# Universities, the military, and political beliefs.



## boots (29 Nov 2005)

Ok here's a better question for you, so you all don't end up thinking I'm like Reese Witherspoon in Legally Blonde. :

From what I understand, the requirement for all officers (all new ones anyway) to hold degrees is relatively new. In general, the military tends to be a conservative section of society, and universities tend to be liberal. So this means that the CF will likely end up taking in more university graduates with liberal ideals. My question is, do you think that this will begin to affect military culture over time, and how so? Or do you think that the effects are minimal, because this only applies to DEOs, or the liberal subsection of society isn't going to be more like to join the CF (This depends on whether you think that universities induce or simply attract liberal minded people, or that it's just because universities are full of youth.), or perhaps that most will just go to RMC (which is probably a rather conservative environment)?

Your thoughts?


----------



## KevinB (29 Nov 2005)

As some one who had been in the CF and attended Universities (Carleton and Calgary).  

  I have noted that the dynamic of the CF is somewhat more conservative that the general public.  I do not feel Universities to be a moderating factor - for while young officers may arrive with dreams of grandeur they are quickly crushed by the realities of CF life  -- and Deployments.


----------



## Infanteer (29 Nov 2005)

I agree with Kevin - as Huntington explored in the Soldier and the State, the very nature of the military institution forces its members into a more conservative, realist mode of thought (there are exceptions, but this is a good approximation of the general trend).


----------



## Britney Spears (29 Nov 2005)

I went to university. I learned to think for myself and make up my own darn mind.

I also learned to use descriptive thread titles so that people would actually know what the thread was about before opening it.

Of course, your mileage may vary.


----------



## George Wallace (29 Nov 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> - for while young officers may arrive with dreams of grandeur they are quickly crushed by the realities of CF life


Usually called a Platoon/Troop Warrant Officer.   ;D


----------



## xFusilier (29 Nov 2005)

Also, to a certain extent those individuals who feel themselves called to the profession of arms, are for the most part have more conservative political views.


----------



## boots (29 Nov 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> I also learned to use descriptive thread titles so that people would actually know what the thread was about before opening it.
> 
> Of course, your mileage may vary.


I'm sorry, it made more sense before the thread got moved to this part of the board. I've changed it now.


----------



## MC (30 Nov 2005)

I am a student at Laval University, involved in the faculty and college-wide student associations, as well as an ocdt in the ROTP program. 

First, you need to know that there are several faculties that are more conservative than the "vocal" elements of the student body, which are what you associate the "liberalism" of the university environment.  Most of these moderate students are pretty nonchalant regarding student and governmental politics, so the left usually gets their way and that is what you see in the media. Here at Laval, its pretty much all of the departments in Sciences and Engineering, Administration Sciences and Health Sciences, and incidently all officer candidates studying here come from these faculties. I couldn't imagine someone studying social sciences making a career in the infantry, which is not to say anything negative about social sciences, just to confirm the impression that people who join the military have a more rational mindset.


----------



## Infanteer (30 Nov 2005)

MC said:
			
		

> I couldn't imagine someone studying social sciences making a career in the infantry.



Well imagine it, because you're talking to one - among hundreds.   Look at the curriculum of most Command and Staff Colleges and University War Studies programs; they are interdisciplinary approaches to the"social sciences".   It's been that way since Scharnhorst and the Prussians started the _Kreigsacadamie_, which is founded on along the lines of Kantian approaches to education - the American's at West Point (and by default, the RMC which was modeled upon it) picked up a preference for science/engineering from the French who's roots are found in Cartesian system.


----------



## KevinB (30 Nov 2005)

MC said:
			
		

> I couldn't imagine someone studying social sciences making a career in the infantry, which is not to say anything negative about social sciences, just to confirm the impression that people who join the military have a more rational mindset.



  ???  I am a Social Science guy -- what are you trying to say???  
I'll have you know I did a 3rd year Gender Equality and the Law course - with a paper and presentation on Parental Leave and why spousal benifits should be the same (and wearing a Airborne sweatshirt too boot  ;D )


----------



## MC (30 Nov 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Well imagine it, because you're talking to one - among hundreds.  Look at the curriculum of most Command and Staff Colleges and University War Studies programs; they are interdisciplinary approaches to the"social sciences".  It's been that way since Scharnhorst and the Prussians started the _Kreigsacadamie_, which is founded on along the lines of Kantian approaches to education - the American's at West Point (and by default, the RMC which was modeled upon it) picked up a preference for science/engineering from the French who's roots are found in Cartesian system.



I stand corrected   war studies does indeed seem very interesting and I would imagine there are many people in the military, especially the combat arms, who have studied the field. although, their seems to be a world of difference to me between the military and political science or sociology taught here. heh, simply as an anecdote, I go to their cafeterias from time to time and what always shocks me  are their billboards. where as ours (engineering) are covered with available internships and jobs, theirs are flooded by anti-justaboutanythingyoucanthinkof association manifestos... when would you infantry types go and deal with the enemy if you were always busy bleeding your hearts about the injustices of modern society?


----------



## MC (30 Nov 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> ???  I am a Social Science guy -- what are you trying to say???
> I'll have you know I did a 3rd year Gender Equality and the Law course - with a paper and presentation on Parental Leave and why spousal benifits should be the same (and wearing a Airborne sweatshirt too boot  ;D )



heh, oh yes, gender equality. always a favorite topic in military circles


----------



## vangemeren (30 Nov 2005)

Looking at the York thread it seems to me my school, Nipissing U, does not have an activist student government and is more concerned with internal affairs regarding the school. In the last three years I've been there, however there seems to be a more vocal movement by a small group of people to make the student government more activist. This manifested itself in a referendum on the school's involvement with the Canadian Federation of Students.

I would think that the two reserve units in North Bay, The Algonquin Regiment and the 26 Service Battalion would hardly exist without the university and college in town, because of the size of the city (52,000 in 2001)



			
				MC said:
			
		

> ... always busy bleeding your hearts about the injustices of modern society?



That's why I try to avoid the Social Justice/Gender Equality wing of the school.  :blotto:

As a side note though I'm an Environmental Science major.


----------



## Pieman (30 Nov 2005)

Most of the people I knew in University didn't give a rats arrse about anything beyond the laboratory, especially my professors.


----------



## couchcommander (30 Nov 2005)

Yes, universities tend to be leftist, but most of the people I know who are planning a career in the CF aftewards tend to be a special breed and don't typically (in my experience) fit into the usual "student" stereotype.


----------



## boots (30 Nov 2005)

My university is fairly liberal, or at least stands out that way to me in a smallish conservative town. I consider myself a centrist, because I think both sides of the spectrum have something to offer and make some good points and some bad ones. I don't really like any of the political parties that we have, so voting is frustrating for me because it's always a matter of voting for whichever major party I dislike less that will keep the major party I like the least out of power, without really wanting the party I vote for to win either.

My roommates on the other hand... I live with another girl, and two guys. All of us are/were students. I'm the first one to be finished. She is also centrist, like me, and follows a similar voting strategy. The boys however are naive and youthful and more leftist than we are. Also, when I told them I wanted to join, both of them piped in and said they had/were thinking about it too. I'm convinced that was a 'me too' thing, because I know them and I don't honestly believe either of them would seriously consider it. I know that neither of them would last too long in training unless they made some major major changes in their ways of life. One of them runs off to sulk at the least criticism, and the other has no sense of responsibility. I wonder what they expect the military would do for them? :-\ Who knows, maybe they'd find something in themselves and shape up. If so I think it would be good for them.


----------



## pbi (30 Nov 2005)

I'm not sure that just going to a civilian university produces more "liberal" officers. After all, look at the US Army: IIRC, only about 25% of the offcers are products of West Point; of the remainder, a large percentage are products of civilian universities(among other sources). I would not classify the US Army as a stronghold of "liberalism" (nor, I daresay, would they...)

As well, take a look at the upper echelons of Canadian business, almost all of whose occupants have at least one degree. Not too many left-wing "fellow travellers" in the boardroom or corporate offices, are there?

So, I agree with the posters who have suggested that it depends far more upon your personal inclinations and your field of study than merely upon the fact of having been to a university. Those students who choose the profession of arms are not likely to be the same ones ranting over Student Radio or preaching to the converted in the quadrangle.

Cheers


----------



## Glorified Ape (30 Nov 2005)

MC said:
			
		

> I couldn't imagine someone studying social sciences making a career in the infantry, which is not to say anything negative about social sciences, just to confirm the impression that people who join the military have a more rational mindset.



Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesus Christ, what is it with people and knocking the Arts/Social Sciences? I'm in Political Science and I'm slated for Infantry Officer. Implying that those in the social sciences/arts are less rational is necessarily saying something negative about the social sciences and its constituency. I'd say I'm a pretty rational person (though some here might disagree  ). The professors I've had have all been very rational people. The overwhelming majority of my classmates have been just as rational, if not moreso, than the people I've trained with in the military.


----------



## Michael OLeary (30 Nov 2005)

Being an officer or NCO in the Infantry is a program in the practical application of the social sciences, and a life experiment in cultural anthropology.


----------



## pbi (30 Nov 2005)

Oh---is it my turn?

OK-well, I'm an Infantryman and my degree is PoliStud/Psych. So there.

Cheers.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (30 Nov 2005)

I found it a valuable lesson to be at a liberal school in the PolSci program and I think it is vital that all properly educated officers get the following lesson......I now know who the enemy is ....leftists.

  Now with that said, you have a point about the left leaning of the schools but as some have said those that take up the way of the sword are a different breed and the left schools only enhance our capabilities to understand who we will one day meet on the field of battle.

  With all this conservative talk I guess we are all voting in the right this Jan06.


----------



## rw4th (30 Nov 2005)

> Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesus Christ, what is it with people and knocking the Arts/Social Sciences?



Friends don't let friends take arts  ;D


----------



## hooch (30 Nov 2005)

Glorified Ape said:
			
		

> I'm in Political Science and I'm slated for Infantry Officer.



You're not the only one... I'm studying History and Philosophy, and most of my friends in the same career track are studying any number of the social sciences or humanities at every university across the country.  Being exposed to a variety of different ways of thinking, whether you agree with them or not, is in my opinion one of the most important things about a university education and I cetainly don't see how it may be a detriment to my future duties as an infantry officer.  I cetainly don't _feel_ like a bleeding heart, and the Philosophy department is arguably the most socialist, leftist department at my school.


----------



## johnny_boy (1 Dec 2005)

Everyone tosses around those terms now, liberal, left, conservative, right, centre, up, down. The US election only made it worse and anyone who is not a Republican is left and liberal and everyone who is not a Democrat and right and evil. I for one think it's the dumbest thing ever. 

I'm sorry but who says if you're in the military you have to have "conservative" thoughts? I support gay marraige, but I support Canada in Afghanistan, Haiti, etc which is what all the people you would call "liberal" do not support. 

I go to university, I am in the CF, and I don't think you can blanket somone simply with a label that says conservative, liberal, etc.

Meh


----------



## Infanteer (1 Dec 2005)

I think the discussion is centered on the "liberal" and "realist" approaches to Canada's role in the world and international relations in general.  Canadian society as a whole tends to be quite liberal, and CF members will tend to reflect this.  However, there are aspects of the profession which will, in general, affect a members structural approach to the way to the world works (this was what Huntington was getting at with his analysis of the professionalism).

You are correct though, pigeonholing political views into boxes doesn't really do the concepts justice.


----------



## ZxExN (1 Dec 2005)

Your education or lack there of does not make you a conservative or liberal. Both sides have thjeir merits and I just hope you're not implying that the educated one are naturally liberals and the stupid highschool drop outs are conservatives.
Your character and who you are affected more so by your life experience than anything else. Also just because someone has been educated in the liberal arts, it does not mean that they do not make excellent infantry soldiers.


----------



## boots (1 Dec 2005)

ZxExN said:
			
		

> Your education or lack there of does not make you a conservative or liberal. Both sides have thjeir merits and I just hope you're not implying that the educated one are naturally liberals and the stupid highschool drop outs are conservatives.
> Your character and who you are affected more so by your life experience than anything else. Also just because someone has been educated in the liberal arts, it does not mean that they do not make excellent infantry soldiers.



I think the reason why universities tend to be more liberal than the rest of society may just be because they are mostly populated with young people, who tend to be liberal because they are young. I've noticed that I have been gradually becoming more conservative over the years, and I might even consider voting for them except that I don't like a lot of the social policies. I haven't been following politics for a while, so it may well have all changed by now. I'm going to have to look into it again with this new election that seems to be about to hit us... either way I am going to vote for either the liberals or the conservatives, if only because I doubt any other party really stands a chance (and that would be a wasted vote) so I will just have to figure out which party I dislike less. 

Infanteer: Personally, I don't see 'realist' as the opposite of 'liberal'. I consider myself very much a realist. I tend to have beliefs along the lines of 'prostitution should be legalised whether or not you/I personally agree with it, simply because it will always exist whether it's legal or not, and legalising makes it safer' or 'we need to have a better alternative to welfare that isn't so prone to abuse, or wasteful, but we need to have something'.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (1 Dec 2005)

Cuteboots, you said..

"I think the reason why universities tend to be more liberal than the rest of society may just be because they are mostly populated with young people, who tend to be liberal because they are young."

I think the reason is that the young are impresionable and they are the main population at university which is influenced by the teachers that are left wing socialists. They are the reason and as you age you see the error of these peoples teachings. If we had universities full of right wing teachers we would create the same group as conservatives. Uhhhhm I like the sound of that...! Could be dangerous though.

Remember those that cant, teach! Why are the universities full of left leaning teachers ...because they could not survive spouting there left socialists crap in a board room.


----------



## KevinB (1 Dec 2005)

Boots -- how who you then legalise prostitution?  How would you guarantee that the pimps and thugs would not continue to control these women?  How could we guarantee that organised crime does not control it?

   I consider myself a realist because I know people are dirty, nasty, and mean at heart.


----------



## Infanteer (1 Dec 2005)

cuteboots said:
			
		

> Infanteer: Personally, I don't see 'realist' as the opposite of 'liberal'. I consider myself very much a realist. I tend to have beliefs along the lines of 'prostitution should be legalised whether or not you/I personally agree with it, simply because it will always exist whether it's legal or not, and legalising makes it safer' or 'we need to have a better alternative to welfare that isn't so prone to abuse, or wasteful, but we need to have something'.



Again, you're talking about domestic social issues - I'm referring to a soldier's outlook on the international order, which tends to be shaped by his profession, his preperation, and his experience in the world's shitholes.  This is why I believe Huntington was correct when he stated that militaries as institutions tend to gravitate towards a more conservative, realist outlook.



			
				KevinB said:
			
		

> Boots -- how who you then legalise prostitution?   How would you guarantee that the pimps and thugs would not continue to control these women?   How could we guarantee that organised crime does not control it?



Same way you would do things with pot (or we do things with alcohol).  Require licenses and mandatory audits.  Showing positive for hard drugs means you license gets pulled.  Designate specific businesses and locations where it can be practiced - they have to be licenced as well.  Jack the punishment up for streetwalking and pimping big time.

There are places which do this - Vegas being one of them.  Of course, you're never going to get rid of abused women, but this is a start.  Helping a good percentage of these women make their living in the world's oldest trade in a safer manner is better then saying "don't do it".


----------



## KevinB (1 Dec 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Helping a good percentage of these women make their living in the world's oldest trade in a safer manner is better then saying "don't do it".



Its true, you are a closet Libertarian


----------



## rw4th (2 Dec 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> There are places which do this - Vegas being one of them.



Actually, as far as I know Nevada does it, but it's still illegal in Vegas (the Bunny Ranch is right outside city limits )

Just "right" and "left" is not usually enough to describe a person's political beliefs. You have to use those to characterize specific areas, such as: foreign policy, economics, and social issues.

For example:

I lean towards the right on foreign policy and economic issues (lower taxes, military spending, etc..), but towards the left on many social issues (drug legalization, abortion, legalized prostitution, etc ...).


----------



## Infanteer (2 Dec 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Its true, you are a closet Libertarian



Got me.



			
				rw4th said:
			
		

> Actually, as far as I know Nevada does it, but it's still illegal in Vegas (the Bunny Ranch is right outside city limits )



Damn, you're right - thanks for the correction.


----------



## Aislinn (4 Dec 2005)

This is always a fun topic for me. I'm still in university and still dealing with anti-military issues on campus. Currently our student union is "deciding for once and all [our] view on the CF". They still want to ban CF recruitment advertising. It's a continuous and frustrating battle for me. And let's not knock arts degrees: I'm a political science major. I'm also a rep on the student union. I like to think I bring a different and perhaps opposing view to school politics.

Cheers.


----------



## UberCree (4 Dec 2005)

Don't confuse the term 'liberalism' in refence to international politics with the newfound media term 'liberalism' in reference to domestic politics.  One of you poly sci students could probably explain this better, but Liberalism is the belief that international trade and interaction furthers our interests... hence world peace.  The more we intereact the greater the opportunity for peace.  Domestically we use the term pejoritively and synonomously with 'left'.  However, most 'conservatives' are liberal in regards to international trade.


----------



## boots (4 Dec 2005)

Enami said:
			
		

> This is always a fun topic for me. I'm still in university and still dealing with anti-military issues on campus. Currently our student union is "deciding for once and all [our] view on the CF". They still want to ban CF recruitment advertising. It's a continuous and frustrating battle for me. And let's not knock arts degrees: I'm a political science major. I'm also a rep on the student union. I like to think I bring a different and perhaps opposing view to school politics.
> 
> Cheers.



Keep up the good fight. 
When I was in university, and the Iraq war thing was going on, some students decided to do some peace protest thing which meant that they camped out on the campus lawn for a while... I'm really not sure what they expected to get out of that, but they are free to their opinion, as many of you and eventually I work on ensuring that. 
Personally for me the war on Iraq was really only ever one question: Will the life of the average Iraqi become better as a result? The answer to that was going to be in line with my support. As for Canada joining in... if we don't, we don't, and if we did and I was told to go, I go. That's pretty simple.



			
				UberCree said:
			
		

> Don't confuse the term 'liberalism' in refence to international politics with the newfound media term 'liberalism' in reference to domestic politics.   One of you poly sci students could probably explain this better, but Liberalism is the belief that international trade and interaction furthers our interests... hence world peace.   The more we intereact the greater the opportunity for peace.   Domestically we use the term pejoritively and synonomously with 'left'.   However, most 'conservatives' are liberal in regards to international trade.


I bet that some of them would have a fit if you told them that.


----------



## KevinB (4 Dec 2005)

cuteboots said:
			
		

> I bet that some of them would have a fit if you told them that.




Some of us just dont do back flips at that revalation...  A lot of US Conservatives are also isolationist.  I have been become more isolationist recently - my anti globalization issues are entirely 180 for the typical though.

Its hard to pigeonhole anyone into a specific trait


----------



## a_majoor (4 Dec 2005)

The use of language has been corrupted, what we think of as "Conservative" today is actually classical "Liberalism" What passes for "Liberalism" today is a variation on socialism, and to be correctly political it is very close to National Socialism or Fascism in nature.

See the test in :http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/32697.0.html, and the discussion in "Politics with more Dimensions" http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/23744.0.html


----------



## KevinB (4 Dec 2005)

Not very PC of you


----------



## UberCree (4 Dec 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Some of us just dont do back flips at that revalation...   A lot of US Conservatives are also isolationist.   I have been become more isolationist recently - my anti globalization issues are entirely 180 for the typical though.
> 
> Its hard to pigeonhole anyone into a specific trait


I will look forward to seeing you at all the anti globalization rallies ???  
I will bet that my pro-globalization is not typical either.  I believe globalization necessitiates global human rights standards, governance and economic freedoms... emphasis on rights.


----------



## Infanteer (4 Dec 2005)

You HAVE been reading Ignatieff, eh?


----------



## KevinB (4 Dec 2005)

I've been reading Diamond.

 My conclusions are likely somewhat different than others though...


----------



## Glorified Ape (6 Dec 2005)

a_majoor said:
			
		

> The use of language has been corrupted, what we think of as "Conservative" today is actually classical "Liberalism" What passes for "Liberalism" today is a variation on socialism, and to be correctly political it is very close to National Socialism or Fascism in nature.



Oh Boy, more Godwin's Law for everyone. Please - "liberalism" in the bastardized mainstream sense it's used in today is nowhere near National Socialism or Fascism. That's just anti-leftist angst talking. 

I'd say democratic socialism would better characterize many on the left than either of your sensational comparisons. That being said, many "liberals" fall far short of democratic socialism. I think the confusion of terms is partly resultant from the cleavage between political and economic views. I find that identifying one's views separately is more useful - IE social conservative, economic liberal.


----------



## UberCree (6 Dec 2005)

Glorified Ape said:
			
		

> cleavage



Ehhh...heh heh... he said cleavage... heh heh..


----------



## a_majoor (7 Dec 2005)

Since "Liberals" (both the Canadian kind and US Democrats, traditional Labour parties in Europe and others who espouse "Liberalism") would allow us the duties and responsibilities of property ownership while using taxes and regulations to dictate the economic outcomes; they are following in the footsteps of Fascism.

Since so much of todays "Liberal" politics is driven by  pandering to or promoting certain groups at the expense of other groups in a "Zero Sum" context, it also resembles National Socialism.

Remember, these are the "correctly political" definitions of these systems, I am simply observing what is going on and supplying the points of comparison. Respect for individual rights, property rights, the supremacy of Parliament and the Rule of Law were the hallmarks of Classical Liberalism, and are now espoused by "conservatives" to varying degrees.

Have a wonderful election


----------

