After reading about the great military meeting that took place a few weeks ago, as ordered by Defense Secretary Hegseth, I planned to post some comments.
But then the death of Jane Goodall was announced and an out of the box kind of thought seeped into my head about combining my thoughts about the two into one post.
Not sure if it will work, but here goes.
First, in order of importance, Jane Goodall.
If you would like to read a really nice tribute, and summary, of Jane Goodall's life, paste and copy the link below.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/2025/10/jane-goodall-fame-research-conservation/684433/?utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20251002&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&lctg=67f130672e8e571a90087893&utm_term=The%20Atlantic%20Dail
Jane Goodall was born the same year as my mother, 1934. I say this because I did not realize this until seeing it stated in the above article, and in the various obits that appeared after she died.
Why does this matter to me? I guess because I am continually amazed at the accomplishments by women of this era, those born in the 1930's and early 1940's, who were attempting to continue the legacy of those brave and forward looking women who lobbied, and sacrificed, for the right to vote which was finally achieved just a few decades before.
An anecdote which is at the beginning of the article I mention above, relates the story of when Goodall was offered a job by the famed anthropologist, Louis Leakey, to study chimpanzees in Africa, British colonial authorities balked at the idea of a young women being alone in the forest, so her mother offered to go with her. That was in 1960!
Of course, I was only a child when Goodall began her amazing work in the jungles of Africa, but when I learned of her, as a young adult, I thought of her as a young women, not much older than I, even though the age difference was 24 years. I guess I always considered her more of a cohort, in age, than someone of my mom's generation, which makes her career and her influence over the years even more remarkable.
The article also mentions the disdain that many of Goodall's male colleagues had for her work. She treated her subjects with respect, even naming them. To me, that demonstrates the strength of her research, and the humanity as well. She didn't think less of the animals she was studying.
When she was the first to prove that chimps used tools to retrieve food from tree stumps, and that they had reworked that stick into the tool to help the process, it was ground breaking. To me, that kind of discovery could only be obtained, be open to, by someone who looked at her subjects through the eyes of a humanist, not just a scientist. The very thing that some of her colleagues didn't like about her, groused about her, that lack of scientific training, is the very thing that allowed her to observe without preconceived notions of animal's inferiority to man.
Considering that Darwin's theory of evolution was a hundred years in the past, it's a wonder that so many of the (male) researchers of the day were not able to look at chimps with an eye to finding similarities to humans as opposed to how inferior they were to us.
So it should come as no surprise that Goodall became an advocate for saving the habitat of chimps, and all the animals with which we share this planet.
Even more than that, Goodall became an advocate for making the world a better place for humans as well. Her organization Roots and Shoots focused on improving the living conditions for those who lived close to and among the animals most in need of protecting, which emanated from her belief that if the people had better sanitation, better living conditions, better ways to grow their own food, they wouldn't need to eat those animals, or clear the land where those animals lived.
Which brings us to Hegseth and his military meeting.
While there was some speculation that he might announce a bunch of firings, it turned out the purpose was to tell the leaders of the United States military, how to do their job. And specifically, how we need to get back to the macho version of the military that an insecure person like Hegseth, and his boss, Trump, deem necessary to demonstrate our collective manliness.
The phrase, "me thinks he doth protest too much" rings loud, considering the president served nary a day in the military due to a medical exception, while Hegseth, after serving, (and I give him credit for that), spent the last ten years railing about how soft the American military has become, by allowing women in combat, investigating sexual harassment claims by women in the military, and promoting women and people of color to positions of authority over any white male.
But even more importantly, so he says, the military has stopped creating and building the warrior ethos that needs to exist, both to scare our adversaries, and to vanquish them in battle.
Now, if I wanted to be sarcastic, I would say that Hegseth spent too much time reading the history of Sparta, or the conquests of the Roman Legionnaires. Or that he must have really enjoyed those stories about throwing young boys into a pit to fight, as a way to separate the warriors from the weak.
Considering Trump's obsession with having his face on coins and mountains, perhaps they share that fixation on all that is Roman.
Also, if sarcasm was the goal, I might ask if Hegseth and Trump are planning a ground war anytime soon, as it seems that the nature of war, when both sides are adequately armed as is the case for Ukraine vs Russia, has turned to remote attacks via drones, long range missiles, targeted bombings. So, while it is quaint to think of our armed forces as the biggest, baddest men on the block, don't we also need really smart people, even nerds, if you like, to program the technology that is in use today. I certainly don't see a near future with battles featuring hand to hand combat with bayonets drawn, do you?
But let's get to the real danger of Hegseth's philosophy which, I believe, is bad for America, and especially bad for our armed forces.
First, for the individual soldiers who are attracted to the idea that a warrior ethos makes them a better man, they might want to ask themselves if such an attitude will make them better fathers, husbands, citizens, when their military career ends.
While a belief system that inspires our soldiers to think, act and lead like warfighters might lead to victory on the battlefield, it hinders the adjustment that veterans face when taking the next hill or killing one's enemy, is no longer a viable coping mechanism when dealing with the daily demands and tribulations of life.
Just ask any of the family members of the 17 veterans who kill themselves every day, a number that is staggeringly higher as a percentage than for non-military people of the same age.
Or perhaps we should look to the number of veterans that are homeless in America, a number that has decreased in the last few years, thankfully, but is still indicative of a group of Americans that struggle to cope once outside the military.
Do we really think that making them emotionless warriors who are trained to kill without thinking, will provide them with a better mindset when dealing with noisy children, a daily routine that is less than exciting, various family members who may disagree with them, or any of the innumerable problems that face us everyday where violence is not the solution?
Hegseth wants a strong army, fine, but he seems to think that the soldiers who make up that army are plastic soldiers that can be replaced with a new batch when they become worn, or weak.
Of course, for a man who has a history of treating women like play toys, again, like his boss, perhaps that is consistent.
Even worse, America is also a victim of such thinking, as this administration seems to think that being the bully of the globe will make everyone else respect us more, and do what we want. Like the tariff chaos that is ongoing, Trump has forgotten the kindergarten lesson that you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
Perhaps I am wrong, but the bullies I encountered in my life, whether as a child or an adult, did not earn my respect. Perhaps fear, but not respect. And certainly not a desire to see them succeed. So it should come as no surprise that this America first selfishness that goes hand in hand with "my way or the highway" is driving our traditional allies away.
Or perhaps Hegseth and Trump think that "turn the other cheek" and "treat others as you would want to be treated" are too woke for their world view of warrior ethos.
I truly believe that most Americans would prefer that we treat our fellow Americans, as well as the other 8 billion people who share our planet, as Jane Goodall engaged with the primates she lived with and studied. That we should hold out an open hand to help rather than a closed fist to hurt.
Unfortunately, I also believe that many Americans, perhaps more than half, are on board with treating our enemies inhumanely. That all is fair in war, including killing civilians, bombing schools and hospitals, stealing children from their homes, because, well, I guess because that is what they would do to us.
And, if there is one thing that Trump is superior at, it is telling us who we should hate, who we should consider less than human, who is out to get us.
Whether it is the people in the boats that he is blowing up in defiance of international law, or the two million Palestinians that he thinks should be killed, or moved, or starved, or the immigrants who come here to seek a better life but are from a country that isn't white enough, or the federal workers who don't kiss his ring, whether they be in the DOJ or FBI, or any department that democrats like, or the countless number of Americans who love America but despise how Trump is remaking our country, Trump has an endless list of those we should hate, and consequently treat as if they were less than human.
So sad that people like Hegseth and Trump talk about America first yet enact policies that place Americans last. Even sadder that people who are on board with such cruelty, claim to be Christians as well.
And so the decline continues.
No comments:
Post a Comment