I imagine some of the problems (paradoxes) may apply to other NatSec entities, esp. if ldrs view their professionalism = apolitical and therefore have blind spots abt how they both operate in a domestic pol context & how politics bears on their work.
October 11, 2025 at 1:18 PM
I imagine some of the problems (paradoxes) may apply to other NatSec entities, esp. if ldrs view their professionalism = apolitical and therefore have blind spots abt how they both operate in a domestic pol context & how politics bears on their work.
You might also find this of interest (a critique of Huntington's argument in Soldier and the State). It is ungated/free: www.belfercenter.org/publication/...
October 2, 2025 at 12:45 PM
You might also find this of interest (a critique of Huntington's argument in Soldier and the State). It is ungated/free: www.belfercenter.org/publication/...
Darin, just a quick clarification, I was talking about the intent of the meeting. I did not draw conclusions about about how it was taken except that it shaped the incentive structure. Officers still have agency
September 30, 2025 at 5:09 PM
Darin, just a quick clarification, I was talking about the intent of the meeting. I did not draw conclusions about about how it was taken except that it shaped the incentive structure. Officers still have agency
None of this to say that most mil ppl in the room agree with the tactics or ideology on display. But it does shape their incentive structure and tell them what is expected and required of them going forward if they are to keep their jobs and protect those under their command. 11/end
September 30, 2025 at 3:55 PM
None of this to say that most mil ppl in the room agree with the tactics or ideology on display. But it does shape their incentive structure and tell them what is expected and required of them going forward if they are to keep their jobs and protect those under their command. 11/end
The ultimate aim here is that people will no longer expect the military to serve the public at large, but that its goal and purpose is to advance the interest of one faction or party in politics. 10/
September 30, 2025 at 3:55 PM
The ultimate aim here is that people will no longer expect the military to serve the public at large, but that its goal and purpose is to advance the interest of one faction or party in politics. 10/
The signal sent to the public is also vital. Laudatory imagery and clips of the president making overtly partisan comments to the military audience will play on partisan news. It will shape expectations that the military does—and should—belong to the administration. 9/
September 30, 2025 at 3:55 PM
The signal sent to the public is also vital. Laudatory imagery and clips of the president making overtly partisan comments to the military audience will play on partisan news. It will shape expectations that the military does—and should—belong to the administration. 9/
For those in the room it is also a signal of power. That they pulled ppl from their jobs on short notice says “we are in control” and we can do whatever we want, whenever. This too creates pressures to conform as makes clear the civilian side is not afraid to flex power & can do so on a whim 8/
September 30, 2025 at 3:55 PM
For those in the room it is also a signal of power. That they pulled ppl from their jobs on short notice says “we are in control” and we can do whatever we want, whenever. This too creates pressures to conform as makes clear the civilian side is not afraid to flex power & can do so on a whim 8/
Even worse, the speech aims to signal that the military profession does not matter. Calls for the military to clap in response to partisan commentary says to those assembled: “we don’t care about your nonpartisan ethic and the professional ethos that sustains it” 7/
September 30, 2025 at 3:55 PM
Even worse, the speech aims to signal that the military profession does not matter. Calls for the military to clap in response to partisan commentary says to those assembled: “we don’t care about your nonpartisan ethic and the professional ethos that sustains it” 7/
If mil leaders don’t buy the message, they can keep quiet or self-select out. Those who don’t want to be part of politicized military (or agree w/ the ideology) leave. This aims to weed out committed professionals who strongly adhere to norms of nonpartisanship. 6/
September 30, 2025 at 3:55 PM
If mil leaders don’t buy the message, they can keep quiet or self-select out. Those who don’t want to be part of politicized military (or agree w/ the ideology) leave. This aims to weed out committed professionals who strongly adhere to norms of nonpartisanship. 6/
The speeches are also a permission structure—or worse encouragement—to explicitly promote that world view in one’s unit and social networks. This too promotes ideological conformity. 5/
September 30, 2025 at 3:55 PM
The speeches are also a permission structure—or worse encouragement—to explicitly promote that world view in one’s unit and social networks. This too promotes ideological conformity. 5/
The framing, rhetoric & content of the speech signals that. This is not about enforcing standards (beards/fitness); it is about inculcating a particular value-system and world view within the officer corps.
No one can miss or ignore that message, as it is being communicated directly to them. 4/
September 30, 2025 at 3:55 PM
The framing, rhetoric & content of the speech signals that. This is not about enforcing standards (beards/fitness); it is about inculcating a particular value-system and world view within the officer corps.
No one can miss or ignore that message, as it is being communicated directly to them. 4/