5 ms·

America’s love affair with uniformed men is problematic

46 points by secfirstmd 9y ago

AndrewStephens 9y ago
As a foreigner in your fine country, the amount of influence the military has in the US is amazing and slightly scary. Going to a Baseball game is like visiting a military base - recruiting ads play of the big screen before the game, during breaks various service people are honored (the last game I attended it was a random technician who had been in the Navy for 20 years. Good for him; but not something I expected to cheer about in a stadium). A large proportion of the audience is made up of military personnel as well. My impression is that the military has a huge marketing budget and basically owns baseball, effectively a huge government subsidy for owners of the teams. Even in wilder society, every third person you meet is either currently serving, served at one stage, or worked for one of the large companies with government contracts to supply the military. Guys, it is not like this in other countries. In fact it is creepy and weird, but I don't see it changing anytime soon. The military is so ingrained into America's economy and culture that de-emphasing it would be a huge change. I am not a total pacifist - a military is a handy thing to have around. But the US is crazy in this regard.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  It starts with all the silly flag worshiping and other symbolism. No need to go to a baseball match for that.
  - rayiner 9y ago
    The flag worshipping and other symbolism is a way to tie together a country of 300 million people that doesn't share much of anything else.
    - hungerstrike 9y ago
      Why do you think that brainwashing people through repetition is the only way to "tie them together"? (Whatever that means...) Causing 300 million people to carry on war (forever) with the rest of the world (7-8 billion people) sucks. Dissent is the highest form of patriotism. We should worship that instead of the murderous and dishonest military machinery.
      - rayiner 9y ago
        You can't run a country where people don't perceive themselves as being tied together and don't agree with each other about anything. You're seeing this right now with Trump--he is such a divisive figure, that the government can't do anything anybody wants.
        brightsize 9y ago
        > You can't run a country where people don't perceive themselves as being tied together Perhaps not, but we could choose differently w/respect to what they're tied together with. For example, the wall-full of soldier-portraits at the local Walmart could come down and be replaced with portraits of, and accolades for, the countless teachers and social workers and community volunteers who have given us so much. But no, they're not worthy, not in America.
- 794CD01 9y ago
  Do you also go to ADP and marvel at how they are weirdly focused on payroll? The size of the US military and the society's focus on it is in large part what allows other countries to ignore their own. Other countries have simply outsourced a secondary function to someone else for whom it is a core competency, making everyone more efficient.
  - DanBC 9y ago
    My life is made considerably more dangerous by the US's constant aggression.
    - chimeracoder 9y ago
      > My life is made considerably more dangerous by the US's constant aggression. It seems you're from the UK, in which case you might want to consider the extent of the UK's involvement in that "constant aggression" that you're talking about.
- cobookman 9y ago
  Without the military there is no American superpower. Take the tech sector for example. Silicon valley wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the military and it's research.
- dudul 9y ago
  Hum, I don't know man, it sounds like you want the terrorists to win or something !!! /s
- chimeracoder 9y ago
  > As a foreigner in your fine country, the amount of influence the military has in the US is amazing and slightly scary. The US has an outsize military because, for most of the past century, it has taken on the role of being the primary defense force not just for itself, but for countries all around the world. > Guys, it is not like this in other countries. In fact it is creepy and weird, but I don't see it changing anytime soon. The military is so ingrained into America's economy and culture that de-emphasing it would be a huge change. I am not a total pacifist - a military is a handy thing to have around. I'm sure it's not like this in New Zealand, but comparing US military culture to New Zealand's military culture isn't at all meaningful. New Zealand has the same population as Brooklyn; given that alone, it's not going to be a dominant sovereign military force on the global scale anytime soon (and that's ignoring its history and geographic location). That's not to say that I'm a fan of much of what the US military does, but it's rather off-base for foreigners from other NATO and MNNA countries to criticize the US for its military, when they're far and away the outsize beneficiaries of it.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    > defense I beg to differ. The US has been on the offensive side of things far more than they have ever been on the defensive side.
    - weberc2 9y ago
      I think the argument would be that being proactive is a sort of defense, and a good one because it is cheaper and saves more lives than waiting until things are really bad. Of course, not waiting for things to get really bad means that we can't know if the intervention is too heavy-handed or even exploitative.
    - throwaway2016a 9y ago
      In the US "defense" is a general term for military. We call it the "Department of Defense" and companies that contract with the military are "defense contractors." With that said (and I've worked at a defense contractor as my college internship a decade ago) the name is intentionally misleading. Most reasonable people wouldn't support the "foreign war budget" but "defense"? What person would be against defending your country!?
- rhcom2 9y ago
  > Even in wilder society, every third person you meet is either currently serving, served at one stage, or worked for one of the large companies with government contracts to supply the military. I think it's an important point that most Americans now are less likely to have served and more likely to not know a veteran in their personal life. The military industrial complex might seem expensive but actual veterans are almost a rare breed.
- pc86 9y ago
  > Even in wilder society, every third person you meet is either currently serving, served at one stage, or worked for one of the large companies with government contracts to supply the military. First of all, that third one is sort of weird to lump in with the previous two. Secondly, but most importantly, less than 1% of the US is currently serving and less than 10% of the US has ever served. So "every third person," even as hyperbole, is just wrong.
  - cnlevy 9y ago
    > or worked for one of the large companies with government contracts to supply the military. What percentage of the population does this add to the total ?
  - AndrewStephens 9y ago
    I concede the point, although I will say I was lumping in people who work for military suppliers in my off-the-cuff statistic. I live in MA, so perhaps that skews my impression - there are a lot of military tech companies here.
    - throwaway2016a 9y ago
      Same. I even worked for one for a while. In general a lot of the New England economy is built around the military, unfortunately. In New Hampshire BAE is one of the largest employers and in Connecticut they freak out at any suggestion the sub base may close. At least if Raytheon, BEA, Lockheed, and MIT Lincoln Laboratory (there are more I'm forgetting I'm sure) leave Boston the local economy will survive.
- mottomotto 9y ago
  It's important to know that the Department of Defense pays for this activity. Here is one example article of it (I couldn't find a general overview article in my brief searching): http://www.post-gazette.com/news/nation/2015/11/06/Department-of-Defense-paid-53-million-to-pro-sports-for-military-tributes-report-says/stories/201511060140 http://www.post-gazette.com/news/nation/2015/11/06/Departmen... Apparently, it falls under the "recruiting" category in their budget.
- lr4444lr 9y ago
  We're crazy how? We are WAY down on the list at 0.69% per capita who serve: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_military_and_paramilitary_personnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of...
- rayiner 9y ago
  The U.S. has 1.3 million active-duty personnel for 323 million people, or about 0.4% of the population. France, by comparison, has 208 thousand active-duty personnel for 67 million people, or about 0.3% of the population. So not really a huge difference. The U.S. military has an advertising budget of about $670 million. That's a lot, but the U.S. is a big country, and that amount doesn't even make the military a top 20 advertiser (it spends 1/3 of what #10 Samsung does).
- brusch64 9y ago
  As someone from Europe attending an NFL game in London it was really strange. We'll we've got the anthems before a game in Europen sports too. But all this "support our troops" and the "be part of a big flag" thing left a bad taste in my mouth. Even stranger if you are neither from the US or England and should partake in a show of patriotism for countries you don't really care about.
  - dogma1138 9y ago
    How is it any different from “join the royal marine commandos” add before every movie in a UK theater? I’ve seen advertisements for military service in most EU countries heck airfrance used to have panflets for friegn legion in their in flight magazine the only reason why I’m using past tense is because I haven’t use them for like 5 years so I don’t know if it’s stil the case or not.
    - brusch64 9y ago
      I am not from England, I am from Austria. Maybe it is one of the effects of losing two world wars (and beeing a neutral country), but I've never seen "support our troops" or something like that in person before. There are some kind of army ads (I hardly see ads), some athletes are part of the army (so they earn some money and can train) and that's it in Austria. For me there is a difference in showing an ad to "join the royal marine commando" and the expectation to partake in a "be part of the flag" / support our troops ceremony before I see a sports match. But most likely I am just a little more sensitive than most in this regard.
- trgn 9y ago
  I moved back to the US after about half a decade in Europe. It's not as clear cut I think. The first thing you'll see getting off the plane in Brussels is the military in full get-up, with guns that look like they'll blow your limbs clean off. You will find them patrolling in the city centers of many cities as well. This reminded me of my trips to the middle east and North Africa. I have never seen this in the US. I have never seen a military parade on the 4th. On Bastille Day, in Paris, the military will parade and drive their tanks down the streets and it will be broadcast on national TV. You're supposed to get all mushy when the foreign legion remains as one when leaving the traffic circle, the commentators will remind you. I've seen a whole bunch of flag worshiping in Barcelona and Spain on the news the last couple of weeks. I don't necessarily disagree with you, but the jingoism you refer to manifests itself in different ways in other countries. I don't think it's a difference in kind, rather in degree.
  - throwaway2016a 9y ago
    > I have never seen a military parade on the 4th. My experience has been there is usually a presence from the local base if there is one but they are not the focus of the parade. Right in there with there between the Revolutionary War reenactors and the Boy Scouts. Edit: Though one could argue that war reenactors are glorifying war and the Boy Scouts is essentially training camp to get boys interested in the military at a young age.
  - Balgair 9y ago
    The US is a weird 'country' when compared to the other 'Western' countries in Europe and South America. We're more 'commonwealth-y' than France or Argentina. We don't have a national police/gendarme and are very against the thought of forming one. Just look at the mess of jurisdictions that the FBI and ATF have, let alone any other agency. You'd have to re-write the constitution to get one. Our states really are sovereign in their own rights. In Colorado you can smoke as much weed as you like, but you can't even ride a bike if your BAC is over 0.05%. In Texas, you can drink in the car as long as you are 'sober'. California has some pretty strange laws over water rights and property tax. Pennsylvania won't allow you to buy liquor in certain counties on Sunday. The laws here are very strange comparatively. Each state has it's own 'army' in a kinda, sorta, not really, but yes really way. Navies differ, but Wyoming seriously wanted a battleship for a lake of theirs. Slavery is it's own mess of evil, but also demonstrates how different the US can be. We had a war over that one, still managed to keep on humming, kinda. Our second amendment is also insane to foreigners except the Swiss. Some states think it's fine, some don't. There's a bit of a spat going on right now over it, what with the massacres and all. We sure do love our flag though, that is true. Many people say that's because we are so diverse, we need something to keep together. I say it's the English language, football, and American Idol. Oh, also the racism. That seems to 'help' too. Also, we've never had sustained conscription here, like in South Korea, Italy, Austria, Israel, etc. Only ~7% of us have ever served in the armed forces in any way. I couldn't find easy numbers for other countries, but that 18-20 year old male conscription laws would skew the percentages higher, I'd think.
- demarq 9y ago
  As a fellow foreigner I couldn't agree more. It's one of the most bizarre and noticeable aspects of American culture. But to be honest every culture has it's weird thing. In a few countries where I have traveled pilots are highly respected individuals, upon landing the cabin breaks into applause and praise - in America though that's just something you don't do unless something really bad happened mid flight.
Hydraulix989 9y ago
We don't need more human volunteers risking their lives in the physical battlefield, we need more hackers and more robots.
- MsMowz 9y ago
  At the risk of getting too political for HN, I think we need fewer of all three. What business does the US government have effectively acting as an imperial power in 2017? I'm with you that we shouldn't be risking lives as often, but we can accomplish that in multiple ways.
  - Hydraulix989 9y ago
    I moved from the US to Asia last summer. Not quite sure what the US is doing differently than other governments. Imperialism has been dead for quite some time.
  - _jgdh 9y ago
    I'm not from America or Europe or China, but many countries might prefer the status quo of American hegemony to imperialism by any other country because they prefer a known devil. Starting 2030 you could ask what business the Chinese have acting as an imperial power but the answer then will be as obvious then as it is now - because they can.
  - tdb7893 9y ago
    In under the impression that the US acts as an imperial power firstly because it's very integrated into the world economically and diplomatically so it works hard to protect those interests. It's easy to say that the US shouldn't have to do these things but it seems that the US involving themselves pretty heavily in world politics is good for them even if the overall effect on others is more debatable (especially with some large missteps recently)
pizzetta 9y ago
It's a bit late for the economist to come out with this. They should have come out against the invasion of Iraq or the campaign to destabilize the middle east after that. Why now that we're beginning to disengage from the world? It's a bit strange to see some dissonance: on the one hand they don't want America to disengage from the world on the other hand we're too in love with our military.
- chimeracoder 9y ago
  > It's a bit late for the economist to come out with this. This isn't "The Economist" coming out with anything. This is Lexington, a long-running column in The Economist. In journalism, columnists do not reflect the opinion of the publication's editorial board, and columnists receive much greater leeway with their content editorially than other reporters or op-ed contributors would. The current author of Lexington has only been writing it since 2012, when the previous author died in a car crash. The previous author was, among other things, the foreign editor for The Economist who covered the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
- _jgdh 9y ago
  Adding to chimeracoder's comment, the Economist has expressed deep regret for its endorsement of the Iraq War. Not just the current writer of Lexington (the column linked in OP), but from 2006 onward every mention of the decision behind the Iraq war was suffixed with "(which this newspaper supported)". I know no other publication as willing to own up to its mistakes, which is why I have continued to subscribe for over a decade.
MsMowz 9y ago
I think it's a little too easy to paint things like this as an outgrowth of culture. While our soldier/police worship is ingrained in culture, it didn't come about naturally; it was deliberately campaigned for after the labor gains in the 1890s-onward to try to undermine the red menace, especially once the US entered World War I, and our government continues to spend tens of millions on propaganda at sports games and the like. Of course, this is perfect for politicians who can take funding from defense contractors, but for the rest of us it's wasteful and, I fear, helps set the stage for the rise of fascist movements like we've seen for the past few years.
rsp1984 9y ago
Notice the title says "uniformed men", not "military", and IMO rightfully so. When I lived in the US I also found that policemen and firefighters enjoy a very peculiar status there. Usually the answer is "but they put their lives on the line". However that I find true for a whole lot of other occupations as well (e.g. coal workers, prof. athletes, (war) reporters and many more) so it's not a unique characteristic.
- ckinnan 9y ago
  "first responders" is the more common term. Honoring their risk/sacrifice became a cultural priority after so many died in the emergency response on 9/11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_workers_killed_in_the_September_11_attacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_workers_killed_in_th...
fortythirteen 9y ago
What's most problematic with America is the need for everything to be a black and white issue. Can it be that both sides have a point in this? Military worship is pretty ridiculous and the mega advertising budgets for an "all volunteer" military turn public events into spectacles of propaganda. But when multiple generations of post-WWII western civilians have lived extremely cushioned lives, when compared to the other 2/3 of the world, a lack of understanding of the sheer sacrifice of wartime military service is inevitable. There's a reason that the vast majority of active-duty and veterans lean right wing, and it's not because of "lack of education" as the more snooty people on the left would have us believe.
- dEnigma 9y ago
  So what is the reason?
  - fortythirteen 9y ago
    One is the social leftovers of a political left that literally spit on veterans forty years ago. There may no longer be spitting, but many times the disdain for military is still palpable. Another is that the military is a large group of people who have seen the manifest benefits of the Second Amendment, in that they have witnessed what happens in countries where only a small portion of the population are allowed to arm themselves. Since much, if not most of the the American left is adamantly anti-2A, backed by fear-mongering, left-leaning journalists who are comically uninformed about firearms, it makes for a huge political rift.
    - trowawee 9y ago
      There is no documented evidence[1] that any veterans were spit on. This is a pernicious myth. 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/opinion/myth-spitting-vietnam-protester.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/opinion/myth-spitting-vie...
swagtricker 9y ago
At first glance, I read this as 'uninformed men': taking it as a reference to the classic stereotyping of 'real men' being all blue-collar style male machismo, brutish willful ignorance, and general lack of intellect and culture (the latter being seen as feminine and weak). I'm a bit disappointed that's not what the article is about:)
maxxxxx 9y ago
What worries me a little is that the military often gets elevated to the point that it's not acceptable to question them in any way. If history has taught us anything it's that military often doesn't think about the big picture of a situation but do what they are told to do. Civil control is important. There is also the trend to make military "cool". I think this has led to a lot of cops wanting to be Navy SEALs and acting accordingly. When I look at the cops in my town they have a little bit an occupying force mentality instead of acting as part of the community.
saosebastiao 9y ago
America was born from anti-authoritarianism. The first 8 amendments to the constitution very clearly outline the founding fathers’ skepticism of authority, whether it be royalty, police, judges, or military. It is scary now that only blind deference to uniformed authority is given the patriotism stamp of approval. Even more scary are those that in one breath mutter original intent and in the next breath condone police executions of suspects or unwarranted mass spying or military invasions without declaration of war.

46 points by secfirstmd 9y ago

As a foreigner in your fine country, the amount of influence the military has in the US is amazing and slightly scary. Going to a Baseball game is like visiting a military base - recruiting ads play of the big screen before the game, during breaks various service people are honored (the last game I attended it was a random technician who had been in the Navy for 20 years. Good for him; but not something I expected to cheer about in a stadium). A large proportion of the audience is made up of military personnel as well. My impression is that the military has a huge marketing budget and basically owns baseball, effectively a huge government subsidy for owners of the teams. Even in wilder society, every third person you meet is either currently serving, served at one stage, or worked for one of the large companies with government contracts to supply the military. Guys, it is not like this in other countries. In fact it is creepy and weird, but I don't see it changing anytime soon. The military is so ingrained into America's economy and culture that de-emphasing it would be a huge change. I am not a total pacifist - a military is a handy thing to have around. But the US is crazy in this regard.

jacquesm 9y ago
It starts with all the silly flag worshiping and other symbolism. No need to go to a baseball match for that.
- rayiner 9y ago
  The flag worshipping and other symbolism is a way to tie together a country of 300 million people that doesn't share much of anything else.
  - hungerstrike 9y ago
    Why do you think that brainwashing people through repetition is the only way to "tie them together"? (Whatever that means...) Causing 300 million people to carry on war (forever) with the rest of the world (7-8 billion people) sucks. Dissent is the highest form of patriotism. We should worship that instead of the murderous and dishonest military machinery.
    - rayiner 9y ago
      You can't run a country where people don't perceive themselves as being tied together and don't agree with each other about anything. You're seeing this right now with Trump--he is such a divisive figure, that the government can't do anything anybody wants.
      - brightsize 9y ago
        > You can't run a country where people don't perceive themselves as being tied together Perhaps not, but we could choose differently w/respect to what they're tied together with. For example, the wall-full of soldier-portraits at the local Walmart could come down and be replaced with portraits of, and accolades for, the countless teachers and social workers and community volunteers who have given us so much. But no, they're not worthy, not in America.
794CD01 9y ago
Do you also go to ADP and marvel at how they are weirdly focused on payroll? The size of the US military and the society's focus on it is in large part what allows other countries to ignore their own. Other countries have simply outsourced a secondary function to someone else for whom it is a core competency, making everyone more efficient.
- DanBC 9y ago
  My life is made considerably more dangerous by the US's constant aggression.
  - chimeracoder 9y ago
    > My life is made considerably more dangerous by the US's constant aggression. It seems you're from the UK, in which case you might want to consider the extent of the UK's involvement in that "constant aggression" that you're talking about.
cobookman 9y ago
Without the military there is no American superpower. Take the tech sector for example. Silicon valley wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the military and it's research.
dudul 9y ago
Hum, I don't know man, it sounds like you want the terrorists to win or something !!! /s
chimeracoder 9y ago
> As a foreigner in your fine country, the amount of influence the military has in the US is amazing and slightly scary. The US has an outsize military because, for most of the past century, it has taken on the role of being the primary defense force not just for itself, but for countries all around the world. > Guys, it is not like this in other countries. In fact it is creepy and weird, but I don't see it changing anytime soon. The military is so ingrained into America's economy and culture that de-emphasing it would be a huge change. I am not a total pacifist - a military is a handy thing to have around. I'm sure it's not like this in New Zealand, but comparing US military culture to New Zealand's military culture isn't at all meaningful. New Zealand has the same population as Brooklyn; given that alone, it's not going to be a dominant sovereign military force on the global scale anytime soon (and that's ignoring its history and geographic location). That's not to say that I'm a fan of much of what the US military does, but it's rather off-base for foreigners from other NATO and MNNA countries to criticize the US for its military, when they're far and away the outsize beneficiaries of it.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  > defense I beg to differ. The US has been on the offensive side of things far more than they have ever been on the defensive side.
  - weberc2 9y ago
    I think the argument would be that being proactive is a sort of defense, and a good one because it is cheaper and saves more lives than waiting until things are really bad. Of course, not waiting for things to get really bad means that we can't know if the intervention is too heavy-handed or even exploitative.
  - throwaway2016a 9y ago
    In the US "defense" is a general term for military. We call it the "Department of Defense" and companies that contract with the military are "defense contractors." With that said (and I've worked at a defense contractor as my college internship a decade ago) the name is intentionally misleading. Most reasonable people wouldn't support the "foreign war budget" but "defense"? What person would be against defending your country!?
rhcom2 9y ago
> Even in wilder society, every third person you meet is either currently serving, served at one stage, or worked for one of the large companies with government contracts to supply the military. I think it's an important point that most Americans now are less likely to have served and more likely to not know a veteran in their personal life. The military industrial complex might seem expensive but actual veterans are almost a rare breed.
pc86 9y ago
> Even in wilder society, every third person you meet is either currently serving, served at one stage, or worked for one of the large companies with government contracts to supply the military. First of all, that third one is sort of weird to lump in with the previous two. Secondly, but most importantly, less than 1% of the US is currently serving and less than 10% of the US has ever served. So "every third person," even as hyperbole, is just wrong.
- cnlevy 9y ago
  > or worked for one of the large companies with government contracts to supply the military. What percentage of the population does this add to the total ?
- AndrewStephens 9y ago
  I concede the point, although I will say I was lumping in people who work for military suppliers in my off-the-cuff statistic. I live in MA, so perhaps that skews my impression - there are a lot of military tech companies here.
  - throwaway2016a 9y ago
    Same. I even worked for one for a while. In general a lot of the New England economy is built around the military, unfortunately. In New Hampshire BAE is one of the largest employers and in Connecticut they freak out at any suggestion the sub base may close. At least if Raytheon, BEA, Lockheed, and MIT Lincoln Laboratory (there are more I'm forgetting I'm sure) leave Boston the local economy will survive.
mottomotto 9y ago
It's important to know that the Department of Defense pays for this activity. Here is one example article of it (I couldn't find a general overview article in my brief searching): http://www.post-gazette.com/news/nation/2015/11/06/Department-of-Defense-paid-53-million-to-pro-sports-for-military-tributes-report-says/stories/201511060140 http://www.post-gazette.com/news/nation/2015/11/06/Departmen... Apparently, it falls under the "recruiting" category in their budget.
lr4444lr 9y ago
We're crazy how? We are WAY down on the list at 0.69% per capita who serve: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_military_and_paramilitary_personnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of...
rayiner 9y ago
The U.S. has 1.3 million active-duty personnel for 323 million people, or about 0.4% of the population. France, by comparison, has 208 thousand active-duty personnel for 67 million people, or about 0.3% of the population. So not really a huge difference. The U.S. military has an advertising budget of about $670 million. That's a lot, but the U.S. is a big country, and that amount doesn't even make the military a top 20 advertiser (it spends 1/3 of what #10 Samsung does).
brusch64 9y ago
As someone from Europe attending an NFL game in London it was really strange. We'll we've got the anthems before a game in Europen sports too. But all this "support our troops" and the "be part of a big flag" thing left a bad taste in my mouth. Even stranger if you are neither from the US or England and should partake in a show of patriotism for countries you don't really care about.
- dogma1138 9y ago
  How is it any different from “join the royal marine commandos” add before every movie in a UK theater? I’ve seen advertisements for military service in most EU countries heck airfrance used to have panflets for friegn legion in their in flight magazine the only reason why I’m using past tense is because I haven’t use them for like 5 years so I don’t know if it’s stil the case or not.
  - brusch64 9y ago
    I am not from England, I am from Austria. Maybe it is one of the effects of losing two world wars (and beeing a neutral country), but I've never seen "support our troops" or something like that in person before. There are some kind of army ads (I hardly see ads), some athletes are part of the army (so they earn some money and can train) and that's it in Austria. For me there is a difference in showing an ad to "join the royal marine commando" and the expectation to partake in a "be part of the flag" / support our troops ceremony before I see a sports match. But most likely I am just a little more sensitive than most in this regard.
trgn 9y ago
I moved back to the US after about half a decade in Europe. It's not as clear cut I think. The first thing you'll see getting off the plane in Brussels is the military in full get-up, with guns that look like they'll blow your limbs clean off. You will find them patrolling in the city centers of many cities as well. This reminded me of my trips to the middle east and North Africa. I have never seen this in the US. I have never seen a military parade on the 4th. On Bastille Day, in Paris, the military will parade and drive their tanks down the streets and it will be broadcast on national TV. You're supposed to get all mushy when the foreign legion remains as one when leaving the traffic circle, the commentators will remind you. I've seen a whole bunch of flag worshiping in Barcelona and Spain on the news the last couple of weeks. I don't necessarily disagree with you, but the jingoism you refer to manifests itself in different ways in other countries. I don't think it's a difference in kind, rather in degree.
- throwaway2016a 9y ago
  > I have never seen a military parade on the 4th. My experience has been there is usually a presence from the local base if there is one but they are not the focus of the parade. Right in there with there between the Revolutionary War reenactors and the Boy Scouts. Edit: Though one could argue that war reenactors are glorifying war and the Boy Scouts is essentially training camp to get boys interested in the military at a young age.
- Balgair 9y ago
  The US is a weird 'country' when compared to the other 'Western' countries in Europe and South America. We're more 'commonwealth-y' than France or Argentina. We don't have a national police/gendarme and are very against the thought of forming one. Just look at the mess of jurisdictions that the FBI and ATF have, let alone any other agency. You'd have to re-write the constitution to get one. Our states really are sovereign in their own rights. In Colorado you can smoke as much weed as you like, but you can't even ride a bike if your BAC is over 0.05%. In Texas, you can drink in the car as long as you are 'sober'. California has some pretty strange laws over water rights and property tax. Pennsylvania won't allow you to buy liquor in certain counties on Sunday. The laws here are very strange comparatively. Each state has it's own 'army' in a kinda, sorta, not really, but yes really way. Navies differ, but Wyoming seriously wanted a battleship for a lake of theirs. Slavery is it's own mess of evil, but also demonstrates how different the US can be. We had a war over that one, still managed to keep on humming, kinda. Our second amendment is also insane to foreigners except the Swiss. Some states think it's fine, some don't. There's a bit of a spat going on right now over it, what with the massacres and all. We sure do love our flag though, that is true. Many people say that's because we are so diverse, we need something to keep together. I say it's the English language, football, and American Idol. Oh, also the racism. That seems to 'help' too. Also, we've never had sustained conscription here, like in South Korea, Italy, Austria, Israel, etc. Only ~7% of us have ever served in the armed forces in any way. I couldn't find easy numbers for other countries, but that 18-20 year old male conscription laws would skew the percentages higher, I'd think.
demarq 9y ago
As a fellow foreigner I couldn't agree more. It's one of the most bizarre and noticeable aspects of American culture. But to be honest every culture has it's weird thing. In a few countries where I have traveled pilots are highly respected individuals, upon landing the cabin breaks into applause and praise - in America though that's just something you don't do unless something really bad happened mid flight.

Hydraulix989 9y ago

We don't need more human volunteers risking their lives in the physical battlefield, we need more hackers and more robots.

MsMowz 9y ago
At the risk of getting too political for HN, I think we need fewer of all three. What business does the US government have effectively acting as an imperial power in 2017? I'm with you that we shouldn't be risking lives as often, but we can accomplish that in multiple ways.
- Hydraulix989 9y ago
  I moved from the US to Asia last summer. Not quite sure what the US is doing differently than other governments. Imperialism has been dead for quite some time.
- _jgdh 9y ago
  I'm not from America or Europe or China, but many countries might prefer the status quo of American hegemony to imperialism by any other country because they prefer a known devil. Starting 2030 you could ask what business the Chinese have acting as an imperial power but the answer then will be as obvious then as it is now - because they can.
- tdb7893 9y ago
  In under the impression that the US acts as an imperial power firstly because it's very integrated into the world economically and diplomatically so it works hard to protect those interests. It's easy to say that the US shouldn't have to do these things but it seems that the US involving themselves pretty heavily in world politics is good for them even if the overall effect on others is more debatable (especially with some large missteps recently)

pizzetta 9y ago

It's a bit late for the economist to come out with this. They should have come out against the invasion of Iraq or the campaign to destabilize the middle east after that. Why now that we're beginning to disengage from the world? It's a bit strange to see some dissonance: on the one hand they don't want America to disengage from the world on the other hand we're too in love with our military.

chimeracoder 9y ago
> It's a bit late for the economist to come out with this. This isn't "The Economist" coming out with anything. This is Lexington, a long-running column in The Economist. In journalism, columnists do not reflect the opinion of the publication's editorial board, and columnists receive much greater leeway with their content editorially than other reporters or op-ed contributors would. The current author of Lexington has only been writing it since 2012, when the previous author died in a car crash. The previous author was, among other things, the foreign editor for The Economist who covered the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
_jgdh 9y ago
Adding to chimeracoder's comment, the Economist has expressed deep regret for its endorsement of the Iraq War. Not just the current writer of Lexington (the column linked in OP), but from 2006 onward every mention of the decision behind the Iraq war was suffixed with "(which this newspaper supported)". I know no other publication as willing to own up to its mistakes, which is why I have continued to subscribe for over a decade.

MsMowz 9y ago

I think it's a little too easy to paint things like this as an outgrowth of culture. While our soldier/police worship is ingrained in culture, it didn't come about naturally; it was deliberately campaigned for after the labor gains in the 1890s-onward to try to undermine the red menace, especially once the US entered World War I, and our government continues to spend tens of millions on propaganda at sports games and the like. Of course, this is perfect for politicians who can take funding from defense contractors, but for the rest of us it's wasteful and, I fear, helps set the stage for the rise of fascist movements like we've seen for the past few years.

rsp1984 9y ago

Notice the title says "uniformed men", not "military", and IMO rightfully so. When I lived in the US I also found that policemen and firefighters enjoy a very peculiar status there. Usually the answer is "but they put their lives on the line". However that I find true for a whole lot of other occupations as well (e.g. coal workers, prof. athletes, (war) reporters and many more) so it's not a unique characteristic.

ckinnan 9y ago
"first responders" is the more common term. Honoring their risk/sacrifice became a cultural priority after so many died in the emergency response on 9/11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_workers_killed_in_the_September_11_attacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_workers_killed_in_th...

fortythirteen 9y ago

What's most problematic with America is the need for everything to be a black and white issue. Can it be that both sides have a point in this? Military worship is pretty ridiculous and the mega advertising budgets for an "all volunteer" military turn public events into spectacles of propaganda. But when multiple generations of post-WWII western civilians have lived extremely cushioned lives, when compared to the other 2/3 of the world, a lack of understanding of the sheer sacrifice of wartime military service is inevitable. There's a reason that the vast majority of active-duty and veterans lean right wing, and it's not because of "lack of education" as the more snooty people on the left would have us believe.

dEnigma 9y ago
So what is the reason?
- fortythirteen 9y ago
  One is the social leftovers of a political left that literally spit on veterans forty years ago. There may no longer be spitting, but many times the disdain for military is still palpable. Another is that the military is a large group of people who have seen the manifest benefits of the Second Amendment, in that they have witnessed what happens in countries where only a small portion of the population are allowed to arm themselves. Since much, if not most of the the American left is adamantly anti-2A, backed by fear-mongering, left-leaning journalists who are comically uninformed about firearms, it makes for a huge political rift.
  - trowawee 9y ago
    There is no documented evidence[1] that any veterans were spit on. This is a pernicious myth. 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/opinion/myth-spitting-vietnam-protester.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/opinion/myth-spitting-vie...

swagtricker 9y ago

At first glance, I read this as 'uninformed men': taking it as a reference to the classic stereotyping of 'real men' being all blue-collar style male machismo, brutish willful ignorance, and general lack of intellect and culture (the latter being seen as feminine and weak). I'm a bit disappointed that's not what the article is about:)

maxxxxx 9y ago

What worries me a little is that the military often gets elevated to the point that it's not acceptable to question them in any way. If history has taught us anything it's that military often doesn't think about the big picture of a situation but do what they are told to do. Civil control is important. There is also the trend to make military "cool". I think this has led to a lot of cops wanting to be Navy SEALs and acting accordingly. When I look at the cops in my town they have a little bit an occupying force mentality instead of acting as part of the community.

saosebastiao 9y ago

America was born from anti-authoritarianism. The first 8 amendments to the constitution very clearly outline the founding fathers’ skepticism of authority, whether it be royalty, police, judges, or military. It is scary now that only blind deference to uniformed authority is given the patriotism stamp of approval. Even more scary are those that in one breath mutter original intent and in the next breath condone police executions of suspects or unwarranted mass spying or military invasions without declaration of war.