Recently, I read an article in the New York Times (Times) which highlighted the apparent mandatory participation of high school students in the military’s Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (J.R.O.C.T.) program. The article points out that J.R.O.T.C. programs, taught by military veterans at some 3,500 high schools across the country, are supposed to be elective, and the Pentagon has said that requiring students to take them goes against its guidelines.
In Canada, over 57 000 youth, aged 12-18 participate in the after school and summer Cadet program: supervised and led by over 9000 military and civilian members; supported by their communities, sponsors, the Canadian Armed Forces, and the Navy, Army Cadet and Air Cadet Leagues of Canada. Cadets generally run activities one night per week, and one weekend per month, with additional opportunities for unique experiences during the summer and throughout the year. As in the case of the J.R.O.C.T. program, the cadet program markets once in a lifetime opportunities that develop leadership, citizenship, and self-confidence. However, unlike the J.R.O.C.T. program, it is completely voluntary.
The Times found the vast majority of the schools with those high enrollment numbers were attended by a large proportion of non-white students and those from low-income households. The role of J.R.O.T.C. in U.S. high schools has been a point of debate since the program was founded more than a century ago. What is disconcerting is that in many schools a student is automatically enrolled, and must put in a request in order to leave the program. Some have described such a military program as a means to indoctrinate young people and a form of “brainwashing”. Others, including civilian teachers, are uncomfortable with military posters and recruiters on campus and the curriculum taught in J.R.O.T.C. classes, especially as it pertains to U.S. history regarding foreign policy and military initiatives oversees (e.g. Vietnam). Some high school freshmen are also in J.R.O.T.C. at the start of the school year in part because of a shortage of physical education teachers.
These types of military sponsored programs advertise their worth in terms of better attendance and graduation rates, and fewer discipline problems at school. However, critics have long contended that the program’s militaristic discipline emphasizes obedience over independence and critical thinking. The Times found the program’s textbooks falsified or downplayed the failings of the U.S. government, suggesting the promotion of “fake history”. It is asserted by some opponents that the program’s heavy concentration in schools with low-income and non-white students helps propel such students into the military instead of encouraging other routes to college or jobs in the civilian economy. I am a firm believer that what is needed by young people is more in the line of developing “self-discipline” and “commitment” to their studies and communities. After all, schools are expected to provide guidance and programs aimed at self-discipline and other behavioural issues. Not all young people respond well to the forced adherence to disciplinary measures and regimentation.
Yes, in both Canada and the U.S. without compulsory military service, there is a shortage of personnel in the professional military. However, a mandatory J.R.O.C.T.-like program in high schools is not going to resolve the problem. The requirements of the modern military today are totally different from years ago. Recruiters today are looking more for better educated and more technically savvy candidates. Indeed, they may be better off promoting military service at the post-secondary level, especially were STEP programs are available. If eventual serving in the military subsidizes post-secondary tuitions and other expenses, then perhaps more young people would voluntarily consider such a program. Simply having a high school diploma no longer cuts the mustard. Governments will have to consider improving wages, working conditions and benefits just like employers in the private sector. The concept of “patriotism” can go only so far in today’s competitive society.
FROLITICKS 