~*~*~
~*~*~
When our perils are past, shall our gratitude sleep?
~George Canning
~George Canning
One of the bloggers in my reader - Penelope Trunk's Brazen Careerist - published a post yesterday titled Veteran's Day Should Be Canceled. It was an interesting, insensitive, offensive, brilliant piece of writing, and the comments that followed her post were equally interesting, insensitive, offensive and brilliant.
Penelope's post is the yin to my yang when it comes to Veterans Day, and clearly her views (based on the comments) are felt by many.
In her post, Penelope lists 5 points that she believes support her position that Veterans Day is "wrong." There is validity in all of her points (bolded and highlighted below), however her assumptions and generalizations, although common, are way off the mark.
1. What about all the other casualties of war?
Penelope discusses how war affects more than the military member, in fact, reaching beyond the families of military members.
I agree - war impacts everyone, but does that mean we don't acknowledge those on the front line? Are we really able to say there is no difference between a young couple who gets married and has children so that the husband can avoid being drafted (her example), and the young man or woman who enlists in the military today, knowing they'll likely find themselves in Afghanistan sometime during their enlistment?
2. Veterans of WWII did not “give their lives for their country.”
Penelope insists WWII was a moral obligation, not a military obligation. I would argue most wars are "morality" based. She also sees no difference between the sacrifices people made on the home front (ex. waiting in line for food in order to ensure food for the troops overseas) and the sacrifices made on the war front.
Seriously? I'm fairly confident in saying those waiting for food on the home front weren't subjected to bullets and mortar rounds while they waited in line for food. There is a big difference between being inconvenienced and putting you life on the line every minute of every day.
3. Veterans of Vietnam hated Vietnam.
Penelope states, "People want to be celebrated for what they choose to do, for what they are proud of, for what they feel like they did well. Vietnam veterans think Vietnam sucked."
Vietnam did suck, but that doesn't mean there is any less honor for those who served there. We sometimes forget that the war and the people are not the same thing, and many in the United States, during the Vietnam war, failed to do that. They were upset with the war and took it out on the service members returning home.
4. Veterans of recent wars do not go in order to serve our country.
I found this point of Penelope's argument most offensive. From her, "Anyone who has a great career ahead of them, and makes enough money to support their family, and is genuinely admired for how well they have navigated their life so far, is unlikely to enlist in the armed forces," to her "It’s telling that the military has to lure recruits with free college to get them to risk their lives. The people who will risk their lives do not perceive that they have a way to pay for college," this argument is riddled with false assumptions and blatant disrespect.
Do all people who enlist in the military go in order to serve our country? Absolutely not, but I would argue that most do - at least in part. Penelope's implication that admirable people don't enlist in the military - that the military is a last resort most people - is highly offensive.
And this idea that enlisting in the military pays for college? I paid in $1,200 for my GI Bill benefit, which gave me a $12,000 educational benefit. Although that money helped finance my further education (I enlisted in the Army already having a 2-year degree), $12,000 doesn't go far in securing a University degree.
Yes, the benefits package offered by the military is usually a factor in any one's decision to join the military, but I don't know of too many people who - if that was their single motivator - would agree to literally put their lives on the line for $12,000 in educational benefits.
5. We should replace Veteran's Day with National Service Day
Penelope argues that there are less "offensive" ways to serve the ideals of the United States. She gives examples of men who give up high-paying jobs to run for office, women who campaigned for the right to vote, and parents who sacrifice health insurance in order to work at a non-profit that can’t afford insurance. She states that, "These people give resources and take risks in order to make the world a better place."
She's right. There are thousands of ways we - as citizens - can serve our country, the problem is that most don't.
Penelope wants to cancel Veterans Day - she sees it as "celebrating military service over everything else - teaching people that one is more valuable than the other."
I think Penelope is making a dangerous assumption that most citizens of this country actually serve this country in some way. Most citizens of our country never have to serve in any capacity because 1% of the population chooses to, and that generally keeps us all safe.
You may not like what that 1% does - war is an ugly, ugly necessity - but each one of us benefits from what that 1% does. Arguing that we, as a country, for just a single day, should not recognize those who have have served in a military capacity is nothing short of a selfish, entitled, "Ugly American" attitude.
Besides, if we cancel Veterans Day, when will we hold mattress sales?
Penelope's post is the yin to my yang when it comes to Veterans Day, and clearly her views (based on the comments) are felt by many.
In her post, Penelope lists 5 points that she believes support her position that Veterans Day is "wrong." There is validity in all of her points (bolded and highlighted below), however her assumptions and generalizations, although common, are way off the mark.
1. What about all the other casualties of war?
Penelope discusses how war affects more than the military member, in fact, reaching beyond the families of military members.
I agree - war impacts everyone, but does that mean we don't acknowledge those on the front line? Are we really able to say there is no difference between a young couple who gets married and has children so that the husband can avoid being drafted (her example), and the young man or woman who enlists in the military today, knowing they'll likely find themselves in Afghanistan sometime during their enlistment?
2. Veterans of WWII did not “give their lives for their country.”
Penelope insists WWII was a moral obligation, not a military obligation. I would argue most wars are "morality" based. She also sees no difference between the sacrifices people made on the home front (ex. waiting in line for food in order to ensure food for the troops overseas) and the sacrifices made on the war front.
Seriously? I'm fairly confident in saying those waiting for food on the home front weren't subjected to bullets and mortar rounds while they waited in line for food. There is a big difference between being inconvenienced and putting you life on the line every minute of every day.
3. Veterans of Vietnam hated Vietnam.
Penelope states, "People want to be celebrated for what they choose to do, for what they are proud of, for what they feel like they did well. Vietnam veterans think Vietnam sucked."
Vietnam did suck, but that doesn't mean there is any less honor for those who served there. We sometimes forget that the war and the people are not the same thing, and many in the United States, during the Vietnam war, failed to do that. They were upset with the war and took it out on the service members returning home.
4. Veterans of recent wars do not go in order to serve our country.
I found this point of Penelope's argument most offensive. From her, "Anyone who has a great career ahead of them, and makes enough money to support their family, and is genuinely admired for how well they have navigated their life so far, is unlikely to enlist in the armed forces," to her "It’s telling that the military has to lure recruits with free college to get them to risk their lives. The people who will risk their lives do not perceive that they have a way to pay for college," this argument is riddled with false assumptions and blatant disrespect.
Do all people who enlist in the military go in order to serve our country? Absolutely not, but I would argue that most do - at least in part. Penelope's implication that admirable people don't enlist in the military - that the military is a last resort most people - is highly offensive.
And this idea that enlisting in the military pays for college? I paid in $1,200 for my GI Bill benefit, which gave me a $12,000 educational benefit. Although that money helped finance my further education (I enlisted in the Army already having a 2-year degree), $12,000 doesn't go far in securing a University degree.
Yes, the benefits package offered by the military is usually a factor in any one's decision to join the military, but I don't know of too many people who - if that was their single motivator - would agree to literally put their lives on the line for $12,000 in educational benefits.
5. We should replace Veteran's Day with National Service Day
Penelope argues that there are less "offensive" ways to serve the ideals of the United States. She gives examples of men who give up high-paying jobs to run for office, women who campaigned for the right to vote, and parents who sacrifice health insurance in order to work at a non-profit that can’t afford insurance. She states that, "These people give resources and take risks in order to make the world a better place."
She's right. There are thousands of ways we - as citizens - can serve our country, the problem is that most don't.
Penelope wants to cancel Veterans Day - she sees it as "celebrating military service over everything else - teaching people that one is more valuable than the other."
I think Penelope is making a dangerous assumption that most citizens of this country actually serve this country in some way. Most citizens of our country never have to serve in any capacity because 1% of the population chooses to, and that generally keeps us all safe.
You may not like what that 1% does - war is an ugly, ugly necessity - but each one of us benefits from what that 1% does. Arguing that we, as a country, for just a single day, should not recognize those who have have served in a military capacity is nothing short of a selfish, entitled, "Ugly American" attitude.
Besides, if we cancel Veterans Day, when will we hold mattress sales?
~*~*~
