DOD (Michael J. Carden)
The late sociologist Charles Moskos called it “patriotism-lite.” Andrew Bacevich, respected professor of international relations and history, called it “cheap grace.” Still others have called it “insincere,” “hollow,” and “a mantra of atonement.” Many veterans and military commentators complain about the custom of civilians thanking active-duty military professionals for their service. Why such a reaction?
The stated reasons vary. They include: The phrase lets civilians off the hook for deeper involvement; it allows them to avoid thinking about conflicts despite harboring deep reservations; it keeps them disconnected from a key national institution; and it reflects ignorance and an unrealistic mythology.
The root cause of all these criticisms, however, is the same: a rift in contemporary society where the few serve for the many. The All-Volunteer Force and the nature of recent conflicts require only small numbers of service members. Gone are the days of the massive mobilization where everyone serves and “we are all in this together.” Much sacrifice is now asked of the few, little sacrifice of the many. The rift also means that for most Americans, the military has become a remote and mysterious institution about which they know little and with which they have no direct contact.
Here is my advice to the critics: Get over it. Instead of “Thank you for your service,” veterans could face receptions ranging from hostility to indifference, as they more frequently did in the not-too-distant past, during the Vietnam years. Some possible alternatives:
• “You volunteered for this.” The isolation of the military from the general population and the frequent controversies over benefits and compensation threaten to turn military service into another blue-collar public service profession—necessary, like police and firefighters, but viewed by the wider society as a contracted, fee-for-service arrangement. Further, peacetime emphasis on the military as a means of personal enhancement has caused it to be seen in some quarters as an armed job corps—socially useful but not a cause for gratitude.
• “Did you kill anyone?” Common during the Vietnam era, this sort of reaction is, fortunately, rare today. The underlying sentiment may still lurk, however, as some uninformed citizens continue to believe that participation in atrocities is widespread. Incidents such as the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse received extensive attention. Many people extrapolate these barbarities to the whole force, assuming that the known incidents are only the tip of the iceberg. The sentiment does not need to be extreme to be present. In the eyes of some, participation alone in unpopular wars makes members of the military suspect. Fortunately, today most of the nation has learned to separate the wars from the warriors. It was not always that way.
• “I’m sorry to hear that. How are you doing?” This attitude has been evident in the popular culture through movies—for example, Home of the Brave, Green Zone, Lions for Lambs, and Valley of Elah. All of these films portrayed service members as being hapless pawns of a corrupt political system, emotionally damaged by their service. This latter impression has, unfortunately, been reinforced by the many efforts to help service members with post-traumatic stress disorder, suicidal impulses, and unemployment.
Nothing like the British Army of the 19th century or the Roman legions of the empire, the military could be viewed as distant maintainers of the international system. Indeed, author and foreign correspondent Robert D. Kaplan once called them “imperial grunts.” Posted on the outskirts of the “empire” or in isolated base enclaves, the military appears to have disappeared from the public consciousness—out of sight, out of mind.
Even now the instances of recognition are decreasing as the wars fade into the past. The once-common “thank you” is heard less often. Soon it will be gone as the nation gets accustomed to peace again, and military affairs exit the front page of the news.
The critics are not wrong in their response to the phrase “Thank you for your service.” It reflects a civil-military divide that is uncomfortable for both sides. The alternatives, however, are worse. So the next time a civilian thanks you for your service, just smile and say thank you.