Walter E. Block Libertarians on the US Military: a Critique of Mercer
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Walter E. Block Loyola University New Orleans, United States Libertarians on the US Military: A Critique of Mercer, Anderson, Boudreaux, Friedman, Oi, McCobin and Markevičiūtė 24/2018 Political Dialogues DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/DP.2018.005 Abstract: of us, have been left sleeping at the Libertarians, all too often, focus, and switch. The appreciation of the evils of brilliantly so, on economics and personal foreign adventurism, imperialism, un- liberties. Unfortunately, many do so at justified war, etc. is all too often sorely the expense of foreign policy, imperial- lacking. It is one thing, when a foreign ism, U.S. adventurism abroad. The pur- country unjustifiably attacks us, or pose of the present paper is to set the threatens to do so. Then, all stops are record straight, and to correct this im- out. The nation under attack is justified, balance. This paper is a critique of lib- more than justified, in defending itself. ertarian warmongers, whether they sup- However, it is an entirely different mat- port imperialism purposefully or not. ter when the home country is itself an imperialist invader. At present, the U.S. Key words: Libertarianism, imperialism, military is engaged in more than a half political correctness, the voluntary mili- dozen undeclared wars against nations tary, religion that have never even come within a mil- lion miles of threatening us, let alone ac- tually invading this country. I. Introduction In section II we take Mercer to task The overwhelming majority of libertar- for her erroneous treatment of this sub- ians apply this philosophy, accurately, ject. The same fate awaits Anderson, Bo- to economic issues and personal liber- udreaux, Friedman and Oi in section III. ties. Since no one may properly initiate Section IV is devoted to pointing out the violence against anyone else or his legiti- errors of McCobin and Markevičiūtė in mately owned property, minimum wages, this regard. We conclude in section V. rent controls, protective tariffs are widely seen, in this community, as illicit in the II. Mercer former sphere, as are laws prohibiting drugs, any and all sexual acts between Mercer (2017) waxes eloquent about consenting adults, alcohol, firearms, etc. some relatively new dangers to the U.S. It is with regard to foreign policy, military; she explores these challenges I contend, that libertarians, all too many and offers solutions that will strengthen 57 this institution. The present paper starts another state-driven reformation pro- with a critique of her essay from a liber- gram.” tarian point of view. Then, there is the inclusion of females In her analysis, it is “killer PC” that in our fi ghting forces; this, too, has weak- is to blame for the weakening of Ameri- ened them. States Mercer on this matter: can armed forces. She sees “multicultur- “To the surprise of liberals, a few good alism, feminism and all manner of outré women have protested. Former Army sexual politics, affi rmative action, and Spec. Catherine Aspy, for instance. Her political correctness” as the viper in the account, published in Reader’s Digest, bosom of the Army, Navy, Air Force and February, 1999, was relayed by column- Marines. ist Fred Reed. Aspy, who had graduated First up in her list of examples un- from Harvard in 1992 and enlisted in the dermining our power to project compul- Army in 1995, said this: ‘I was stunned. sory power around the world is Major The Army was a vast day-care center, Nidal Malik Hasan. A psychiatrist in the full of unmarried teen-age mothers us- army with the phrase “Soldier of Allah” ing it as a welfare home. I took training embossed on his business card, he killed seriously and really tried to keep up with thirteen soldiers at Ford Hood. Was he the men. I found I couldn’t. It wasn’t excoriated for this deed of his? No. In- even close. I had no idea the difference in stead, Mercer informs us, “Commander physical ability was so huge. There were Colonel Steven Braverman, a colleague always crowds of women sitting out ex- of Hasan’s at the Darnall army medical ercises or on crutches from training in- center on Fort Hood, vouched that Hasan juries. They [the Army] were so scared of had performed well in his job and had sexual harassment that women weren’t shown no obvious signs of trouble.” allowed to go anywhere without another The second instance of this weaken- woman along. They called them “Battle ing, she points out, is the gun free zone Buddies.” It was crazy. I was twenty-six policy at military bases: “Lieutenant Gen- years old but I couldn’t go to the bath- eral Robert W. Cone, commander of III room by myself.’” Corps at Fort Hood, brag(ged) about the Mercer concludes her essay as fol- ‘no-guns’ policies on that base.” Avers lows: “Biological reprogramming and Mercer: “These left Hasan’s victims help- brainwashing, courtesy of Rome on the less.” Cone went on to say: “As a mat- Potomac, were already plain to see in ter of practice, we don’t carry weapons a Pentagon-endorsed VH1 series enti- here, this is our home.” Mercer’s reac- tled ‘Military Diaries,’ which this writ- tion? This policy led to “A funeral home er covered in 2002. Touted as a ‘power- for some!,” namely Hasan’s victims. ful fi rsthand look at our heroes, their Mercer’s next cause of dwindling stories and the music that gets them U.S. military power is “LGBTQ as Social through,’ this ‘militarytainment’ could Engineering.” To wit, “payment for dras- but strengthen the resolve of the ene- tic elective medical procedures and the my…. These poster-girlie recruits want- attendant hormonal maintenance” can- ed viewers to know that their ‘real duty not help strengthen this organization. is to provide humanitarian aid to the She continues: “In other words, LGBTQ Afghans’ (it’s in the revised Oath of En- in the military isn’t about enhancing listment, apparently). They shared their a fi ghting force, it’s about introducing dreams of being ‘self-help authors.’ And 58 they imparted the joys of manning posts the libertarian principle of non-initiatory like ‘Diversity Awareness Offi cers’ and aggression, or is it mainly defensive, and ‘Drug and Alcohol Counselors.’ Suffi ce it therefore compatible with this axiom of to say that the ‘human face’ of our coed our philosophy, at least the minarchist men and women of the armed forces ex- version thereof. To ask this question is udes mush, not mettle. ‘Military Diaries’ pretty much to answer it. Yes, our armed was a motivational video for America’s forces do indeed play a defensive role, in ascetic, Islamic enemy.” part, as does the army of pretty much What is the libertarian to say about every other country on the face of the all of this? At least in the view of one earth. But the U.S. is unique amongst such, the present author, Mercer makes its fellow nations insofar it alone has an excellent case in favor of her conten- some 800 military bases stationed in tion: soldiers, sailors, aviators, marines, roughly 140 countries.2 No other state have been greatly weakened by the fact even remotely approaches this record. that political correctness has infected Thus, I conclude that the cause of liberty the leaders of these institutions. In addi- would be enhanced, not decreased, with tion, when 10 men form a platoon, they an infusion of even more harmful politi- can be a powerful coherent force. Add cal correctness in this institution. Why a woman to the mix, and, at least among stop with encouraging the signing of heterosexual men, they all compete for women, gays, the gender fl uid, “soldiers her favors, to the detriment for the mo- of Allah,” etc. What about elderly people, rale of their squad. Further, women, at say, aged 70 plus. True, they would not the margin, are the limitation on popula- in any great numbers be able to pass the tion growth; they are too precious to be stringent physical requirements of sol- risked in hazardous conditions, faced by diering, but we have already made ex- the military (Block, 2015). ceptions for females; why not for them, In all this I am a fi rm supporter of too? Then, there are the physically and Mercer’s hypothesis. These politically mentally handicapped.3 Their inclusion correct initiatives do indeed weaken the would also further deteriorate the (inva- military, and are horridly objectionable sive!) fi ghting ability of our armed forces. on all sorts of other grounds.1 However, So, let us have less prejudice against the I must part company with this author in disabled; let us apply more and more one very signifi cant regard. No. Scratch political correctness to the military of that: in one overwhelmingly crucially im- this imperialist war-mongering nation. portant respect: she opposes the infec- Would that the Nazi Army had imposed tion of the military with political correct- this sort of recruitment upon itself. They ness. I, in sharp contrast, welcome it. would have been far easier to conquer, The point is, does the libertarian as they so richly deserved. favor a stronger or weaker U.S. armed force? The proper answer is dependent upon the question: is the U.S. military 2 http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/BSR_ offensive, and therefore in violation of 2007_Baseline.pdf 3 Please do not think I have taken full leave of my senses. (Partial, maybe, but, please, not full). 1 They undermine our traditional culture, I oppose all governmentally imposed affi rmative ac- they play havoc with our mores in all sorts of other tion, discrimination, etc., in all “normal contexts.” areas other than the military, for example in mar- But, in this one, where I welcome ineffi ciency, is riage, divorce, academia, the labor market, etc.