Does the military have a right to be different from, or a need to be reflective of, the society which it serves?

According to Max Weber, the armed forces can be most effective only when the rational, functional discipline of the military (which would stem from its organizational objectives) overrides the military professional’s identification with and loyalties to the civilian society. Consequently, Weber thought that this military discipline should erase the civilian habits of behaviour in recruits while turning them into soldiers (Rosen, 1996). Thus, Max Weber was clearly of the view that the military not only has the right to be different from the civilian society; but it actually should be different from the civilian society, and can only get harmed by attempting to reflect it in any way. However, perhaps Weber’s, just described, statements on the matter, were too broad, and would prove to be inappropriate, or at least, too simplistic, when one starts to analyse specific aspects of the military profession.

Thus, according to Ficarrotta (1997), if the armed forces are to effectively perform their function, military professionals should both be bound by special moral obligations not binding on civilians, and strictly follow all those moral obligations that apply to civilians. Hence, based on this line of thought, at least when it comes to its morals, the military clearly has the right to be different from the civilian part of society, even though civilian morals should form an important part of the military moral code.

However, according to Ficarrotta (1997), there are reasons to believe that the effectiveness of the armed forces will not suffer if military professionals who follow all moral obligations, required of a military professional, on duty, do not follow some or all of these moral obligations while off duty. This suggests that the military has the right to and should be morally different from the civilian society, while it is performing its functions. However, the people, who collectively form the armed forces, need not be morally different from civilians, whenever they aren’t functioning as part of the armed forces.

On the other hand, according to Ficarrotta (1997), it is possible that if military professionals always follow their professional military obligations in all contexts, the moral image of the military, in the eyes of the public, will be higher; which will contribute to a greater support for the military by the public. Also, highly moral soldiers are more likely to go above and beyond the call of duty if they believe that their military leaders are exceptionally moral. Hence, these arguments suggest that military professionals should follow the military moral code both while they are on duty and while they are off duty in their civilian roles; suggesting that all component parts of the military have the right to and should be morally different from the civilian society which they serve, in all cases.

References

Ficarrotta, J. C. (1997). “Are Military Professionals Bound by a Higher Moral Standard?” Armed Forces and Society, 24(1): 59-75.

Rosen, S. P. (1996). Societies and Military Power: India and its Armies (pp. 1-32). Cornell, NY: Cornell University Press.