For a moment, let us imagine life before the Army. It was a grand occurrence; the life of little responsibility was apparent, nothing could deter the mind from the goals it endeavored upon. The moment of enlisting was a pipe dream; the swearing of an oath, like all the others that have passed honorably before us, to a great nation and its allies. No feeling seemed to captivate the mind as immensely as the raising the right hand of promise to acknowledge one’s decree. To defend our soil from enemies, no matter the circumstances, whether foreign or domestic. The reasoning enlisting could be decided that the emotion of pride might be distinguishable within our psyche is the concept of overcoming fears for a commonplace “good”.
Now we have graduated and spent a good part of life within a new institutional organization which could sculpt another personal epigenetic effect upon our programming. This programming, at constant ends of inquiry within our original schematic mind, impresses the notion of change upon all people. However, it cannot be concluded as an acceptance to all beings. Every individual in a region reflects a specific culture within that societal structure. If one takes an infant and raises it in a Native American environment the child will reflect the specific culture of the region; accent, values, morals, beliefs, etc… Thus, even though we all joined for a common purpose, our individual plans still outweigh the immaterial generalized view of why one would enlist. In other words, I am no different than any other person who enlisted, or is commissioned, because our views are in unison and the variety of the latter is indifferent.
The structure around me was built to sustain individuality with the ability to constantly educate others about who, what, and why I am. Who I am is a reflection of education, values, beliefs, and so forth; it depicts the brilliance and shortcomings of society as an experiment rather than an end. Who I am is based on the environment I was raised, educated, disciplined, enriched, challenged, trained, and stimulated. It is not based on assumptions. Thus, I am a philosophical, logical, educated and honest human being. I am frustrated, misunderstood, indoctrinated, and dumbfounded. I have been forced to wonder why we choose to act as if we are decoupled from nature. Why I am emotionally, mentally, and psychologically exhausted is illustrated by the failings, of our ability to identify our relationships to each other; even though we are separated, segregated, and divided by power structures. Concordantly while there is a multitude of reasons why I have chosen certain courses of action, I still have one underlying notion of drive; a notion of freedom not understood by anyone. The purpose of the discussion is to outline the introductory clauses, advocating positions, and concluding arguments which will enable us to better understand the dispositions of my mind.
Firstly, the Army is an institution created over two hundred years ago to protect this country. In order to accomplish this the Army, which I will refer to as the military, because all branches of service work in unison, must have intricate plans to keep the organization sustainable, efficient, and long-lasting. The enlisted spectrum of soldiers is the working labor force behind enforcing regulations, training, and advising leadership. The officers are the planning, organizing, commanding, and leading aspect of the military. With the obvious stated one of the many inquiries for leaders, both enlisted and commissioned, is what do their soldiers need? A need is something one cannot survive without. The field manual for leadership, FM 6-22, defines needs as physical, social, security, and higher (religion); however the manual fails to take into account the vast changes happening in the world. Next, when we recognize the needs of all soldiers, which are scientific, we can now ask how we can possibly lead them. One of the greatest tacticians in history, Sun Tzu, once said “Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys; look upon them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death” (Sun Tzu, Art of War, Chapter 10-25). In order to harness the aforementioned substantially, we must begin to incorporate this into all forms of comprehension and stop identifying the act of caring, or “coddling”, as weak and inferior. The military has recognized “bad” behavior as “stupidity” and cannot fathom why soldiers drink excessively, break laws, get into debt, make drastic illogical decisions, and other categorized aberrant behaviors. The military constantly attempts to re-train their soldiers with subsequent patchworks, incorporating PowerPoint presentations and statistics, hoping soldiers become more “educated” in making better decisions. The reality is soldiers, rather all human beings, are not motivated by something which does not enrich them. Sadly, the military, as well as society, does not reward education as much as we would want to believe. Moreover, promotions, decorations, recognition, and pride are not rewards or incentives for education. Supporting the individual for making the common good more efficient should be the intention. In other words, to encourage motivation, we must find what supports each individual’s goals, rather than with commonplace military awarding incentives.
The inquiries above, along with many others, continue to cast a contagion of confusion, misunderstandings, and disorientation within the authoritative offices of the military. The honest truth is that our philosophy of security and military must change to reflect the incalculable findings in science, psychology, philosophy, and so forth. One of the very first examples one sees is punishment. Punishment is a fear based enterprise, comprising of negative reinforcement to teach the aberrant consequences of the soldier’s actions and behaviors. Within the punishment system are laws, regulations, rules, constitutions, and legal proceedings to enforce the policies encompassed so integrity of the system is respected. If one breaks a rule, there will be consequences to encourage respect of the system. However, the most logical and enriching learning tool is not negative reinforcement. Its consequences range from a slap on the hand, to harsh violence with methods of psychological, physical, and/or mental harm. For instance, if a soldier makes a mistake in training, at work, or off duty, a counseling statement or an on-the-spot correction ensues, usually involving some form of negative stimulus to the brain; consequently, causing drops in motivation, morale, and attitude within the organization. This stems a chain reaction of disrespect, to both the leader and soldier, because the army value system has been mistakenly disregarded. Moreover, since the rank structure must be held in check, the lower ranking soldier must be punished for questioning the reasoning (Disobeying a lawful order) of orders in standing, according to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ, AR 27-10, Article 91). While the leadership uses punishment as a learning tool, the soldier has only learned making a mistake results in a negative reaction which does not support their professional development.
If there is a brilliance one can commend the military upon, it is their emphasis on education. Advocating education is something all people need to pursue. However, the educational statistics for the United States have been regarded as substandard. It does not take a lot of ingenuity to figure this out. Education, ran by gubernatorial (not limited to just state governments) institutions, is plagued by budget cuts. Education will begin to be more of a detriment than a success. There is an issue with the growing phenomenon of education. Collegiate levels of learning demand the teachings of philosophy, sociology, and humanities. The issue with these subjects is they promote the nature of truth, questioning, logic, and reasoning. This is something the military has a huge issue with, especially when coupled with the rank structure and the principles of military discipline. From the military’s perspective, questioning in general is demonstrative of a lack of discipline, integrity, and loyalty. The foundation of education is to question in order to learn and understand the materials being presented. If no one ever questioned, before, during and after a situation, corruption, abuse, and power struggles would ensue, for there is no guiding respect to change. While I concede that in a wartime situation there is no time to question, but questioning comes from not understanding the points being directed; this implies the leader has not effectively demonstrated concern for the soldiers
The next area of concern is the military’s stance on human nature. They believe that competitiveness, laziness, and all other forms of observed behavior is genetically or inherently predisposed. The current belief structure is that incentive, competition, punishment, fear, and similar avenues of approach will instill pride, motivation and discipline in a soldier. In contrast, human nature is environmentally driven. In other words, the environment is the sole role player in the acts and behaviors of all people. Wherever one was raised their environment will dictate the supposed values, beliefs, morals, and other behaviors of that particular culture or structure. The argument of genetic predisposition, determining what one will be when they “grow up” is nonsense, for not everyone who drinks, gambles, and so on will develop that particular addiction or other aberrant behavior. Furthermore, according to James Gilligan, Former Director at the Center for the Study of Violence at Harvard Medical School, who has worked with the most violent offenders for over 30 years, has stated “In the past, the main threat to human survival was nature. Today it is culture…what we are doing to each other” (Zeitgeist: Moving Forward, 2011, Educational Documentary). The idea that policies, disciplinary action, and implementations sculpt order should be called into question in respect to the nature of operations within the military environment. Suggestions to help the organization have been formulated; however advocating temporal solutions can be helpful, but they are only patchwork, short-term solutions. In other words, plans to help the organization will go as far as the people working inside the institution are willing to go. In no way am I suggesting to completely scrap the disciplinary infrastructure of the military, but incorporating alleviating tools can help smooth stress and test the neo-plans of those willing to open the gateway to their critical mind.
The first application of possible acceptable solutions is the use of, but not a complete change over to, positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement, popularized by B.F Skinner in the 1960s, and originated by Dr. Ivan Pavlov in 1927 as classical conditioning, is a very enriching stimulus to the human brain. This promotes brain development, perpetuates trust and integrity, and instills comprehension of learning. According to Skinner, he found that positive stimulus is superior in behavior modification in permanency, while punishment temporarily corrects the behavior but causes detrimental behavior side effects and the correction eventually fades. Positive stimulus would be to reward specific behaviors, like raising a Physical Readiness Training test score. This reward or incentive would be given, or planned out, after the behavior is understood, thus rewarding those who achieve the desired goal. Likewise, inventing an incentive program for a specific group of people already performing the desired task is not a reward. For instance, those already at a PRT score of 270 or above should not be rewarded for having a PRT of 270 or above. This promotes jealousy and envy about not being rewarded for achieving a significant PRT score gain, but failed to meet the desired 270 goal. (You must reward the desired behavior to get repeatable results.) Very simply, the behaviors which the military wants to keep, such as high PRT scores, nutritional eating, education, and promotion can be reinforced with the notion of using positive stimulus. The stimulus will also promote and illustrate how leaders and soldiers can co-exist professionally as well as keeping the military’s family oriented campaign.
With enriching stimulus will continue the opportunity for education. Advocating education is the key to understanding how to solve problems critically. The issue for the military is not to remain stagnant when new ideas flourish. If one is enlightened with an epiphany, it is not farfetched for the military to use rank to squander the idea if it does not fit their interests. If the military wants soldiers to go to college, or have a similar educational regiment, we have to encourage them that it is in their best interests, while also promoting the positive stimulus. Leaders should steer the conversation so the soldier’s are the ones taking credit for the ideas. For instance, if a soldier refuses to pursue a higher education, begin to question the reasons as to why the solder is defiant. This is where the leaders can gain the most. By leaders using counseling sessions for strategic planning and helping to organize the soldier’s future, the leadership also gets to know the soldier as a person in the process. Then the leader can begin to ask why and to formulate motivational techniques to enable the soldier. The divisiveness plaguing numerous units is apparent by leaders having no idea how to communicate effectively with their soldiers without using rank. The rank structure, which is taught at basic training and reinforced with complete negativity, has a very intimidating nature when soldiers are exposed to it. The negativity arises when a soldier begins to understand rank and continues to associate ranks with basic training, since it is their first real association with the rank structure. For instance, if all drill sergeants are the staff sergeant rank and they impose their will onto a soldier, the individual will associate that rank with the continuous negative feedback. This is why the professionalism of the leader should take the soldiers and use Sun Tzu’s ideologies to incorporate the advocating of not just education, but all behaviors the military desires. The most important perpetuation of stimulus should be focused on critical and analytical thinking. Most soldiers, not matter the rank, have lost their way in this particular area. However, this is based on the environment, not from predispositions determining their paths such as genetics.
To increase the awareness of critical thought is to pose inquires and ask for feedback. Critical thought promotes brain activity, analytical thinking, and problem solving skills. Consequently, this upholds the fundamental principles of the Army Values or any other philosophical belief system in today’s society. To question is to have respect for any type of rule, regulation, or thought process. This reasoning shows high respect for they begin to understand the placement of said policy. Very simply, if one does not understand a particular rule and is not conditioned positively, their minds will not follow until it is understood why things are the way they are. In fact, people will continue to question a rule until it is completely understood or they feel it is unjust logically and not follow anyways. It is not because people are naturally defiant, it is because we all long for truth and we begin to try to understand these truths. If everyone blindly follows the rules without questioning the basis for them, then progression to future harmonic dispositions is stifled and placed in paralysis.
In the body of this manifesto we discussed the myths and assumptions of societal behaviors and their relationships toward the military. We also discussed some temporal solutions, different avenues of approach, and the reasoning behind those formulations. The product we all want will come from a personal reflection. The information present, and not presented, is intended to be used to educate and give a completely different perspective on how we can combat certain behaviors deemed unbecoming of a soldier. As Mahatma Gandhi, former ruler of India and strict advocate of peace, philosophy, and pacifism, once said “One must be the change they want to see in the world;” secondly Gandhi brilliantly points out “An ounce of practice outweighs a ton of preaching.” This speaks volumes if anyone wants to change the way people act, behave, and project. The beliefs start from within, and what one does with information, whether it is for righteousness or condemnation, will characterize the outcome.
It is impossible to predict the future, but the actions we project cannot be promising. The only way to progress with Gandhi’s words of wisdom, is to not advocate, exacerbate, and/or perpetuate negativity; increasing the behavior and reinforcement of negativity. The continued use of negative reinforcement will only strengthen belief in it. The military continues to preach leading by example, however in order to do this effectively, the process must be enriching, expected or forced. This correlates with the idea of the Golden Rule (Do unto others as you would want others to do unto you); every practiced religion, philosophy, and advocating alignment or belief signifies this attribute. The Golden Rule signifies positivity and all Army Values; moreover, all Religion, in doctrine, has similar alignments toward the Golden Rule. Christianity uses “do unto others as you would want them to do unto you; Islam uses “Hurt no one so that no one can hurt you”; Buddhism uses “Putting oneself in place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill”; and so forth. At the same time, our system is based on negative reinforcement and perpetuates the aberrant behaviors which infectiously pillage our conscious mind. Patience will be rewarding to those attempting to change the existing ideology.
Calculating the aforementioned, the way to change anything is to practice it wholeheartedly while giving support, education, and an enriching environment to align the value into the change. Sculpting every soldier, not just leaders, to bring out potential is what the military really wants. So does the soldier. This exemplifies a “win-win” situation for all parties involved. If we do not materialize the manifestations, we will continue our path blindly and inflate our decoupling from nature as well as our environment and to each other. This will ultimate help mold our understandings with the military’s philosophy of Army Strong through family unity
References
Sun Tzu. “Art of War”. The Oldest Military Treatise in the World. Translated by Lionel Giles 1910. Tuttle Publishing-2008
FM 6-22 Field Manual for Army Leadership. October 2006. General Peter Schoomaker.
AR 27-10. Army Regulation regarding Military Justice and The Uniform Code of Military Justice. Joseph, Peter. “Zeitgeist: Moving Forward.” January 2011. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w Wikipedia on religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rule Fresco, Jacque. “The Future and Beyond Essays.” 2000. http://thevenusproject.com/a-new-social-design/essay#motivation
