The Military

It was National Armed Forces Day 2005, the cafeteria neatly adorned with regalia. Flanking the entrance were tri-fold displays dedicated to each particular branch of the service. At the table were myself, a good friend enrolled in the Air Force ROTC* and several proud civilians. One of them, who wasn't aware of our military presence, had several choice words about the subject as well as the commemoration. Keep in mind our country had just reinstated George W. Bush for a second term. He offered criticisms of the military construct as well as the national administration and questioned the decision to celebrate either. My friend stayed his tongue but clearly held grievance with the man's observations. Sensing visibly his growing incontinence my non-confrontational self moved to prevent a strong encounter over the undeserving dormitory fare. In retrospect, the guy just failed to employ prudence in his half-hearted tirade.

"The military" is simply a tool and is only as good as how it is used. There is a strong difference between the construct and its application. In many ways armed forces stay the same while being manipulated by ever-changing bands of elected and appointed kings-of-state. Get the right president to start two concurrent wars that swiftly become unpopular and you will likely see a decrease in military favor. What detractors often don't recognize is that they disagree with the use of the tool and not the thing itself.

Everybody loves armed forces because animals kill each other. That's what made Ghandi so powerful and remarkable, he made himself an exception to the universal rule. All creatures possess the fear mechanism; everything knows as soon as it can think that something else might try to kill it. The military addresses this issue at the macro level, we fend for ourselves at the micro level. Perhaps even more admonishing to those who would blindly criticize is the fact that most military personnel--particularly high-ranking officers--respect and follow whoever the president is, regardless of party affiliation. We all know the rhetoric because it's true. On paper and in practice the military exists to protect the country and is directed by the commander in chief in meeting that task. They have great utility in this regard.

Beyond the political implications are other interesting considerations. The hallmark of any fighting force is discipline. Order. Efficiency that begs descriptions such as "well-oiled machine." As a thing, in and of itself, it is wonderful: A system that develops strength and ability in the subject in both mental and physical aspects leading to improvement on a level approaching literal augmentation of the human being. It instills courage and skill, ultimately rendering capable, productive people. Then one man can take it and exercise illegitimate use of force.

I have a problem with that. For the sake of humor, here's a thought from Lewis Black^# that effectively illustrates my sentiment here:


"The major lesson that can be learned from the hurricane [Katrina] is this: that while we were fighting the terrorists, god bit us in the ass!"


The military are our finest and strongest, most able and vital. It's troubling to recognize that this rather unique faculty could be readily used in ways that are not intended. That's where all the lying came from. In order to bend the rules they had to say we were "protecting national security" by pre-emptively attacking a country for reasons that were ultimately false. We grapple with the concept that our military is subject to arbitrary application.

I'm wishing for another entity. Very much like "the military" as we know it but in key ways different. It maintains similarly high standards for conduct and ability. It provides training and education to its ranks as well as support and protection for society. It is capable of waging war but is very restricted in how it can be deployed internationally. It could provide support in the stead of presently defunct agencies. It's what homeland security never was. It would be there when we need it.

People hesitate to join the armed forces because they don't trust in the prudence of those who wield them. In contemporary language, they "don't wanna get sent to Iraq." It's unfortunate that the end of such a thing would negate all its positive means. If there were another option that provided a sure return on one's civil service it would be greatly received. We need a safe haven for such a resource so that it can be reserved for where it matters most.

* Recruit Officers' Training Corps
# http://www.lewisblack.com/audio.asp#audio (The Carnegie Hall Performance, Track 12 - The Real Problem is Gay Marriage)

Growth

"All great ideas are dangerous."

-Oscar Wilde

Parking

'Only an asshole would park like this.'

That is a bumper sticker attached to my friend's refrigerator. I like to think it's waiting to be met with that special car out there--somewhere. Maybe you've seen it. Jutting awkwardly into the lane at your local co-op. Occupying two spaces like a corpulent airline passenger. Several feet over the line into the spot in front of it. Oh, if only people had to pay for the entire area they consume.

In the order of shameful parking practices none is more heinous than the infamous 'sports car parked diagonally across several spaces so as to prevent anyone else parking near it'. Cousin to the over-sized sport utility vehicle to whom the lines are invisible, they both favor personal satisfaction over social responsibility. The flasher exhibits selfishness and the tank exhibits laziness. It must be terribly embarrassing to drive a car you can't park.

My favorites are the more subtle botch jobs. The ones where they barely made it somewhat into the space. "Close enough." I used to think people who can't park between the stripes were the same who couldn't color inside the lines as children. Now I think they're people who are still children in that they live life completely oblivious to the world around them.

What I'm saying is I see a direct relationship between social capital and the quality of public parking in a society. This is important, so we will define it:


social capital : An economic idea that refers to the connections between individuals and entities that can be economically valuable. Social networks that include people who trust and assist each other can be a powerful asset. These relationships between individuals and firms can lead to a state in which each will think of the other when something needs to be done.


Or as I think of it: the social health of a society. Do people trust each other? Are relationships between citizens and government mutually beneficial? Furthermore, how interactive are communities? Do people pledge their support? You know, it's viewers like you...

Of course, with any intuitive idea, social capital--or more specifically the need for it to be good--makes perfect sense. Of course a healthy person is a better person, so would a healthy society be a more productive one. When you're not sick you get a lot of work done.

It also makes sense that the less people care in general the less they care about their parking job. What goes through the mind of a person walking away from poor parking?:

1.) Nothing (unfortunately).
2.) "I'll just- be right back."
     "There's plenty of other parking."
     "It's not so bad."
     "I don't have time."
     "Screw these guys."

It's a sprawled society that produces this sort of citizen. Suddenly everything that is important-- what you value--is not in your neighborhood any more. Your resources are flung across the globe and your families are spread across continents. You are the law of diminishing returns. The more disconnected every individual is, the less they care. My money and my daughter go to New York.

It's harder for a human to care if it can't see the impact of its actions. Not feeling confident in one's community certainly compounds the matter. To the detriment of social capital we have public trust scandals, disdain of government, xenophobia and less civic engagement. To bolster we have volunteer organizations, block parties/barbecues, religion when it behaves and the parks department. Among other things.

We are social beings and organize ourselves as such, even if in a perverted manner. In such a product-oriented world the ends are the only concern. Cheap produce. The Dollar Value menu. Outsourced technical support hotlines. We offer these services as a value to our customers.

Forgotten is the notion that the means are what produce good social capital. How we get our food or support or services. Playing a relay race across the country with invoices as the baton and the grocery shelf as the finish line disconnects everyone involved. This is a far cry from two small businesses down the street coordinating an effort to offer more comprehensive services to their customers and unify everyone involved. One size does not fit all, just as one chain does not meet well with every community. The future is customization.

Remember the old phrase, "Getting there is half the fun." Hold it close to your heart. It's through the daily interaction of neighbors and regulars that a wealth of social capital is built. It's knowing who lives next to you. It's contributing to the local economy. It's stopping to give someone your spare tube. It's empathy in practice. It's good parking.