Veterans Day is approaching fast, and John Kerry's recent remarks could not have come at a worse time for both the Democrats and members of the military.
On Monday, Nov. 6, Clarke Burns picked up the baton for the armed forces and took the opportunity to bash the Tufts Daily for its previous editorial on Kerry.
Quite frankly, I thought he was rather beating around the bush. I applaud the Daily for setting off this discussion at the most appropriate time of the year. However, Clarke did not address the central issue, which is the broader implication of our retreat from involvement in the military.
I would like to ambush you with a question, dear reader: Why won't you be joining the military? Is it because of the war? The pay? "Don't Ask Don't Tell"? The danger? Your background? How many soldiers do you know?
You would be surprised at how many Tufts and Harvard students joined the military in years past, yet today, the divide between us and them (the military, not Harvard) is more like a chasm.
Supposedly, we seem to have come a long way since Vietnam - hence, the ribbon bumper stickers on our parents' Volvos (and some of our own Beemers, too). Those brave men and women are fighting Bush's wars for us thousands of miles away. But Bush's daughters are not amongst them. Nor are we. Our parents would not let the recruiters come to our high school. Our professors keep them off our campus. We do not seek them out.
So, while we admire soldiers, it seems like we would never dream of being them.
I should digress here and suggest that unless we are fully committed to unconditional pacifism, the military obviously is not an optional extra within society. Historically, it has been an integral part of our society's strength. The military is democracy in action. In fact, with its tethered pay scales, ignorance of color, and meritocratic promotions, the military is probably the most truly socialist organization in the United States. No other organization of such importance has as many people of color in leadership positions. How can we pretend we have no stake in it?
Anti-war activists argue that the "not-us" groups (minorities, the poor) are disproportionately represented in the military. That may be the case, but doesn't fault for that lie with us, at our end of the bargain?
It is an amazing testament to our nation's character that the least enfranchised are the most patriotic - just as in World War II, when oppressed black men fought for their right to serve in combat duty while they, of all Americans, had the right to say, "This country doesn't speak for me."
The prices we pay for our lack of involvement are countless. There is the humanistic equation: How can our class send men and women to war not knowing any of them personally? There are the economic and social dimensions: At a time when the gap between the rich and the rest is growing steadily, doesn't it smack of aristocracy to expect an underclass to fight our wars?
According to statistics from the Department of Defense, 0.005 percent of is shouldering 100% of the burden of a war we started as a nation, now that sounds a little grotesque.
Beyond the psychological dimension, our daily lives have not changed since 9/11. What recent development has affected you more, Facebook or the conflicts fought by your fellow citizens abroad?
We cannot use our wealth to isolate ourselves from our nation simply because we disagree with broad sections of society. Taking that to its
logical conclusion, we might as well disband our country and engage in a spot of ethnic cleansing until we have a totally homogenous successor state
Above all stand the policy implications: All of you aspiring politicians, bureaucrats and activists, do any of you know how we can win these wars we are fighting? Do you know how to win a counter-insurgency war, how to win hearts and minds, how to keep the military-industrial complex at bay?
Our current leadership certainly doesn't, on either side of the House. Tufts students have had no problem working in any branch of government that developed our disastrous foreign policy, including the private sector, of course: Enron, Halliburton, Exxon Mobil. But we staunchly refuse to put our lives on the line for the privileges that we, of all Americans, enjoy most.
The military will continue to recruit from all facets of society except ours. Bereft of cadets from Tufts and Yale, it has had no trouble filling its officer ranks with bright students from regular backgrounds and less affluent schools.
Do you really want someone else to shoulder this responsibility? Because, damn it, someone has got to bloody well do this job. It won't just go away because you let some poorer person take your place.
Will you choose to stand up for our country or hide beyond your excuses?
I have laid out my case for you. This has nothing to do with politics. I am a left-leaning moderate who believes in universal healthcare, gay marriage and gun control. For too many years, we have branded military service as some kind of lifestyle choice like any other job. Military service goes way, way beyond that, because it is a matter of fairness. Because it is about the strength of our democracy. We are in this together. Let's no longer shirk our responsibilities like Dick "Other Priorities" Cheney did back in Vietnam.
Do you disagree with me, or do you feel guilty about abusing your privilege? The 1st Fisher Panel on Civil-Military Relations will be held this Thursday at 12 p.m. in Cabot 205, just before Veterans Day. Two authors will be visiting us for the panel: Kathy Roth-Douquet and Frank Schaeffer. Kathy spent many years in the Clinton White House, and Frank is a novelist. Together, they have written a book entitled, "AWOL: The Unexcused Absence of America's Upper Classes from Military Service - and How It Hurts Our Country." After they present their viewpoint, Professor Malik Mufti will moderate an open discussion about the issue.
Let your voice be heard.
Toby Bonthrone is a sophomore majoring in economics.
