Re: Open Letter to Those Who "Serve and Protect"

Re: Open Letter to Those Who
"Serve and Protect"

by Steve Garcia

Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:24:29 -0600 From: Steve Garcia To: harmon Subject: Re: Open Letter to Those Who "Serve and Protect" Harmon, my good friend - This is a good thing John Wildman has written. Having been in the military myself, during Viet Nam, I know how non-sane the military actually is. I agree with John that the men must weigh the morality of their orders. Though I want them to do that at all times, I know that very few - VERY FEW - actually ever will. It is a bizarre fact that the very instrument by which democracy and freedom and equality are protected are, in fact, the very opposite of those ideals. The military functions on the premise of ABSOLUTE inequality. No two soldiers or sailors are equal. One of the pair will have his rank higher than the other. If that appears the same by insignia, then one will have been promoted to that rank before the other - and he is - by definition - the higher ranking. This is a silly observation, but it is true, nevertheless. I had read "Fifty Years of Soviet Communism" shortly before enlisting in 1967. The most absurd thing I realized on day in the Army was that the same things I was seeing were described in that book on the USSR: people whose families were taken care of by the state (medical, housing, clothing, etc.); people standing in lines for long times for many reasons - all beaurocratic; people who were not permitted to think for themselves - under real threat of punishment; people who found that they did not have to produce anything at all - they just had to show up; "make work" jobs; "corporal mentalities" - where individuals have a tiny bit of authority go to their heads; belief that the state has the right to decide things for individuals; heirarchies that believe in authority above all else. It was a wakeup call to see that the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave was being defended from socialism and fascism and communism (as practiced) and totalitarianism by an institution that was - in itself - the very embodiment of all four of those. I enlisted without a full realization that the function of the soldier was to kill. The entire mechanism of the military is to facilitate and abet that killing. It stunned me to be faced with that reality - that such a huge enterprise had as its function to kill people. It was presented as otherwise, but in its inner workings, in its education of its members, in its organization, in its belief system (that it is okay to kill, if the chain of command says do it). It is, in fact, an insane institution. While in the Army, I began to wonder if institutions were inherently insane. I have since concluded that they are. All institutions take on a mind of their own. I do not mean that hypothetically or philosophically. The individuals within an institutional setting begin to think differently than they do as individuals or as they do in non- institutional settings. They mentally morph into what they think will be suitable thought patterns to make their thoughts and actions approved by the institution (which has no mind of its own, of course). They do not think of the institution as NOT having a mind, though. Day by day, they learn the ways of the institution, and the most bizarre conclusions are drawn as to what is acceptable behavior. And they eventually come to conclusions like, "It's for the good of the patient to drug him into a stupor," or "It's okay to torture, enslave, kill, starve, or rape someone who is not one of our people." or "It's okay to haze someone if he is new," or "It's okay to 'Code Red' someone if they are not keeping up to others' standards." That is insanity. . . When I was a member of the Stelle Group, in rural Illinois, it was expected that the world economy - including the U.S. - would collapse in the mid-1970s. It was expected that "hungry hordes" of people would exit the cities, looking for food. "Stelle", the institution, said that it was okay to "defend" the community against such hordes by shooting them with rifles as they "came over the hill", and before they could get close enough to steal our food. Stelle is not the first or last community to believe this kind of scenario justified cold-blooded killing. Some months later, I was watching a mini- series about the Nazis and the Holocaust (Shoah?"). As the normal, everyday Germans encountered the Nazi thinking patterns day by day, their acceptance of the Nazi way of thinking gradually grew, until they accepted it as their "new normal". Now, that was Hollywood, for sure - but I saw that the same process had happened to me and others in Stelle as regarded the "hungry horde". That was a real eye-opener for me. I knew that I had not accepted it as much as some others, but I HAD certainly shifted in that direction. I saw that I had been in a literally insane state of mind - I could not tell (nearly as well as normal) that it was wrong to kill those hordes, who were actually just people like us. In the Army, I eventually realized that it WAS an illegitimate, insane way of thinking. At the time my thinking was based on my religious beliefs. I translated those beliefs into taking a stand and declaring myself a Conscientious Objector. I was going to stand up and refuse to go to Viet Nam - or anywhere ordered to. Then I found (at just the last moment almost) that I could apply for a discharge as a C.O., and did so. After 17 months and two applications were rejected, I found myself in the same situation. I was ordered to be transferred to Germany, and I refused the orders, much to the chagrin of my commanding officers and sergeants. Their choices then were to court martial me or to find an alternative, which turned out to be that they applied for me to be discharged. In three more days, I was out of the service - with an Honorable Discharge as a Conscientious Objector. It happened so fast, it made my head spin. I did stand up to what I thought were insane, illegitimate ways of thinking and acting, the very act that John Wildman advocates U.S. soldiers of today do. It takes very much solid belief that one is in the right. It takes time to formulate that belief. It takes courage. (I was absolutely expecting to go to Leavenworth.) And it takes some support system. I had that in friends off-base, and actually some understanding from my fellow soldiers (who didn't necessarily agree with me, but who accepted that I believed in my cause.) I like to think that they respected me, though none came out and said it. I suppose that they avoided the subject, because it never came up in conversation. The anti-war sentiments in the country certainly did not hurt. Will any of today's soldiers have that anti-war sentiment to create a supportive atmosphere? That support system? That belief in their cause? The time necessary to come to a resolve? The anti-war movement is certainly gaining momentum. It remains to be seen if any of the soldiers can gain the insight and knowledge necessary to formulate a strong belief that the war is wrong. (It does not help that the military intentionally controls much of the soldiers' time and focus, so that there is less opportunity for outside ideas to take root. I was well aware in my time that the same tactics used by "cults" to sleep deprive and brainwash new members were used extensively by the military with their new recruits. That IS a fact.) Harmon, I am sorry to hit you with this epic tome about this, but as you can see it is apropos to what Jon WIldman advocates. I fervently pray that some day an army will do just what he is urging. I completely believe that his assessment - that we are headed to a new gulag - is correct, if the country continues to follow like sheep. I am heartened by the past few weeks, that FINALLY some opposition to Bush's insane leadership has reared it's beautiful head. There are certainly divergent mentalities existing in our world. Hallelujah that our side is now getting active. Maybe we will have a 1960s renaissance - wouldn't that be nice? Good night, and good revolting . . . Your buddy, Steve