This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
“There are distinct advantages not only in tolerating, hut also in fostering dissent . .
T
JL here has been much discussion of the symptoms and effects of dissent in the armed forces and in society during recent years. There have been investigations into the reasons for the dissent but few examinations of the ultimate causes or of any potential benefits. It might be useful to speculate on why we now are concerned about this phenomenon and what must be done fully to understand it. This concern should go beyond the point of merely restoring order and discipline, important as these might seem.
I would propose that we are not so much concerned about the untidy events that have occurred as we are about a serious and fundamental challenge to basic aspects of human behavior. This threat is to the defined predictability of performance of armed forces personnel. Worse, it has the potential for upsetting many other established practices, procedures, and processes upon which we depend for the smooth functioning of society. To make daily living less subject to continuing analyses and decisions, we have
adopted neat characterizations and generalizations which establish a fixed set of properties and, hence, set predictable performance. Personal titles, such as “commander,” “doctor,” “professor,” “father,” “commissioner,” etc., all signal certain necessary reactions in interpersonal relationships. It is mildly upsetting to find that the “doctor” is a fortune-teller or the “commander” a Legionnaire, if you expected a physician or a naval officer. However, we do eliminate many daily decisions by assuming much from little.
It became apparent very early in man’s existence that his society could not function without rules of procedure, understood by most, and enforced through incentives or sanctions of some kind. This has caused endless conflict between the desires of the individuals and the collective conscience of the whole population. It has meant that a large percentage of man’s time has been consumed in the formulation and the testing of various processes and in the resolution of differences. It has brought about wars and threats of war, revolution, and civil strife. It has also permitted the more or less peaceful development of very complex societies. The healthiest segments of society have been those which could maintain some sort of balance between the desire for order and symmetry and the desire for freedom or change.
It is easy to accept the thesis that laws, rules, and orders are necessary for the smooth functioning of a society. It is harder to believe that these very regulatory mechanisms might be threats to the complete development of a healthy society. Legal frameworks clearly outline what a society perceives as acceptable conduct. They contain a series of decisions which, once made, can be used by most individuals without the necessity of reexamining proposed courses over and over. They establish a high degree of predictability for personal, official, and corporate actions. Essential to this process, however, is a mechanism for enforcement. Thus, we have police departments, regulatory commissions, courts, prisons, and armed services. The maintenance of this predictability has produced a substantial industry devoted to restricting the movement of society to the established norms.
A comparison with the scientific process may be useful. Here, we study a performance and attempt to understand it. Understanding can be measured by the degree to which performance can be predicted; that is, by the success of models or formulae in describing what occurs. Logically, also, once the predictability of a phenomenon has been achieved, it becomes possible to utilize this phenomenon, or even to control it. Here, the parallel between physical and
Fostering Dissent 55
human systems begins to diverge. The basic di- otherwise orderly society. We do not wish to have
lemma is caused by the fact that human systems our ability to predict degraded, so we tend to ignore
resist being controlled, even while striving for con- such behavior as long as possible. Recognition of
troj dissent requires a reanalysis of many Iong-
The level of activity representing this basic con- unevaluated assumptions which are the basis for
flier may be a measure of the dynamics of a society. current decisions. Dissent thus forces an examination
Those civilizations which have bound themselves up that can cause changes in the conduct of our lives
by ironclad laws, and which have strongly enforced and businesses, which entails establishing a new data
conformity, eventually have been ground under by base, new weighing and evaluating of assumptions,
others who were able to capitalize on the established new conclusions and new processes and modes of
predictability of the fixed society. If the level of conduct. This will obviously upset our scheme of
------------ —---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *—- —
internal conflict becomes too intense, however, a individual and official predictability and will greatly
complex organization can break down completely complicate our daily lives. No one in an established
because of failure of the coordination function. There role will relish this procedure.
is no generally agreed-upon measure of the amount The lessons for a military service should be obvi-
of controversy that can be tolerated. This is depen- ous. In few other organizations is it considered
dent upon the maturity of a particular segment of necessary to define authority-responsibility relations
society and the sense of social responsibility that has so clearly, or to enforce conformity so severely. The
been developed. These factors explain why the inter- individuals who survive under such conditions may
national political spectrum is so wide. not be the ones best fitted to operate under wartime
If the health of a society depends on the existence situations. The principles of war do not include
of controversy, it follows that there will always be conformity or predictability. Survival depends on
potential alternatives to the existing structure. There innovation and surprise and on keeping at least one
may be parallel information chains or action systems. step ahead of the enemy. Hit em where they ain t.
Whether—and how—they function will be depen- The ability to manage ambiguity must be in the
dent on the established degree of tolerance. In other arsenals of our military services, distasteful as this
words if the alternative operates within the pre- may seem to the tidier leaders.