Monday, May 3, 2010

Don't Ask, Just Do

During the Clinton administration, we were described as having a “government by focus group”. Now it appears that we have a government by survey – at least in one vital area, namely that of the military and the question of the “don't ask, don't tell” policy. And it's funny, it seems like just yesterday that all the senior military leaders, except maybe for one holdout among the Marines, were stepping up and vowing that, indeed, the time had come to eliminate this wishy-washy policy and institute full acceptance of gay and lesbian (and, I suppose, bisexual as well) citizens into the military. And if military leaders – allegedly the most conservative demographic around – were for it, who could be against it? So... what's behind this recent headline, “Pentagon wants to keep gay ban”? Who “got to” whom? Who got “politically corrected”? And here's what I find striking. The Pentagon wants to “come up with a plan for dealing with potential opposition in the ranks” before the ban is “tampered” with. And how is the senior leadership going to find out how the troops feel about the issue? Why, via a survey, of course! And “the troops” are supposed to tell the Secretary of Defense “how it should be done”. Now... can you imagine what would have happened if this procedure had been adopted back in 1948, when the armed forces were integrated? If they had put out a survey – and if it had been answered honestly – the military might still be segregated! What ever happened to that old civil rights tactic of, first you pass a law and start putting people in jail, and their hearts and minds will follow? It always worked when it came to racial integration; why wouldn't it work when it comes to integration of “sexual minorities”?

Oh, and – by the way – much the same thing happened when women were integrated into many “non-traditional” specialties and units. Yeah, there were some surveys – I was involved with some of them – but the bottom line was, this is the way it's going to be, and if you don't like it, there's the door. I'm not sure if any other approach is ever going to make as much sense, especially since it's the military we're dealing with. The whole notion of listening to reason – of trying to impress people with “data” -- that just doesn't have traction among the types who are likely to join the military, especially on the enlisted side. There is a certain power to the fait accompli – and it's surprising how readily people's attitudes can change based on actual experience. But if you ask them in the abstract, via a survey – what do they have to lose by saying “no way”? Absolutely nothing. In fact, they might say “no way” just to be ornery – a not uncommon motive among the troops in any time and place.

Now, this is all in the face of a very unambiguous statement by the president that the current policy “unfairly punishes patriotic Americans”, and he has asked Congress for its repeal. And now we're to believe that the senior military has told that same Congress to hold off – even though they are sworn to unwavering obedience to the president? Yeah – there is definitely a disconnect here, and it has everything to do with politics – with mid-term elections coming up in a few months – and nothing to do with the real needs of the military. And the top brass at the Pentagon must be feeling a bit whiplashed at this point – not that this is a new experience for them. One minute they're “encouraged” to jump on Obama's anti-DADT bandwagon, and the next minute they're told that it's OK to tell Congress how they really feel. This, in turn, provides the Democrats “political cover”, as an AP article puts it, “not to press the issue until after this year's midterm elections.” In other words, come November, their conservative constituents can't blame them for getting rid of DADT because nothing will have changed... but their liberal constituents can't blame them for not getting rid of it because it was that mean old reactionary military's fault. Perfect! And the only true victims, as usual, are the senior military leaders, whose self-respect has to have reached new lows with this latest episode. But hey, that's what they're paid for, right?

And of course the gay rights crowd has reacted with predictable indignation – but aren't they used to getting seduced and abandoned by liberals yet? At long last? Guess not.

No comments: