Lawfare Daily: Military Education and American Manhood with Jasper Craven

Ingrid and Indeed present here.

“Jobs, by which you don't have a lot of love.”

Hey, have fun, Monterey. The Heitzer-Macht-Sae-Toucher-Morgen-Komische-Geräusche. Inshoulding see that it's a Galer-Beat. I don't want to talk! And now, the drop!

[MUSIC PLAYING] That's the end-job for premium sales. With the right profile, it won't happen. For trading, you try Indeed, and find qualified talent with premium sales.

[MUSIC PLAYING] But the Indeed, now, on Indeed.de/recruiting. [MUSIC PLAYING] Online bezahlen. With Epipay, it's just simple.

When you're on the Epipay button, tips, you can have a card and a special part of it. You want something else? Just tap on your account to update it.

“Then you can also use your account with Face ID,”

and in the second, please.

With Epipay, with Online Shopping, I don't know, I know. [MUSIC PLAYING] Whenever we are engaged in serious conflict, you get a sort of increased interest in these places,

and also just the Pentagon lurchs in the high gear and make sure that these schools have the support they need. It's the law fair podcast. I'm Tyler McBrion, managing editor of Law Fair, with Jasper Craven, a freelance reporter

covering the military and veterans issues. I just can't see any other force beyond the Pentagon that wields more power over, sort of, educating historically American boys. I just-- there's nothing--

there's nothing out there as powerful, really.

Today, we're talking about Jasper's new book. God forgives, brothers don't. The long march of military education and the making of American manhood. So Jasper, I wanted to start actually

“with a confession, which is that I've been to West Point”

and stayed in the dorms for the Scusa conference years ago, when I was in undergrad. I mean, now reading your book, having stayed with a friend who kind of pulled strings to let me stay in his dorm. I was like, I'm not really sure it's worth the risk

of that act of rebellion, but all that is to say-- this is immediately interesting to me, like having been there is just fascinating. But I want to start with your interest. Anyone who's read the book or your work

knows that you don't come from a veteran background or having been in the service yourself. So where the interest in the military as a subject to cover as a beat come from for you? Yeah, well, it's interesting because I

sort of experienced the inverse of what maybe a young son of a hard-boiled colonel might go through. My father was a prominent anti-war activist during Vietnam, helped organize the Mayday protests in 1971 in Washington, which precipitated the largest mass arrest

in American history. Was mentored at Boston University by Howard Zinn. I've said this on podcasts before, but he briefly did a Jane Fonda that's kind of his claim to fame, or at least helps illustrate the fact

that he was really in this movement in a major way. And he came to define himself fundamentally by the principles that he engaged with during anti-war movement. I mean, by the time he was in his early 20s, really, the movement had kind of fractured and was being infiltrated

by the FBI and all of the rest. And so he really didn't spend that much time fighting for peace. But nonetheless, it was just-- it was deeply formative to him. And so I sort of understood that from an early age.

And also, you know, was sort of reared on the work of Howard Zinn for one and other sort of historians offering a pretty skeptical eye of the military industrial complex. So when it came time, in my early 20s, to pick a beat as a journalist, veterans, issues,

and the military sort of seemed like a natural fit, I don't have a JD, so Department of Justice was out. I didn't feel like I could effectively, you know, ingratiate myself with spies at the CIA. It just sort of seemed like something that made sense.

And began really covering the VA from a number of angles, and through that work came to understand more acutely, you know, what military service does to someone. And you know, started off because I'm a civilian,

a bit skittish to be overly critical of the Pentagon.

the great risks that service members take.

“But it was really through discussions with a lot of vapations,”

administrators, people who had been through really tough experiences, that I sort of became confident in my ability to criticize this institution simply because I had just seen so much damage that it had wielded, sort of, over, you know, this population of millions of people.

And then, I mean, the sort of clarifying moment that led to this book was a tip I got about five years ago about a military academy, just outside of Philadelphia called Valley Forge. And there was a really sort of raw, violent, hierarchical, hazing culture there, a lot of corruption from administrators.

This was sort of the first time where I was able to see like military pedagogy

and sort of the sort of training, the sort of core training rights and tools in action in a really sort of vivid way. And then also, like these military schools often offer sort of perfect dynamic or sort of reflect really nicely and intimately sort of a lot of the problems that plague the institution writ large,

like it can just feel so impossible to try and grasp how an institution, like the Pentagon operates, but sort of in these smaller environments and these sort of more contained places, I was also able to sort of understand and flesh out how the military operated as well. So it all just like really fascinated me.

And it's what led me to write this book about military education. Well, first of all, as tempted as I am to get into the Jane fondest stuff, I have heard you talk about it and this life size poster that your father purchased of this act just who he's, I guess, a fan of now. But that is funny how it is really like a peace activist bonafide right there to say

that you dated one of the most prominent peace activists. But again, before we get into the book, I want to ask one more question about your sort of identity and position coming in. I mean, it's questions of objectivity and about journalism in general and coming from your background and your family, your father, peace activism,

trying to cover the military.

“Did you get a lot of resistance throughout your career?”

Did people look at you as scans as the son of a piece neck or?

Because I don't know, I've always thought about flipping it.

So there's the idea of the veteran mystique and the moral authority that veterans come with in writing about veteran affairs and the military and these critiques. So yeah, I guess questions of access and willingness of military members to speak to you. Obviously, you don't tell your subjects, your whole back history. But yeah, curious what kind of resistance you got.

Yeah, it's a good question. I mean, the simple answers that I have endured a lot of criticism and push back, I remember, you know, I wrote a book about veterans in the VA a few years ago for Duke University Press and I was still pretty green and as part of that promotion, I went on a public affair show, a call-in show, and was just like blasted with calls from

that who were set with my conclusions and, you know, resentful that I'd insert and felt that,

you know, I just simply did not know what I was talking about and I could never sort of

ever hope to grasp the complexities of veteran life.

“So yeah, there had been moments where I'm sort of like, is this, does this make sense?”

Is this what I should actually be doing? Historically, DOD and VA have been covered by vets or, you know, people with, with a pretty deep military lineage. But there really were sort of a couple of key veteran writers over the years whose work I really respect that sort of like validated what I was doing and, you know, sort of made clear that it was really nice to have someone coming from the outside because I think,

you know, if you've been through this system, a lot of strangeness that is sort of a cultureated to people who've been in the service, I sort of see for what it is and I can sort of like flesh it out and I think that my outsider status has been a benefit and yeah, I mean,

this is because I really care about this community. I want justice for this community. I want accountability for how the government treats these people and many veteran writers can sort of lock into sort of like a shorthand with a vet on, you know, a call and create some like comfortableity by talking about their service or sort of invoking some military jargon or, you know,

“insider jokes and while I don't, I can't do that personally. I think that just sort of my,”

my focus on getting to the emotional core of like how they feel about this allows for vulnerability and for trust and and I've any, you know, I've just, I've just been doing it for so long and I'm also not pretending to like, my work is really focused on like high level, pentagon, war planning tactics or like foreign policy or anything else. It's really trying to sort of flesh out the human stories, the hopes and dreams and damage that sort of emerges from this institution. And so,

I don't think you need any particular experience to focus on those sorts of topics. Yeah, and then I imagine that the times in which you do face resistance or this idea that only those who have experienced it can actually criticize it or truly understand why we do certain

“things certain ways. It's sort of like the idea of, you know, only I can, I can”

criticize my own family, you know, you can't do it, but I can only strengthen things, you know, some of your, the themes that you bring up in your book of the, this toxic insularity and, you know,

this protectionism. So let's get into, to some of the book, which is an incredible read,

congratulations. It's a, it's a, it's a really, really amazing project. I'm curious though about how you sculpt it. So the history covers, essentially, the arc of the US history beginning with the beginning. And I like how you sort of planted your flag and said, this is the beginning, not only of military education, but of the military industrial complex in the US. So I want to talk about, you know, how you decided where to start, how you started and how, also how you did

“this historical research, especially as as a journalist. Yeah, it was very overwhelming and time”

consuming and involved a lot of sort of historical rabbit holes that ended in confusion and

complication. It was messy. It was very messy. Because this was really my first book, the last one

about veterans was co-authored. I don't know. I sort of, you know, did the rightly thing for a while and tried to think of some brilliant, you know, complicated structure that would like, you know, just lead to a climax that would have readers bold over by its intensity of brilliance. And then at some point I was like, okay, well, let's just, let's just see if I can write this chronologically. Let's see if there's a way to map these themes onto American history and let's see if

this goes all the way back 250 years to this country's founding. And, you know, luckily there was. When I was, when I was sort of figuring out whether this magazine article about a single military

school could be expanded into a book, the first thing really I did was go back to the Revolutionary

War. And there was a nice, I mean, it was helpful to me. And I sort of was able to like, make these connections or sort of had the idea to go there because valley forge, military academy is located in close proximity to the valley forge historical encampment, the place where George Washington and his men retreated to after losing Philadelphia for a really hard winter, the all new cadets at valley forge are basically given like a challenge coin that features this mythical moment

in which Washington, you know, in the wintery woods of valley forge sort of praise for the survival of the, and the success of the American public. And it's then sort of further involved, lies from there that this like low-pointed valley forge injected this this burgeoning American military with the energy and the ambition to defeat the British occupiers. So like there was all this sort of history just wrapped up in the story that valley forge was telling. And you know, just as it

turned out, you go back to that moment and what you start to realize is that Washington was not a

education for establishing these networks of schools to train elite officers and to ensure a sort of

“steady pipeline of young recruits that was basically birthed at valley forge, you know, Washington's”

top aid Henry Knox understood very much that, you know, Americans were losing battles because they were dealing with European foes who had established military schools centuries ago. And so the sort of like embarrassing, amassulating defeat that led to valley forge is what sort of helped get this system in motion. And then at the same time, Washington despite sort of all of these

loud proclamations of his modesty and his, you know, refusal to be elevated or mythologized to

kingly status did a lot to sort of nurture these false ideas about his own strength and masculinity and fearlessness in battle. And so then from there, okay, the founding fathers, that is a very like masculine coded term. And if we're thinking about it, in addition to sort of framing this country, these were the men that young boys looked up to. And there's evidence of that. And the man who founded or really sort of established the core principles of West Point was one of those boys who just,

you know, fell in love with Washington and Bonaparte and these great men who had, you know, who

were strong and who sort of typified manliness and did so because largely of their sort of military prowess. So it all kind of, it was just one of those things that thankfully worked out, you know, it kind of all sort of, you know, the sort of thesis could have fallen apart. And because I was able to see those sort of early developing ideas right at the beginning of this country, I was sort of, I felt confident enough that I could find a throughline. Yeah, and I'm glad you started where you did

because it helped me at least work through this great contradictory question of US history, which is how did a country founded on opposition to a standing army? And it was, as you write, it was really the abuses of the standing army in Boston that galvanized a lot of the revolution. How did we go from that to now a country that that generates the military to such a degree that it insulates it from, you know, I guess, true reform and that we put so many resources into it

at the cost of so many other social goods. So how do you make sense of that, that shift? I mean, the story that you begin is sort of is one of necessity, I would say, is maybe broadly, which you are obviously more than welcome to push back on. But, you know, there was sort of this this idea that we have this rag tag group of militias, maybe we need to professionalize it because we're getting our asses handed to us by the British who are highly trained and experienced

to now what we have today. So, yeah, I guess, at the risk of asking you to summarize your entire book, the history there. Yeah, how did we get from it from A to B now that you've walked through

“this history? Yeah, well, there's a number I think of forces that that pushed us into this present”

moment. And, you know, one of them is just the simple fact that America has really failed on a basic level to inject not only like budgetary resources and attention, but also a certain sort of like cultural masculine endorsement of other lines of work, other types of service. I mean, you know, that's not to say they don't exist. But, you know, certainly like the post office and the postman doesn't really enjoy any sort of like societal recognition as a public servant. There's nothing

sort of romanticized about the work of a postman, and that's fine. But, there's a way to do that, you know, so much energy has been directed at the military and really more than anything,

“I think that is a result of the fact that, you know, military work is intense, brutal, violent,”

something that, you know, is not inherent. I argue to sort of human nature. And so it's just to sort of

these big myths about what military service means. You have to sort of paper over the violence and

“the suffering and the isolation and all of these other things with really big ideas and promises”

of masculine validation and then sort of more practical pledges and benefits like, you know, free college through the GI Bill and, you know, low interest home loans and free healthcare at the VA and all of the rest. So, I mean, once America decided that it needed to have a strong military, all of this other sort of work in the background commenced and, you know, at some point it just became all encompassing and out of control, especially because, you know, warfare during the

first half of the 20th century due to the state of technology and the, you know, various

geopolitical forces at play. It just required like massive manpower insane amounts of industry and technology and so there was just this sort of, it was, it was a relatively brief moment, but there was just this moment, like the entire country is oriented essentially around military work, like college campuses are emptied, they reorient all of their programs for military purposes.

“I mean, I know in the book that like Harvard's like theater department started, I believe,”

or like costum-designed department started like stitching camouflage for the boys overseas, like it really was just like all encompassing, you know, the military gets its teeth into civilian universities at this point, funnels a lot of money towards research and development. And again, there's sort of like, even then there's sort of these pledges that to the public that like, oh, this is fleeting, this isn't going to like take over the economy or the country,

like the Pentagon was built during World War II, on the promise that after the war, it would revert to some other peacetime use. It would become a hospital or some other sort of like civilian government building. And so, you know, I think they're like, there, there remains a sort of deep skepticism of the military. That's kind of this insane fact that doesn't square it all sort of what's happening, policy wise. And certainly there's like all of this influence,

you know, and money and lobbying and all the rest that sort of, you know, keeps those voices out of the rooms where big decisions are made. But I just think, yeah, I mean, people, you know, the military has played a very canny game to establish and hold on to power. Yeah, I want to pick up on that because some of the most interesting parts of the history that you tell to me were these points at which take West Point, for example, that they faced a real crisis of

legitimacy. And it seemed like it could have gone the way of abolition or at least deep, deep reforms. But that institution had this way of coming out of each crisis more solidified and so to take the Oscar booze investigation, for example, when, you know, allegations of abuse, or, I guess, factual documented instances of abuse, hazing, you know, reaches the public and there's an outcry. And then it seems like at certain points, the answer to say the criticism

of a leadism is to now establish ROTC programs all across the country, which actually now spreads

the influence of, and it just was this amazing kind of seemed this way to just pivot and then actually

come out of each crisis stronger. Is that a fair, you know, theme throughout and, you know, you start, I guess the book with a school closing. So I'm curious where you see the current state of military, these military education institutions. And I guess we can use that to kind of pivot to the current moment and whether it's in crisis or not. Yeah, how do you, how do you see the sort of the health of the state of of these institutions today? Yeah, I mean, another big question I had when considering

whether a book made sense is like, is this a relevant influential network or is it sort of

“on the way out? I mean, because I think, you know, when most people think of military school,”

they either think of West Point or any of the other Congressionally chartered service academies,

like, anapolis for the neighbor of the U.S. Air Force Academy, those places will always exist.

You know, they are federally funded. They don't have to worry about tuition and they maintain a certain

who can afford traditional elite liberal arts schools and are won over by the free admission.

“But sort of other military schools, like the idea of them feels very, like, specifically confined”

to maybe like the 1950s, '60s, '70s. There was sort of this moment where in the sort of lead-up to the counter culture and the anti-war movement, you know, the baby boomers were sort of deemed insufficiently disciplined and sort of troublesome and not worth some parents' time and energy. And so often, if they had, you know, academic problem is behavioral issues. Got cut up in the juvenile

justice system. They would sort of be sent to military school as this easy way to sort of like

reform a boy and whip them into shape. But the fact of the matter is, is that this system beyond the well-funded service academies remains very strong and over the course of reporting my book,

“it became very clear that these schools really suffer when the pentagon's image is”

billiard, when the pentagon's wars are unpopular. So, like you see, many schools shut down during Vietnam, for instance. But then, you know, there sort of seems to seem to be these inevitable spikes when a new conflict is launched. So, in the early days, after 9/11, a number of schools open their doors. Many of them are sort of in what was then a sort of novel charter mold, a lot of impoverished school districts in places like Cleveland and Chicago,

urban military, high schools. And so, my hunch is that the system sort of waxes and wanes some, but whenever we are engaged in serious conflict, you get a sort of increased interest in these places, and also just the pentagon lurches in the high gear and make sure that these schools have the support they need. I mean, valley forge has maybe one of the most troubled military schools left. And it's like a middle school academy in junior college,

they announced plans after years of declining enrollment, pending lawsuits alleging horrible abuse, financial, alleged financial mismanagement. They announced last year that the academy was shutting down, but they're also moving in all of these ways to survive and maybe re-establish the academy, the junior college remains open. They have a satellite campus and cutter. They've been demonstrating their field to the Trump administration by signing the his compact for higher education

to sort of like devise new conservative curriculum. That was followed shortly by a $1 million grant

to the academy. So, I mean, you know, the fact of the matter is is that most of these places are run by current or retired military brass were very well connected. And, you know, the pentagon has a lot of money to throw around. And so, I just don't see this system ever becoming irrelevant. And, you know, this is all without mentioning ROTC and JROTC, which I also, you know, remains a very strong under recognized presence. I mean, there's 5200 JROTC and ROTC programs in public, American,

high schools and colleges. So, I just can't see any other force beyond the pentagon that that wields more power over sort of educating historically American boys. I just, there's, there's

“nothing, there's nothing out there is powerful, really. That's why Tissiri and Phenomenus Zurück”

come from the island in Trongeet, weiter. Up to 22 June, there are the 3rd Staffel House of the Dragon by HBO Max. Here's the whole world of Westeros on a board. Game of Thrones on Night of the Seven Kingdoms and, of course, House of the Dragon. Trachen kämpfen ging drachen. Targaryens ging Targaryens intrigue, Farad and epischishlachten. All that awaited a new Staffel. Also, streamed up to 22 June, Denoish Staffel House of the Dragon on the Ali-Siri and Phenomenus Froads. Nua of HBO Max.

War. One of my favorite pieces that you've written actually was a profile of Hexeth and

learned a lot about his past and that was very much top of mine as I was reading your book. This sort of this tension between these two archetypes of members of the military. On the one hand, you have the Pete Hexeth, lethal war fighter, law war, be damned. We have to just get it done for flagging countries, etc. Versus what I, I will admit, I had this myth of the West Point philosopher, warrior, reluctant soldier scholar type in an epitrius. I don't even

like a Frederick of the Great Mold. Reading their closet with and knowing the terms of engagement

and you know, like anything, there's somewhere in between these two poles. But I wonder what you

“make of these two archetypes. I think it really gets it like the American public seems to be”

very split on like what they want their veterans to be like or their military members to be like. There's probably a question in there somewhere, but I'm just curious what you make of those two moulds, whether that's even the correct binary thing about? Yeah, I mean, I think that you make a really good point about sort of the complicated sort of expectations that we as a society have for veterans. It's it's being sort of explored in a really interesting way through the campaign of

Graham Platner. You know, I mean, typically like a service candidate, a political, aspiring

political figure with a military record is someone who is exceptionally clean, straight-laced,

“really sort of embodies this old school soldier scholar archetype often. He is an officer who can sort”

of draw from the great scholars who has a patina of intellectualism and, you know, at the same time, those sorts of figures tend to be kept away from sort of the worst of war, you know, and this in turn needs many of them to falsify or exaggerate the intensity of their military records. You know, they feel some expectation, whether it's true or not, that the public does want both someone who's sort of clean and poised and polished, but also someone who's like seen

some crazy stuff and like got his hands dirty and, you know, maybe even killed a guy or two. So, you know, we see this like huge spike, especially today in stolen valor, politicians, you know, falsifying their military records, then comes along someone like Graham Platner, who wishes, frankly, that he had, you know, experience less combat, was just was just so deeply damaged by his four combat deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan and, you know,

that intense experience damaged him deeply and damaged a lot of people who go through similar experiences. And so the question with his campaign is like will voters be willing to provide some grace to someone like him who's actually really been through heavy, heavy combat and been deeply damaged by it or will they sort of refuse to look the darkness of military service in the face and then sort of like to expand on that a bit in terms of this really helpful

“duality, I think that you lay out. I mean, West Point, yes, West Point largely serves as a place”

to keep this myth alive of the soldier scholar, to derive an art of war to again sort of elevate and abstract what is actually going on here and, you know, portrays is a good example of that, but even so like, I think the generations of officers since Vietnam have lacked something core to what a good general, a good soldier scholar has, which is humility and an ability to take accountability. You know, like the sort of legendary generals of your were not perfect people,

but someone like Douglas MacArthur had a certain amount of humility, someone like Eisenhower was willing to publicly grapple with just the terrible bloodshed and loss that world were too yielded. And then, you know, comes along, someone like Hague Seth, who is so hardened and reflexively

theory of the case, his revisionist explanation for why his wars were lost is just that there simply wasn't enough bloodshed. There wasn't enough power. There wasn't enough domination. And so he is through his stewardship of DOD, processing his own hangups and issues with the war in a way that it lides any personal accountability and just sort of points the finger at people of color and

women who who during the war on terror were for the first time really able to finally sort of secure

upper echelon positions in the Pentagon and also, you know, for women in particular to get close to battle and gauge in fighting. Whereas Hague Seth, you know, and to bring it back to the profile that I read that you wrote, would often be decorated or promoted when Hague Seth was not.

“And, you know, drawing the eye of his, like, stalking his sexism, which I think is now being born out”

today. Yeah. No, absolutely. Yeah. So, I mean, Hague Seth had a very blinkered idea of what military life would bring him. I mean, it was as best I can tell. I mean, maybe there was some negative, like

service through genuine service that that flex his motivations, but he, I think, you know,

wanted to be in the military because he wanted the power and prestige that was conferred by it. And he was at Princeton during 9/11 and I think, you know, despite the ghosts of Vietnam, I think he felt genuinely like, okay, I'm actually going to be participating in a war that is universally popular that will be one day compared to World War II. Like, I think he really

“set a high expectation for what his participation in this conflict would yield him both”

reputationally in the sort of power and public life that he could establish, but like, it just did not happen. The war went south, the public, soured, and Hague Seth due to largely, you know, his own trauma from his, his combat couldn't ever sort of until he sort of fell into the position of the fence secretary couldn't really cobble something together from his military service. I love to mention the fact that he came back from the Middle East, tried to put together a Senate

challenge to Amy Klobuchar who, like, is by no means a political genius or the most charismatic person in the Senate and just like, could not muster a real challenge to her, a serious challenge to her. So, like, he's just so shot through with resentment and anger about like the, the sort of broken

“promises I think as he sees it of his military service and is now kind of on this revenge tour.”

I mean, yeah, just going back to the duality that we're, we're setting up here. It also maps really well onto the, the partisan divide. You've also written really well about how it's really conservative as in Republicans who have put the biggest stamp on the military and been able to mold it more so than Democrats and there's of course a stereotype that Democrats are our devs and Republicans are hawks and Republicans are tougher and then you have like Democrats overcorrecting

to try to buck that stereotype. But I'm curious where you see it now because it seems like there has been a bit of an an inversion where someone like a general millie becomes a, a democratic hero, a capital de Democrat because of his apparent restraint and and being a bullwerke against Trump running rough shot over our institutions. Is that a fair assessment to say that this, it has sort of complicated the picture as the Trump administration has come in or is this just

just an affirmation of this, the thesis that is running through the book that that this, this

like philosopher, soldier type is a bit of a myth and and there's always just this lethal,

undercurrent this hard Spartan atmosphere in the military. Yeah, that's a good question. I mean, I do think that there remain a lot of people in the military, including in senior positions who have real integrity. I mean, on paper, like the principles of the US military are

and and there are men like millie who surely embody those beliefs, John Kelly and Mattis also took

“a strong stand against the president. I mean, these people don't have perfect records by any means,”

but they were willing, again, to sort of like, I mean, you know, they also were willing to break from another toxic trend in the Pentagon, which is just like shameless careerism and and a sort of, you know, unyielding thirst for brass and, you know, many of the people who wind up at the joint chiefs level or whatever have had to really compromise their beliefs and

silence their doubts and become yes men by and large to sort of get there and they lose a level of

independence through that, that ladder climbing, but there remain men who who don't and and these are good examples. I mean, it's worth noting that Mark Millie for one was not inculcated in a isolated insular environment, like West Point, but rather was educated like Higgsav actually at Princeton ROTC. So obviously, it's not a perfect program, but in general, I've found that ROTC officers are far more questioning and independent-minded than service academy guys. I mean, that's kind of a stereotype

that that runs through the military and that's because largely there are exposed not only to

like specific military education, but also are sort of in a liberal arts environment, they can become more enlightened in sort of more holistic ways and they're also engaging with civilians

“which is really important to their development. But yes, I think still the tendency for Democrats”

partly because I think there were many these weird psychic hangups where they feel amasculated still by being derided as like insufficiently strong and supportive of the troops in the early years of the war on terror are not really willing to rock the boat. They see, you know, deep political consequences for challenging the military. They haven't even really engaged in the sort of process of becoming familiar with this culture becoming well-schooled and thereby

learning how to articulate an argument that is an offensive or sort of ignorant and they haven't really offered any sort of systemic reforms for the system. I mean, there was this brief moment

“during Biden's term right after January 6 which was largely carried out by military veterans to like”

better screen the Pentagon for extremism to sort of, you know, rid the military of white supremacist ideologies which has been festering in dark corners for a long time. But under, you know, Republican pressure, Lloyd Austin the former defense secretary and the Biden administration completely folded and did not properly pursue those reforms. Now, of course, headset is like running rough shot over all of the sort of Pentagon programs meant to rain in civilian casualties or promote

people of color or address military sexual trauma. He's corrupting the place in really profound ways. He's engaging in war crimes. And so, I mean, I've asked people like Chris Van Hollen, the senator from Maryland and Jason Crowe who's a former Army Ranger in the house, like what, what they plan to do when and if they regain power. And there is some, there is some like thoughtful reflection on the fact that the Pentagon really does need to be

ramed in and reformed and fixed from headset. I, I have yet to see like a comprehensive plan or sort of anything too aggressive in terms of like securing accountability, you know, certainly no one's raised the idea of like prosecuting headset under the UCNJ for war crimes or anything like that. But maybe that will happen. I do think some drastic measures need to be taken. And to that point, I mean, I kind of want to wind down my circling back to what we spoke about

often fork. And there was this alternate path possible, not only for the military, but for

our conceptions of masculinity. And what I also really enjoyed about the book is this, this constant reminder that there is another way. You know, this is not the inherent and exclusive nature of masculinity to be this lethal and, you know, unbending. Can you talk a bit about why you wanted to include peace movements at different times and these alternative paths? And to your last answer is an alternative path is reform even still possible. You know, or did we foreclose that

“that opportunity decades ago? Yeah. Well, I think people forget that there is a noble”

history, a long and noble history of everyday people fighting back against efforts to militarize education, to militarize society. You know, often these movements are really complicated or undermined when America is inactive conflict. There's sort of like any anytime, you know, the country needs a pipeline of young GIs, any sort of concerns are overwritten by these like, you know, national security warnings. But yeah, there was there was sort of a brief moment

both in the sort of lead-up to the first world war and then between the first and second world

wars where a diverse coalition of religious leaders, educators, socialists, suffragettes, intellectuals, banded together to sort of create, push forward a sort of alternative curriculum in public schools that would expressly advocate peace and sort of capitalize on this really beautiful youthful unbound imagination that school children have. You know, I mean, I feel like so many of the problems today can be nebulously tied back just to

sort of like the sort of depressing expectations of reality that young children receive.

“You know, their dreams and aspirations are often foreclosed upon quite early. And I think that yeah,”

I think that it's possible to actually through education and through sort of, you know, key shifts in how we view what is noble and evil, what is good and bad, what is manly and cowardly. We can we can sort of manifest a world that is not defined by militarism. I mean, I know this sounds like, you know, very like sort of peace and love and would stock vibes or whatever, but I think that's possible and there are, you know, practical ways to do that to get to that

place, because man at the end of the day, they have a death of options. Really, if they are like, you know, a valid Victorian at their high school inevitably, they will be contacted by a West Point crowd and and lobby to go there on the complete other end of that spectrum. If they're like profoundly disillusioned, they have a bad family life. If they're economically unstable, they will also be given the military most likely as as a prescription.

And so we just need to reckon with the fact that boys have not been given enough opportunities, which I know sounds crazy, considering like the long history of patriarchy and all of the rest, but as has been pointed out many times, like boys are slipping on sort of key metrics,

“they are falling into dark ideologies. I think that like the work of Richard Reeves to sort of”

prescribe, you know, nursing and teaching, I sort of like these newly noble pursuits, the more mentioned it into is great. I also think that there are ways to, you know, channel some of the more like chaotic, reckless, aggressive energy that some boys have, into more sort of positive, acts of, you know, civil disobedience and and there are like there are sure missions, there are noble missions that can fortify the soul that also, you know, include

with a story of conscientious objectives and the work that they did in World War II rather than

fight, including, you know, undergo really risky health experiments, many infiltrated mental health hospitals and exposed agreed to abuse there that then led to major reforms, conscientious subjectors during World War II wanted very badly to go over and deliver aid on the battlefield, but we're denied from doing so. My hunch is that part of that had to do with the, now, panicky war planners worried that if these pacifists were seen sort of engaging in this

risky sort of heroic behavior, it would offer, it would sort of illuminate to other men that,

“you know, there were other ways to scratch these itches. So I think that I think that man,”

his salvageable, the American man is salvageable. I think that the military educational system

may not be, but ROTC, as I've said, is is perhaps a good place to sort of rethink how this system might work in a sort of diminished capacity. Well, hopeful note seems like a good one to end on. There's hope for man yet. Even though there's so much, we didn't have time to talk about, I mean, the Boy Scouts for one was such a fascinating early chapter. The Ignog riot, there's just so much in the book. So listeners, please, please go buy it, go read it. Before I let you go,

I'm just curious, what's next for you? I think another thing I've been watching from afar and enjoying is how you rolled out the book in a way. You sort of like been having fun with it. You

“procured a West Point uniform, I saw at some point. So yeah, what's next for you?”

Yeah, well, I am trying, I think I'm going to spend a few more weeks kind of like pumping out some social media content and other stuff that that tries to sort of puncture the sort of self-serious military culture. I just think that like it would be helpful to sort of point out some of the ridiculousness and humor and irony that that pervades these places. I'm really, I'm trying to put together a story about

male anger because I mean, that was a huge sort of theme throughout writing this book and I think it's a defining sort of issue among American boys and men today. There's a really interesting pioneering program that exists in Vermont where I'm from in which men who have been

convicted of domestic violence are basically put into these really intense

impatient mental health and sort of like work therapy group programs with each other. It's a pretty small program in Vermont, but it's been highly effective and like I've been speaking to a lot of the men who've been through it who have become just like incredibly remorseful but also like vulnerable and have been able to sort of like trace the roots of their anger and really profound ways and it's all been very moving talking to these men and

you know I mean again sort of going back to Graham Platner I think there's a really there's really interesting questions with him and with with many men like around the possibilities of redemption the limits of redemption what that looks like how you can change. I'm hoping to sort of explore those ideas in various ways. Well definitely keep an eye out. The book is called God for Gives Brothers Don't the Long March of Military Education and the Making of American Manhood.

Jasper Craven, thanks so much for joining me. Thanks a lot Tyler.

“The law for podcasts is produced by the Law Fair Institute. If you want to support the show”

and listen ad-free you can become a law fair material supporter at lawfairmedia.org/support. Supporters also get access to special events and other bonus content we don't share anywhere else. If you enjoy the podcasts please rate and review us wherever you listen and really does help. Be sure to check out our other shows including rational security, allies, the aftermath and escalation. Our latest law fair presents podcast series about the war in Ukraine.

You can also find all of our written work at lawfairmedia.org. The podcast is edited by Jen Pazia with audio engineering by Hazel Hoffman of Go Grosio. Our theme music is from Alibi

That's the Worldwide Series in Phenominus, Zurück.

“The fight for the ice on the throne goes on.”

On the 22nd June, there's the third star of House of the Dragon by HBO Max.

Here you find the whole world of Vesteros on a board.

“Game of Thrones on Night of the Seven Kingdoms, and of course House of the Dragon.”

Dragon Camping gegen Drachen, Terrarians gegen Terrarians in Triegen, Varat and E. Pische Schlachten.

All that awaited a new star.

“Also, streamed up the 22nd June, the new Starvel House of the Dragon and all the”

series from Game of Thrones, newer of HBO Max.