Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
“Army Values”
A report is out that West Point is removing “Duty, Honor, Country” from its motto. Instead it will have the words “Army Values”. The Superintendent is trying to argue that since Army values include duty, honor and country that it is no big deal.
Gilland made a point to say that West Point’s mission statement has changed nine times and that “Duty, Honor, Country was first added to the mission statement in 1998.”
The general added that “Army Values include Duty and Honor, and Country is reflected in Loyalty, bearing true faith and allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, the Army, your unit, and other Soldiers.”
Interesting that the phrase “Duty, Honor, Country” was only added in 1998. Many of us probably assumed it was much earlier, given the words of General Douglas McArthur’s famous farewell address included the following —
In the evening of my memory, always I come back to West Point. Always there echoes and re-echoes: Duty, Honor, Country.
So maybe it isn’t really a big deal. But when you replace specific values with a more vague (if arguably comprehensive) phrase, you are focusing on the vessel, not the contents. And any vessel can be emptied and refilled with something very different indeed.
Published in General
Tend to agree. As a doggie from the mid-60s, those “values” appear to be something a boot would be required to memorize such as the General Orders or Chain of Command. On the other hand, “Duty, Honor, Country” was/is a code to live by.
Plato’s Socrates, Jowett translation:
Confucian Analects, Muller translation:
Looks like I’m going to have to add Confucius to my summer reading list…do you have any suggests as to a “Confucius for Dummies” text?
The Oxford Very Short Intro by . . . Gardner.
Fingarette wrote a classic, not exactly for dummies.
And this:
https://ricochet.com/1376368/confucianism-is-awsome/
Doesn’t matter. I like your comment!
You just can’t make this stuff up anymore. The ideas of the “progressives” (aka, communists) are just stupid and beyond parody.
That is the intent.
John Solomon Reports podcast I am listening to talked about a soldier in training here who hadn’t been allowed to graduate from basic training because he has been tabbed a white supremacist for not embracing DEI. Fellow recruits have already said he isn’t a racist. Can’t wait for the follow-on investigation.
I don’t have much confidence in today’s U.S. military leadership. So I’m suspicious of the change.
But I also think it’s interesting that the phrase was only instituted in its mission statement in 1992. It reminds me of the Pledge of Allegiance controversy about keeping “…One Nation under God…” in the pledge.
When I found out that the phrase was inserted during the Eisenhower Administration, I found that interesting too.
Somehow we won World War II without it. And MacArthur popularized the phrase, Duty, Honor, Country in a speech to West Point in 1960, so that means the West Point cadets that went on to win World War II also managed to do so without that too. MacArthur himself had a controversial military career that included in the end, being removed for disobeying his Commander in Chief, essentially challenging civilian control of the military, one of the hallmarks of our constitution.
So of the three, Duty, Honor, Country, I’ll give him 2 out of 3, when assessing his career.
He was a very ambitious man, who almost disgraced himself in the end.
And yet General Milley has no ignominious end.
McArther was Superintendent of West Point in the 1920s and at that time the mission statement had some formulation (or proposed formulation) of the “duty, honor, country” mantra.
Mark Milley’s accomplishments have no comparison to MacArthur’s, whether as a successful general or a villain.
MacArthur’s military career ended 73 years ago. We’re still talking about him. Milley is a drab bureaucrat who won’t be remembered in 5 years.
Except as a treasonous SOB who delights in talking to his “counterpart” in the Chinese army.
And heteropatriarchal, too.
We also prevailed in many conflicts without a formal code of conduct.
Our experience in Korea led to Eisenhower’s executive order establishing one for the armed forces. None of the articles were new or revolutionary. They were an official restatement of rules soldiers lived by for almost 200 years.
Much like the fetish for “mission statements” in civilian organizations, I guess sometimes it becomes necessary to formally document what has always been in the sinews of the Army.
My current employer has a silly mission statement. Every time we get a new boss, they change a word or two on it and make an announcement as though it were profound.
I agree with the characterization of mission statements as a fetish. I include the military.
I was a firefighter volunteer for 25 years. I rose up the volunteer ranks, and became an assistant chief. I participated in conferences and committees with our volunteer organization that dealt with mission statements.
I’ve come to the conclusion that when it’s obvious what the organization does, including the military services, as well as a fire or police department, you really don’t need a mission statement. And really those organizations shouldn’t be drafting their own mission statements anyway. They’re established by legislation, or more broadly, by the “will of the people.”
Their mission statements should be imposed by that, not by the members of the institution.
As far as a statement of values is concerned, the military didn’t seem to need them when they were primarily a citizen soldier force, at least during war time. The broader society brought those values into the institution that was the military. Just as they do for volunteer fire departments.
I work for an electric utility. It’s another example of what we do being obvious. And when it comes to integrety, the larger society has a big affect on employee integrity. And if the larger society has lost those values, all the value statements in the world aren’t going to stop that degredation within the organization sooner or later.
And it’s why I consider the changes to West Point’s mission statement to be irrelevant. It’s a lagging indicator. They aren’t being leaders, they’re being followers.
“Mission“ perhaps carries more meaning for the military, as does “mission accomplishment.”
I agree.
At least in the service you can accomplish your mission. Invade France, force Germany to surrender. Box checked.
If you are MEGA Lo Mart, and your mission is making stuff available to customers at low prices…well you can’t really accomplish something lacking a definite end. I suppose you can measure the variance at a specific time. That’s one reason I’m skeptical of corporate mission statements. They are really more a statement of purpose.
I blame MBA’s. They seem to have been the common factor when looking for a reason why America’s businesses have been declining, especially manufacturing.
When I worked at Dell, Michael Dell hired as many MIT and Uof Michigan engineer MBA grads. I guess some thought they were great, but to me they just competed with each other to show how great they were at the expense of the company.
That mailbox appears to be full.