Armed Forces Day

[Chinahand]

John, I assume you can relate in some form to protesters in the Vietnam era who saw the US army as simply being tools of oppression and violence supporting thugs ruling South Vietnam?

 

I don't think LDV is expressing himself very well, but I am a bit suspicous of attempts to say "my country right or wrong".

 

I've talked about a covenant between the people and the military - obviously there is a government between these two groups - almost by definition a state has to claim the right to the monopoly of violence both internally and externally.

 

LDV sees a total break down between people and state - and sees the state as using the military solely in the interests of the elite.

 

That takes a bit of doing, but I don't think it is so difficult to see areas where there is a slight, or even a serious breakdown in that relationship.

 

Vietnam is the classic example, LDV seems to think Suez fits the bill.

 

Alot of people think the democratic purpose was hijacked when this country went to war in Iraq. I disagree, but can see the point.

 

If the democratic process was hijacked what should a soldier do? Following orders isn't a good enough excuse - Einstein has a famous quote saying you only need a spinal column and not a brain to march in line.

 

I am concerned about jingoism and an attitude that the troops always do the right thing.

 

I think most of this argument is really at the wrong level - I think LDV isn't right to claim the military simply supports the elite - but there is an argument to be made about the military covenent and ensuring democratic support for military policies.

 

Iraq strained that support - and maybe the emphasis shouldn't be on supporting the army, but rather on strengthening our democracy institutions and ensuring the army isn't misused in military adventurism.

 

All this isn't particularly relevent to Armed Forces Day and I do think LDV is basically hanging his flag inappropriately, but some of what he says isn't without some merit.

 

To totally discount it to go to far.

 

To Godwin myself - no one is saying the SS were heros in uniform. There is a line on the spectrum where supporting your countries military is no longer right.

 

I am slightly conflicted when it comes to the Chinese military for example - China glorifies its military, and proudly says it is controlled by the Party who will never accept democracy.

 

That attitude really scares me. Its very very dangerous. It has little relevence to the UK, but for a general debate it is worth remembering.

 

Soldiers shouldn't be honoured in all circumstances.

 

I've sympathies with old Tommy Atkins - he's had a tough time recently, he's had to go and do a shit job - and many people do ask whether the person who ordered him to go and do that job was justified to order him to go and do it.

 

Tommy just got on with it - LDV questions if that was right - it isn't a totally stupid question.

[pongo]

Two excellent posts Chinahand. Even people higher up in the military sometimes express similar well thought out doubts.

[Vulgarian]

Of course the armed forces sometimes work in difficult or dangerous conditions but so do a lot of people. And actually, very few of them participate in real combat or are under any real threat, most are in support roles, sitting in offices or kitchens or on boats, working on computers, or engines, just like the rest of us.

 

In 2008 39 people died in Britain in agricultural accidents.(source) In the same year, 4 servicemen died in the "war" Iraq (source)

 

How about a national day in praise of agricultural labourers? Why not let's have a big fucking parade down the street for them, with brass band, and award them all medals?

 

It doesn't take a Joseph Goebbels to see that this 'armed serviced day' is just propoganda.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Vulgarian - You are quite right. Except it would silly to have a national day for those who are simply courageous or risk their life in a job. The difference here is that we are apparently supposed to support the forces because of the myth that they are ultimately a force for good for the people of Britain and the world.

 

But it is because they are paid workers just like everyone else that means that they deserve no disrespect, but to be thankful is quite another thing.

 

And support is another matter entirely. This word is bandied around without much thought as to what it really means. People will say such ridiculous things (though they don't realise it) such as that they do not agree with the war in Iraq or even British foreign policy, but that they support the troops. What they mean is that they sympathise with current predicament, but that does not mean support. If I support someone, I give backing to what they do. And if such people are involved in something that I consider wrong, morally unjust, ethically unsound, etc. then I face a massive contradiction when I claim to support them.

 

 

It isn't just about supporting or being thankful for what the forces do on a particular mission or in certain areas of their role, it is supporting them and thanking them for EVERYTHING that they do and everything that the institution stands for and has been part of now and historically. And that is an abhorrent idea that clouds over and disguises all the dirty stuff that the UK government has been involved in.

 

I don't understand why people find that difficult to get their head around. People on this thread seemingly want the servicemen to be respected for what they do but then argue that this respect should come regardless of what job they are doing (what the government orders them to do). That simply leaves us to ponder and possibly recognise that they do the job well - fair enough, but that isn't what Armed Forces Day is about.

[Chinahand]

Erm - you've edited your post - I'm quite happy to admit that covenents etc are abstract notions, political constructs etc - so is anarchism - and I think I can explain the idea of a covenent far more easily.

 

It isn't just about supporting or being thankful for what the forces do on a particular mission or in certain areas of their role, it is supporting them and thanking them for EVERYTHING that they do and everything that the institution stands for and has been part of now and historically.

Erm - what are you going on about - where the heck do you get this idea from.

 

I found the way the army behaved towards detainies in Basra abhorrent, there are thousands of instances where the forces have either institutionally, or due to rouges or whatever acted terribly. That shouldn't be swept under the carpet - the army has accepted a need to improve its conduct and attempt to improve its behaviour both institutionally and individually.

 

And sorry if you can't see the difference between an industrial or agricultural accident and a soldier going into battle I think you are being naive.

 

Miners 100 years ago were probably facing a similar level of danger, but nowadays no profession comes close - there are far more agricultural workers than soldiers.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Erm - you've edited your post - I'm quite happy to admit that covenents etc are abstract notions, political constructs etc - so is anarchism - and I think I can explain the idea of a covenent far more easily.

 

I did because it was lucky a bit too bulky and I was repeating things I had already said. My remark about theoretical notions were on how you understand government and the armed forces - you give explanations based on a very liberal understanding of why we have such things and how they operate. All I am saying is that such ideas are largely theoretical and are either not true or do not work in practise.

 

Erm - what are you going on about - where the heck do you get this idea from.

 

Because we are asked to support the troops. I keep saying this. Support means supporting what they do, it doesn't mean anything else. I criticise this idea on two levels. Firstly, you cannot pick and choose what aspects of what they do you like or dislike. You either support them or you don't. Secondly, the liberal argument sees that the government serves the people and therefore so does the military. But this is not true.

 

 

And sorry if you can't see the difference between an industrial or agricultural accident and a soldier going into battle I think you are being naive.

 

Miners 100 years ago were probably facing a similar level of danger, but nowadays no profession comes close - there are far more agricultural workers than soldiers.

 

I see a difference between an accident and willingly putting one's life on the life. But people should not be celebrating those who choose to get paid to risk their life for the government and its friends.

[Chinahand]

Erm - what are you going on about - where the heck do you get this idea from.

 

Because we are asked to support the troops. I keep saying this. Support means supporting what they do, it doesn't mean anything else. I criticise this idea on two levels. Firstly, you cannot pick and choose what aspects of what they do you like or dislike. You either support them or you don't. Secondly, the liberal argument sees that the government serves the people and therefore so does the military. But this is not true.

 

 

What crap LDV - I support an ideal of the military - disciplined, respecting human rights, careful in its use of force, working under democratic contol. Its panglossian, and abstract, but its an ideal many aspire to - of course reality fails in that aspiration, but that doesn't mean the military, or the political "class" is unredemable.

 

The idea that because I'm happy to accept Armed Forces Day I've got to support Boer War concentration camps and torturing members of the SS is bull shit.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

What crap LDV - I support an ideal of the military - disciplined, respecting human rights, careful in its use of force, working under democratic contol. Its panglossian, and abstract, but its an ideal many aspire to - of course reality fails in that aspiration, but that doesn't mean the military, or the political "class" is unredemable.

 

The idea that because I'm happy to accept Armed Forces Day I've got to support Boer War concentration camps and torturing members of the SS is bull shit.

 

Supporting an ideal is all very well and good, but what about the realities, such realities which you are being called on to support with this Day? Nobody is talking or thinking about ideals in respect of this Day. This is about being thankful for and supporting what they do and what they have done.

 

And the military organisation and government can be tinkered about with and reformed as much as any liberal would like but ultimately it is not democracy, but the maintainence of power and control in the hands of a few.

[Vulgarian]

Vulgarian - You are quite right. Except it would silly to have a national day for those who are simply courageous or risk their life in a job.

 

It would, and that's exactly my point. Is that not what we are doing with this 'armed services day'? Soldiers are just workers like everyone else. They may be exposed to greater risks than most other professions but that's what they are paid for.

 

And sorry if you can't see the difference between an industrial or agricultural accident and a soldier going into battle I think you are being naive.

 

Miners 100 years ago were probably facing a similar level of danger, but nowadays no profession comes close - there are far more agricultural workers than soldiers.

 

The main difference is that soldiers expect to face death and injury in their work, and are trained for it. That was their choice of career. Dozens of ordinary people are killed and seriously injured at work each year in accidents, but why we hold soldiers in such high esteem i don't know.

 

Perhaps it is because the army is the weapon of the state and their having the support of the public is crucial to the government. We've come to regard them as heroes, and continued praise of the military institution has reinforced this idea, whatever the reality is of what they're doing now. This Day is another form of glorification and praise of that institution.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Vulgarian - You are quite right. Except it would silly to have a national day for those who are simply courageous or risk their life in a job.

 

It would, and that's exactly my point. Is that not what we are doing with this 'armed services day'? Soldiers are just workers like everyone else. They may be exposed to greater risks than most other professions but that's what they are paid for.

 

But this is also why they should not be disrespected or vilified. It is the institution and the government that is the problem, not the servicemen themselves.

[Vulgarian]

Vulgarian - You are quite right. Except it would silly to have a national day for those who are simply courageous or risk their life in a job.

 

It would, and that's exactly my point. Is that not what we are doing with this 'armed services day'? Soldiers are just workers like everyone else. They may be exposed to greater risks than most other professions but that's what they are paid for.

 

But this is also why they should not be disrespected or vilified. It is the institution and the government that is the problem, not the servicemen themselves.

 

I agree. We have two components - the actual servicemen, and the government that gives them orders - although they are ultimately part of the same machine. I think we all agree that the men and women in the forces themselves do a job which is sometimes difficult and dangerous and they deserve our respect for that much. If this Day were simply in praise of the work of the servicemen themselves, i would argue 'why not include all workers?', but it is not, and the government has other motives for introducing it.

 

And then there is the institution itself (which is really why the government has started this, to boost support for it), and the rather massive argument over whether armed forces are right or wrong. This argument boils down to drastic ideological differences.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

And then there is the institution itself (which is really why the government has started this, to boost support for it), and the rather massive argument over whether armed forces are right or wrong. This argument boils down to drastic ideological differences.

 

I was reading on the internet (http://flag.blackened.net/af/res/resist104.pdf) that the drive for it was to foster a better relationship between the people and the military, which no doubt lessened with Iraq. But I also think the general public are coming to see that Britain is no force for good in this world as many would believe. A lot of people have this idea that Britain, being a liberal democracy, seeks to make the world a better place.

 

It is absolutely ideological. But these myths that surround the Armed Forces and more especially government need to dispelled. People are only offered one way of thinking about the role of the State and that is the government's view.

[immortalpuppet]

It is the institution and the government that is the problem, not the servicemen themselves.

 

Hurray! something thak makes sense.

[John]

It is the institution and the government that is the problem, not the servicemen themselves.

 

Hurray! something thak makes sense.

 

 

Its about time, was getting sick of all the dross about anarchism etc etc.

 

China, I do appreciate your posts and they speak volumes, I just can't relate to LDVs.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Hurray! something thak makes sense.

 

I haven't thought or said any different though. This seems to be the problem, criticised the institution and what it asks people to do and the general idea is that you criticise people who do the work. There is a difference.

 

Its about time, was getting sick of all the dross about anarchism etc etc.

 

China, I do appreciate your posts and they speak volumes, I just can't relate to LDVs.

 

About anarchism? I've barely touched upon anarchist theory. I have, however, been presenting the realities of what the government and military exists for and does - if you believe in Chinahands liberal idealism then of course you would agree, but that has more to do with RECEIVING the same liberal nonsense that we are all brought up with.