to prove that they are tough and manly. Joining the military is a huge commitment, and it is hard for me to imagine someone making this kind of commitment just to prove their masculinity, although I can't really understand the need for masculinuty the way a male would. Personally, I think the opportunity to have more than their poverty and dead end upbringings (according to the recruiters Mariscal mentions) is a stronger appeal of the military than the opportunity to show off being a man.
I agree that some people who are well of financially choose to join the military as well, it is not something that is only for the poor. Financial reasons are among the most important reasons to join the military for many people however, and while you see a few people who obviously don't need to joining the military, such as Pat Tillman, most people from the upper economic tiers don't consider the army. Even people with a great deal of patriotism and support for the military often do not join if they have no real need to. Although economic need is far from the only reason to join the army, it is an important reason, and the result does seem to be a kind of a poverty draft. The need for masculinization, or patriotism definitely play a role, but in most cases those with the resources available satisfy their needs through other means than through the military.
Post a Comment