AWOL: The Unexcused Absence of America's Upper Classes from Military Service -- and How It Hurts Our Country (Hardcover)

~ (Author), (Author)
Key Phrases: privileged young people, civilian culture, military recruiters, New York, World War, Marine Corps (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

In this impassioned, convincing manifesto, Schaffer (Keeping Faith) and Roth-Douquet, a former Clinton White House and Department of Defense staffer, call for class integration of the military. Their arguments are personal: Roth-Douquet is a military wife and Schaffer's son is a marine, and the authors fall within the demographic they critique. Alternately narrating, they relate their experiences with the military and detail the liabilities of the present all-volunteer "corporate" force: the hindered policy-making ability of a civilian leadership without significant ties to the military, the weakening of the armed forces themselves, and "the sense of lost community and the threat to democracy that results when a society accepts a situation that is inherently unfair." While Schaffer proposes a lottery draft and Roth-Douquet suggests the military "convince" people to sign up, they both call for all young people to submit to some form of national civilian service. Though the authors occasionally exaggerate ("we are fast approaching the day when no one in Congress and no president will have served or have any children serving"), they make a clarion call in the face of increasingly controversial foreign policy and a military stretched thin. (May 9)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From The Washington Post

In World War I, the United States imposed a military draft for a reason that seems strange today: to prevent too many of the nation's most privileged citizens from rushing toward the sound of the guns. A draft would spread sacrifice beyond the elite, went the argument, and ensure that the country didn't lose too many future leaders. Contrast this with the run-up to the Iraq War in 2003, when the New York Civil Liberties Union challenged a federal law allowing military recruiters to contact graduating seniors at public high schools. "Students," the organization's executive director said, "have a right to not be bothered by aggressive military recruiters."

How did we change from a nation where military service was a duty of citizenship -- akin to paying taxes or serving on a jury -- to one where simply being asked to consider time in uniform is an infringement of civil rights?

In their compelling and inspiring cri de coeur, Kathy Roth-Douquet and Frank Schaeffer trace this societal shift, arguing that the schism between America's military and its opinion-making class threatens the nation's welfare. Both authors qualify as opinion-makers, and both have personal connections to the military. Roth-Douquet, a self-described "former agitator, feminist, Ivy Leaguer, Clintonite," is married to a Marine pilot. Schaeffer, a novelist, painter and film-maker, saw his plans for his children -- "top college, good grades, smart jobs, wife/husband, Subaru/Volvo, membership at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, IRA started early, kids, college fund" -- derail when his youngest son enlisted in the Marines after high school.

That their stories are rare is a recent phenomenon. In 1956, 400 of Princeton's 750 graduates served in uniform. By 2004, only nine members of the university's graduating class entered the military. Harvard, Yale, Brown, Columbia and many other schools do not even allow ROTC on their campuses. The gulf is growing in Congress, too. In 1971, three-quarters of our representatives had military experience. Now, fewer than a third do, and that number drops with each passing year. Some citizens see no problem with this. We are indeed fortunate not to live in a militarized society, and our hyper-capable armed forces enjoy, at least superficially, broad support from the American people.

But Roth-Douquet and Schaeffer, who've written the book in alternating sections, unite to argue convincingly that there are at least three dangerous consequences of a civil-military divide. First, it hurts the nation's ability to make sound military choices. Uniformed service is not a prerequisite for individual expertise in the conduct of war. Abraham Lincoln -- arguably America's greatest wartime president -- never served in uniform (although he spent three months in an Illinois militia). In the aggregate, however, we benefit from having veterans in every corner of our decision-making apparatus: as presidential advisers, members of Congress and active citizens. Without them, our civilian leaders embody less and less of that visceral wisdom forged in harm's way, and the problem perpetuates itself: If young people don't serve today, then we won't have older veterans in leadership positions tomorrow.

Second, a schism between the military and the rest of us weakens the armed forces. Absent broad and deep ties throughout society, the military becomes "them" instead of "us." Roth-Douquet and Schaeffer fear that such a force "will be overused and underled and that support will run out fast for any project that becomes a political liability." Consider that Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, unlike most political leaders today, both had children in uniform in the Second World War. Whether such personal connections actually affect policy is almost impossible to say, but common sense supports the authors' assertion that "the grunt on the ground is best equipped, best trained, and best served when the opinion makers have a personal stake in his or her well-being."

The greatest problem with an isolated military, however, is even less tangible. "When those who benefit most from living in a country contribute the least to its defense and those who benefit least are asked to pay the ultimate price, something happens to the soul of that country," write the authors. That argument makes for the most powerful reading in the book: "We are shortchanging a generation of smart, motivated Americans who have been prejudiced against service by parents and teachers. Their parents may think they are protecting their children. Their teachers may think they are enlightening them. But perhaps what these young people are being protected from is maturity, selflessness, and the kind of ownership of their country that can give it a better future."

In pointing the way to this better future, the authors place great value on the bully pulpits of public life. "Ask not what your country can do for you" is a long way from our government's post-9/11 exhortation "to live your lives." AWOL's most heartening conclusion -- that today's young Americans would be willing to put service to country ahead of personal gain -- is also its most maddening, because they haven't been called. "I don't want to draft" young people, Roth-Douquet declares. "I'd like to do something even more radical. I'd like to ask them to serve." A good first step would be asking their parents and teachers to read this important book.

Reviewed by Nathaniel Fick
Copyright 2006, The Washington Post. All Rights Reserved.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 241 pages
• Publisher: Harper (May 9, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0060888598
• ISBN-13: 978-0060888596
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 5.9 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 4.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (47 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #317,253 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

21 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Uncle Sam Wants ALL of You!!, July 2, 2006

By	David W. Southworth (Alexandria, VA United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

These two authors, one a Republican and one a Democrat, have written a provocative and very timely book about the large portion of society that doesn't see military service as fit for "their" kind of people.

The book starts with an astonishing anecdote. The draft was initiated for World War I because Congress thought too many of the country's elites would rush to fight (and maybe die) for the country!

That concept simply could not even be comprehended today, where the children of our current elected leaders in Washington, DC, with a few noticeable exceptions, would rather avoid serving the country in the military.

The authors identify several symptoms of the problem: Recruiters who are discouraged from even bothering to look for potential troops at elite private universities, and instead recruit from state and small Christian schools in the south; the hostility of some parents to recruiters even talking to their children; and the rise of the "me" culture and the attendant devolution of the call to service (We certainly never heard that call after 9/11).

This is an important book. While the authors sometimes get bogged down or distracted--for example in their attempt to give a brief history of four different schools of thought of US foreign policy (leave that to Walter Russell Meade please)--their thesis is powerful and important. Besides, some of their most moving sections are from testimonials from current and former servicemembers on what duty and service means.

I highly recommend this book.

12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Important Book Needing to Be Read by Our Upperclass, May 30, 2006

By	K.H. - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

Frank Schaeffer, a terrifc writer whether in the world of military, religion, or fiction brings his considerable skills with Kathy Roth-Douquet to bear on this seminal work on this nations upperclass' failures to support the military in deed, but often provide support with pale words.(I must admit to finding Frank one of the most skilled populist writers around today, and whether in agreement or not, he is a great communicator)

The book provides observations and yes, research, and although I have very minor quibbles, (Kathy, gives Clinton too much credit, although she is at times critical as well and while the military did a fine job, the stopping of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo has in reality, just caused other problems in reverse; and Frank supports a lottery draft, potentially problematic, albiet historically, it works more often than not - I prefer Kathy's option) these two authors provide great analysis and insight.

The strengths of this book are many: one, on how the military recruits on college campus and spends its money on ROTC programs faults our leaders for not engaging the upperclass. While this is understandable due to ivy league hostilities, it still needs to be pursued; two, the lack of moral clarity among our upperclasses ("me" and my "choice") is staggering and since these are the people generally with money, they are ripe for politcal leadrership, therefore, possibly using military men and women for their gains in foreign worlds, while not always properly equiping this same military to do the job; thirdly, the "not for people like us" is insightful and speaks to a snobbish group, again, lacking any moral clarity, especially when sacrafices are needed from them.

Lastly, the authors make an important point that liberal elites in particular just do not get: That being in the military is not a job decided on "do I support this war or that war", but a calling to serve. Knowing that if one only joined in military operations one agreed with, there would not be a military that could responed to protect this country. Military members only obey the President, they do not serve him, but the America people and our founding documents. This point is leveled graciously, but forcefully, and thank goodness.

Now, hopefully, our political readers will read and heed, before middle-class and poor Americans decide they want to be selfish too, then who will provide our Country's security?

Thank you Frank and Kathy.

23 of 27 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A book for our times......, June 27, 2006

By	MotherLodeBeth "MotherLodeBeth" (Sierras of California) - See all my reviews (TOP 100 REVIEWER)

This is one of those books where you hope more Americans will read it but sadly realize those who should wont. Kathy Roth-Douquet and Frank Schaeffer do an excellent job writing about how their thinking evolved as far as the military is concerned, both with her husband being in the military (Marines) and then Franks son joining (Marines).

Especially interesting is how she shares growing up in Shaker Heights, Ohio, attending Bryn Mawr College and basically living a wonderful life, lacking in nothing. Being an active Democrat, working in the Clinton White House where on page 14 she writes 'The military people we knew were so impressive - tall and direct, knowledgeable about their jobs, dedicated'. Not what some of us were led to believe by some 'conservatives' who suggested the Clinton White House detested the military.

Frank writes of 1970 and getting married to Genie whom he raves about and how they to led a life surrounded by the right people and then 1999 arrived and his youngest son, John, was about to ship off to boot camp on Parris Island. The way he writes of what an eye opening experience this was is excellent. Bearing in mind these are families where military service wasn't the norm.

Unlike my family where my Dad was a POW during WW2, my husband was in the California National Guard and foster sons now serve in the guard with one due to ship to Iraq this month. My ancestors have fought in every war going back to the before we were a government. Some traveled west with Captain Fremont on his trek to California who over saw the first California Volunteer Militia. I also note that we all attended college.

Reading the honest feelings of these two writers and the comments friends made when they discovered a husband, a son were in the military, by choice is sad at times. On page 23 Frank writes 'I felt ashamed of feeling embarrassed by the fact that John was not in college. When my neighbors, people who went to Harvard and drove Saabs, asked about where John was in school, I mentioned that Francis, my 'other son' got the top academic award at the Georgetown School of Foreign Service. 'My daughter is living in Scandinavia and doing graduate studies and raising two children and speaks three languages and is running a successful ceramics business....' I felt like Judas. Nevertheless I let everyone know that John could have gone anywhere and that he 'chose the Marines as a poet chooses to write about it later'. I came up with all sorts of bullshit like that. 'He wants to live large,' I lamely said.


This has got to be one of best books I have read this year. A book I might add that every parent should read. Especially those who profess to be conservative, religious and patriotic because as the authors note very few of the upper class be they Republican or Democrat have a son, daughter or even a relative serving in any military branch of the services.

On page 43: 'In 1956, 400 out of 750 in Princeton's graduating class went into the military. In contrast, in 2004, 9 members of Princeton's graduating class entered the services, and they LED the Ivy League in numbers'. (emphasis added by me). Or as the authors note on page 30 a few pages back 'Privileged folks may be proud of the troops, but most contemporary men and women in uniform are strangers to the most influential segment of society. Mark Shields, syndicated columnist, former Marine, and PBS pundit, noted in a recent essay on this subject that 'probably nobody at any Washington dinner party tonight - liberal or conservative, Bush appointee or Democratic holdover-personally knows of any enlisted man or woman now defending the nation.' Not to long ago the sons of presidents, bankers, and oilmen regularly served. This was even true of powerful dynasties such as the Roosevelt's, the Kennedy's, the Sulzbergers (owners and publishers of the New York Times), and the Bushes. Now, however not one grandchild from those powerful dynasties serves'.

I was humbled and proud reading how Frank would visit Harlem and a jazz club where veterans from other wars played on a regular basis and how these gentle, class black men embraced Frank and took him under their wing. Likewise Frank reminds the reader of the sacrifices they made and the bigotry they endured, and that more patriotic men you wont find anywhere in America.
Beginning on page 224 the authors offer some excellent ideas on how we can make the volunteer military more fair and equal so that more upper class or privileged kids will have to join. Like Reform current military recruiting and personnel policy. Change Federal student aid and introduce a tax credit. 'The current system of federal financial aid grew out of the G I Bill but now, as Charles Moskos has pointed out, it is a 'GI Bill without the Gi'. He proposes reinstating its original intent as a vehicle for rewarding veterans for their service and making federal financial aid contingent on providing some service to your country'. YES!!!!!

Scale up the Army citizen - Soldier Option. Create a National Service Lottery. I so agree, because we are or have become a nation of citizens who think they are entitled to so much, but are never required to give anything back. Universal service - Military and National Service. Again I agree 100%. As the author quotes 'Universal service could provide some much needed 'social glue' to an embattled American society that is growing increasingly diverse - by race, national origin, and religious preference - where many young Americans from well to do families grow up and go to school hermetically sealed social environments...'. Universal Service II Manning the HomeFront and Policing Abroad, which would required a draft, not for combat soldiers, but for noncombat positions and to address the increased needs on the homefront that emerge from the War on Terror (page 227).

Alas this book couldn't have come at a better time. And I end by adding, that I live in Amador County in California a nice drive southwest of Lake Tahoe, where the voter turn out for the state, ranks us #1, #2 sometimes. Most homes fly a flag, most cars have 'Support the Troops' yellow magnetic ribbons on them. But a lot of vehicles also have stickers that denote sons, daughters, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters now serving in some branch of the military. Contrast that to a two hour drive west to the bay area where you see little of what we see.

Ironcially I have most of the books Frank Schaeffers Father had written and I had assumed that being conservative, and Christian that the family would have been gungho for anything patriotic, including military service and have to admit I was a tad surprised to read that Frank was so taken aback, yet would become so profoundly proud of his son John, and with good reason.