"Deserving" Freedom and the Role of the Military

The uproar surrounding William Arkin's writing questioning the role of the troops in political discourse at home continues, with hordes of conservatives, hawks, servicemen and veterans attacking Arkin as "anti-American," a "traitor," and virtually every other political insult in the book. Arkin has offered two responses, one directly to his critics here and another more widely addressing the role of the troops.

What is most interesting -- and most disturbing -- has been the way in which Arkin's admittedly incendiary words about the troops have drawn enraged responses that, ironically enough, display the exact attitudes Arkin was worried about in his original writing. The most common of such demonstrations were found in the countless replies from both servicemen and conservative pundits that sent the clear message that it was totally unacceptable for Arkin to disagree with the wisdom or viability of the war, or to question the untouchability of the troops and their opinions. Coming after Arkin's stated concern regarding attempts by military men to stifle civilian debate, these enraged responses showed that our military-worshipping culture does in fact have a problem with free and open debate.

Another, even more disturbing instance of this sort of display can be found in numerous responses from troops not only to Arkin's comments, but to critics of the war in Iraq in various venues. One reader calling himself "Stu," commenting on Arkin's second reply, said the following:

This whole "we can't win the war, but I support the troops" crap has made me realize that none of you deserve freedom or are worthy of those that serve or served to guarantee it. I served my country proudly, in war. Now I have realized you didn't deserve my sacrifices or those I served with.

This sort of sentiment, seen frequently throughout the conservative/military blogosphere, perfectly exemplifies the sort of superiority-complex about which Arkin expressed concern. The idea that the troops are not only the sole guarantors of Americans' freedom, but that they also are the only ones "deserving" of that freedom -- as if freedom was theirs to give or withhold -- reveals a very dangerous tendency in our society which has completely lost contact with its classical liberal roots.

To those who established these freedoms at the founding of the nation, the idea that freedom is given and maintained by military force was completely unacceptable. In fact, the architects of these freedoms were clear that only in a nation protected from military influence could real liberty be sustained. Numerous founders warned of the danger of a standing military force -- one can only imagine what they would think of our massive modern military-industrial complex and all the power it wields.

While Arkin's initial comments may have been somewhat more incendiary than thoughtful at times, the heated debate that has resulted has offered a rare honest glimpse into the dangerous attitudes of many in the military and the hawkish civilians who seem to worship them. As our constitutional liberties atrophy in the face of executive onslaught and our culture remains caught up in a fever of militarism, it is more important than ever that Americans realize that their liberties are not granted at the mercy of government or military, but are theirs to keep as free citizens. The day any people abandon a jealous hold on their freedom, that freedom is lost -- we can only hope that the American people have not already let go.