Wed 30 Jul 2008
Peter Nunns ‘08 worries about military popularity and military coups.
A recent Gallup poll revealed that, in America, the military is far and away the most popular institution.
…
Shortly after Argentina became democratic, with universal male suffrage in 1916, it fell prey to six military coups between 1930 and 1976. The first unseated Hipólito Yrigoyen’s Radical government and installed a conservative oligarchy, the second, in 1943, unseated the oligarchy and, after three years of military rule, restored power to the elected populist Juan Perón. After the unraveling of Perón’s popular coalition, the military deposed and exiled him in 1955, restoring power to his “class enemies.” They intervened again in 1962, but stood by when democracy was restored in 1973, resulting in the return of Perón’s Partida Justicialista. Three years later, the military took over for good, plunging the country into seven years of brutal dictatorship.
In each of these instances, a political or economic crisis - the Great Depression, a slump in export earnings, internal guerrilla warfare, etc - called the legitimacy of the standing government into question. When the military stepped in at these points, they were a popular institution carrying out the will of (a certain subset of) the people.
…
We have not undergone such a disastrous experiment with military rule, and our military is, as the polls show, the most trusted institution in the country. It would not be entirely erroneous to comment that conditions are ripening for a repeat of the Argentine experience.
Indeed. Read the whole things. Although Peter’s politics are different from my own on some dimensions, we share a concern about civilian/military relations. Fortunately, there is an easy solution: Close the military academies. Instead of having thousands of future military leaders spend their college years separated from civilian life, have these future officers attend elite colleges and universities around the country. Dramatically increase the size of ROTC classes at places like Princeton, Brown, Amherst and so on. If the future American elite of both the military and civilians worlds spent their college years together, a coup 20 years later would be much less likely.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Jonathan Alter of Newsweek spoke in Griffin about how many called on FDR to take on more and more power. At that time, Mussolini was popular in the US, there was a car made called the “Dictator.”
Apparently, FDR almost chose, in a speech to members of the American Legion, to command the authority to order members of the Legion as Commander in Chief. That draft was never delivered. Instead, FDR’s bills went through the Constitutional process, though the Congress essentially took his bills and passed them as presented.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
The last time Congress exercised its highest power, the power to declare war, was December 7, 1941. Every war since then has been entirely an exercise in executive authority, in direct contradiction to Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
I’d say FDR garnered as much power to himself as he could reasonably hope for, and his reign marks the beginning of the imperial (if not necessarily dictatorial) Presidency.
July 30th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Lol- What the hell happened David, you get passed over for a “ring knocker”?
Good god, you make the academies out to be a place that fosters some kind of hard right wing military style dictatorship governance. “Please save us HYP for our academies that foster military dictatorships!” Nothing could be further from the truth!
Without a doubt, our military academies produce the finest officers of any nation in the history of the world. Their understanding of military and civilian governance is far superior to any “90 day wonder” or ROTC Officer. You go to one of the academies, and you live it! You live and breathe military law under civilian control. You take a look at any list of Admirals and Generals, and I guarantee you will find a massive number of academy graduates at the helm the greatest and most widely respected military in the history of mankind. The military is respected, because our academies do such a good job producing officers that understand and believe in our Constitution.
No one has ever understood or taught the need for civil authority over our military better than our academies, and no one ever will.
The comparison to Argentina… I’ll file that under- FUBAR!
July 30th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Given the character of the ‘neo-con’ elitists and authoritarians produced by Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Chicago and Stanford, I would argue that it is a damn good thing that the service academies keep the ring-knockers away from close relationships with the students at elite universities.
July 31st, 2008 at 2:50 am
If I were an enlisted man in combat, as a general proposition I would prefer to be led by a second lieutenant from West Point than one from Harvard or, for that matter, Williams.
July 31st, 2008 at 9:53 am
How about a Colonel from Bowdoin?…hint July 2, 1863…..
July 31st, 2008 at 11:25 am
At Little Round Top Chamberlain’s men sustained a high casualty rate - about 18%.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:06 am
Frank- The second lieutenant normally does not issue tactical orders on the battlefield. He is learning that craft from an E-6 or E-7, normally. That prepares him for higher paygrades where he becomes responsible for strategic managment of the space, employment of supporting assets and arms, and communications with the larger chain of command. The days of a Col yelling “fix bayonets” are over. They have a much larger tactical and strategic battlefield vision to worry about.
One of the things the academies definately teach well, is use of the chain of command and the roles and responsibilities of enlisted and officers. Take a second to read this and ponder.
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/mullen/CNO_Podcast_17SEP07.pdf