An Aristocracy of Warriors

Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture ^ | October 2001 | Roger D. McGrath

[philman_36]

Chronicles is having military troubles of their own.
What a shame. Nothing new to write about?

They've celebrated the military virtues but been very critical of the US "Leviathan state" and military ventures.
True colors shining through?
Thanks "O". I see I've got some more catch-up reading to do.

[philman_36]

Part of the debate over Al Gore and George W. Bush focused on their service records...
One would think that current events would have inspired the writing of this article in light of this section. Odd that this article doesn't come out until "almost a year" after it is over with.
Keeping the good stuff back? Odd indeed!

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

Just a peripheral thought: The loss of the warrior spirit in the Catholic Church has been a disaster for Christianity. There are no Charles Martels to turn to as the hierarchy has cultivated a culture of contempt towards and apology for that great, fertile period of Church history when there was a blending of European paganism, the Life of Jesus, and the Acts of the Apostles. Anyway, that's what popped into my mind upon first reading the article.

Also, the author fails to mention the role sports plays in the USA as an alternative form of warmaking. The jockocracy in High Schools can be seen as a form of warrior elite. And these warriors are also given special deference.

The Founding System was an Aristocratic Republic. Something historians don't like to admit--especially after our bloody century of "making the world safe for democracy. But the splendours of that form of aristocracy could only last during the lives of the Founders.

The author also doesn't pursue the intriguing question of whether or not there can be a "warrior aristocracy" in a push-button military. A one-legged, huchbacked, dwarf female can operate much of the military hardware with which we "civilize" and "humanitarianize" the savages of the 21st century.

[A.J.Armitage]

Translation: my father's generation manfully accepted what they saw as their duty in WWII. I, on the other hand, either missed the war completely or dodged the draft in Vietnam. To make up for this, I will agitate for war and cheer while I send people a decade or two younger than me to fight and die. My own kids will remain either safe in college or will be too young to have to go to Afghanistan since my wife and I aborted our first couple pregnancies and waited until we were 40 to have our kids so we could enjoy life first.

That about sums it up.

You have to wonder about someone who thinks using tough rhetoric is remotely like storming Normandy beach. Hopefully the government will kill bin Laden and as many of his associates as it can and overthrow the Taliban and possibly the government of Iraq(if they're behind the anthrax) and then get out of that snake pit. The worst thing that could happen is a war comparable to WWII. Whether we get in a war like that is only partly in our hands, but to that extent the United States should try to avoid it. If we end up in that kind of war, I'll almost certainly volunteer, but it's hardly something to see as an opportunity.