The Daily Bell Newswire – It's Free!

News & Analysis

One U.S. Soldier's Struggle to Reintegrate

Thursday, March 11, 2010 – by Staff Report

Editor's note: Mike Scotti served as a U.S. Marine in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003, and is a founding board member of Reserve Aid, a military-themed, nonprofit charity. He is the founder of the Military Veterans Club at the NYU Stern School of Business and is the subject of the documentary film "Severe Clear," which opens in New York on Friday. ... "A few days after I had returned from a six-month deployment to Iraq, my second sojourn in the Middle East since 2001, I remember feeling like I was an alien creature from some other planet. It was 2003, and I was attending a friend's wedding. As I sat at the table listening to the conversation, I suddenly realized that someone who had never been in combat could never even remotely understand what I had just been through. I looked around. The chamber music quartet, the beautiful bridesmaids, the steak dinner ... none of it was real. My buddies were, at that moment, probably on patrol and quite possibly engaged with the enemy. That was real. And as for the other guests at the table who were staring at me in my dress blues, we were no longer even the same species." – CNN

Dominant Social Theme: The loneliness and alienation is real.

Free-Market Analysis: We found the article, excerpted above, to be most sad, though our collective hats are off to Mike Scotti for the good work he is trying to do in helping vets readapt to civilian life. We cannot tell what Scotti thinks of the war efforts in Afghanistan or Iraq, but certainly his pain is real and shared by thousands who find it hard to live in a peaceful society after the stresses of war. While the article itself was interesting, if sad, the commentary beneath the article was just as enlightening in our opinion. Two feedbacks stood out, and we reproduce them below:

JoeCucaracha ... The problem, Mike, is that differently from WWII, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is not seen as a "just" war, as it was back in the 40's.You went there convinced that you were serving America, but the perception back home is that you were there serving Haliburton's interest, in an economic war.

waltwalt85 ... Wow, this dude hit the nail on the head. I've been a civilian for almost two years now and I've had enough. I re-enlisted and will be reporting back in two weeks. As a former Staff Sergeant of the 2-2 Infantry once put it, "the bleacher seats s*ck balls". Everytime I see a news report coming out of A-stan or Iraq I feel like I'm missing out. I'm ready to say "adios" to the 9-5 grind, the emptiness of another night in front of the TV, all of it. And although I want us to be successful over there, I worry about what the heck I'm going to do with myself once these wars are over. Can we invade Iran next? (that's a joke people...sort of).

The first feedback (which was deleted by CNN, which is why we don't have the whole post) made the case that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been profoundly polarizing for America (and for Europe as well) – and that many in the US are uneasy over the aggressive levels of patriotism that the military and its political backers seem to demand, as well as the ever-shifting rationales for the invasions themselves.

Those who would share this sentiment would no doubt point out that the American military these days is voluntary and that no one forced Scotti to join or serve a tour of duty. The rejoinder is of course that money alone could not motivate someone to risk his or her life and that it must be love of country. But what exactly is the country that is being loved? America in the 21st century (and Britain, too) ironically has less and less freedom even as its leadership proclaims that Iraq and eventually Afghanistan will have more and more. But if the end result, even in Afghanistan, is a bankrupt nation-state with sky-high taxes, price inflation, regulation that makes industrial or entrepreneurial activities difficult, and a bloated public sector that has nationalized everything of consequence, then what's the point?

The second feedback feeds into the first. This young man obviously does not find much meaning in modern American civilian life. In fact, life under a mercantilist central-banking fiat-money regime can be hollow. As the power elite seeks to consolidate wealth and authority, most or all elements of society are eventually compromised. People lead inauthentic lives of quiet desperation because they have to make a living, even though they know they are not truly contributing to the general welfare of society – or even furthering their own family's prospects, generationally.

Public school teachers, for instance, must know that public schools inevitably devolve because of lack of competition and that private facilities are preferable. Yet many may continue to work at American public schools nonetheless. Those who work in various government jobs know how much corruption and waste takes place, but may continue in their positions nonetheless in order to earn a steady paycheck. Stockbrokers know that modern investing is a casino. Policemen and firemen know all the budgetary games that are played and how the rhetoric often has little to do with reality of what someone does day-to-day. And so it goes. Financial planners, insurance salesmen, lawyers, accountants, many businesspeople, even those in the health care profession are all compromised to a greater or lesser degree by what they see around them on a daily basis – and of course the activities that they must participate in to earn a living.

The same monetary mechanism that supports so much misery in people's internal lives is at work in the wars that America and its allies are pursuing. These are not wars, contrary to popular belief, to merely enrich a privileged few corporations and moguls. They are likely wars of conquest intended to project the power and authority of the Anglo-American empire abroad. Those soldiers participating in them are thus furthering a certain kind of governance. And when the soldiers come home wounded or psychologically damaged the sad truth is that they have sacrificed their health for a society that is becoming more hostile to the individual freedoms that they have sought to instill elsewhere.

The support that soldiers provide to the Anglo-American regime – voluntarily, and presumably out of love of country – is in fact part of the modern, military dilemma. In fact, the corporatism, militarism and increased authoritarianism that mark the Western world today are not vitiated by a young person's sacrifice in Afghanistan or Iraq. Thus, the best way to deal with the isolation and mal-adjustment felt by soldiers like Scotti is to reduce Western wars to that of defense rather than offense. Then not so many young people will serve or be damaged. And the dangerous differences that are apparently building up between "soldiers" and "civvies" will be mitigated.

Conclusion: Perhaps the wrong wars are being fought. Maybe the real wars that ought to be waged – firmly and without violence – should be ones against systems of governance and economics that gradually remove people's freedoms to live and work as they choose, and to retain wealth and build lives of hope and promise for their families. Unlike shooting wars, they can have more predictable and lasting ramifications.




Latest Daily Bell Articles

Feedback

Effective April 25, 2012, the Daily Bell will discontinue allowing feedback comments. We have left in place the large body of responses posted in the past, as we appreciate the valuable contributions made by some of our readers.
Showing 1 - 20 of 21 - Newest on top - Reorder Feedback
  Posted by Donald B. on 03/15/10 09:39 PM

My 23 year old neighbor is back from Iraq on leave. His recruiter told him his job would be in "power generation", (his father is an electrician).

He's been behind a 50 cal on top of a HumVee the whole time, with no training in the field he was promised, despite almost a year in the U.S. before going over.

I'm betting he'll want to be a cop when he get's out. It may be an "all volunteer" army, but the term "economic conscription" comes to mind.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks for the comment. Young American soldiers, in our opinion, often have no idea what they're getting into or how difficult it will be to reintegrate into "civil" society.

  Posted by Bill Ross on 03/14/10 12:36 PM

"Dangerous differences that are apparently building up between "soldiers" and "civvies" will be mitigated."

Never happen. Soldiers are being adapted (by the insane environments they are placed in) to consider "civvies" the enemy and, hopefully will have zero empathy when called to fire on their own people...

In case this fails, well, agreements are in place between, for example US and Canada to have each others military "assist" in the case of civil insurrection. I guess the idea is that US soldiers will nave zero qualms in firing on stupid Canucks, nor Canadians firing on arrogant Yanks.

  Posted by Steve Sexton on 03/12/10 11:38 AM

Fiat-money, power elites and misery oh my!

We are all doomed! (especially the Anglo-Americans) You folks must sleep curled-up sucking your thumbs. I recommend you get a grip on yourself and remember, everything is not about you and that your limitations are not ours.

By the way, Americans are busy fighting the war against systems of governance and economics that remove peoples freedoms. We have been fighting that war for several hundred years.

  Posted by Mark Y on 03/11/10 05:32 PM

"Public school teachers, for instance, must know that public schools inevitably devolve because of lack of competition and that private facilities are preferable."

As a 20 year public school teacher (in California, no less), I think the above statement misses an important point. Its not the "lack of competition," per se that is the primary problem, but rather the stultifying and smothering bureaucratic constraints placed on the public school teachers that is so damaging to the teachers efforts to teach and the students learning.

Back in the 1950s and probably into much of the 1960s California's public schools were actually fine. As the federal bureaucracy has grown and taken more and more power from the individual school sites and districts, the predicable decline the quality of the public schools has followed.

We teachers at a school I worked at for many years wrote a charter school proposal, which we called the "Magna Charter School" in which we attempted to disconnect from bureaucracy and form a better run school. The onslaught of lies and distortions from the education administration and even the teachers' union was literally unbelievable.

As you note later in the above quoted paragraph, this bureaucratic control is (increasingly rapidly) seeping into all aspects of our society. The growing power of the US Federal (now really becoming a national not federal government) is the deadly poison squelching the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness so wonderfully sought in the creation of our country. That poison kills literally many of our fine people in wars and attacks the spirit of all of us who are forced to live in its presence.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Great points. But you know the federal bureaucracy you rightly criticize is a result of the lack of competition we note!

  Posted by WAYNE on 03/11/10 02:04 PM

For those who seek to understand what this is really all about Read "War is A Racket"by Major General Smedley Butler USMC.

The most decorated Marine Officer in history

Reply from The Daily Bell

Very good! We often refer to his book, a classic of its kind.

  Posted by Boatman on 03/11/10 11:50 AM

"There is nothing more addicting than the adrenalin rush from risking your life and even more when you kill to protect it."

I say bring the troops home, tighten up visa requirements, no illegals work here, muslims fly commercial in provided underwear.

how many places are we going to point guns in two directions ... keeping people from killing each other?

we cannot afford to police the world.....we can't even afford ourselves.

sent from somewhere to the right of attila the hun

  Posted by Headhunter on 03/11/10 11:50 AM

While I disagree with ALOT of what is going on in the US it seems to me that many of you are missing the point. If it wasn't for the paid professional solider fighting on National/Governmental scales you would have tribal, religious, or economic fights for you life, liberty, and property and left to fend for yourself.

Just how do you think you would fare without law enforcement? Look at other places around the world. Human nature is consistent and predictable. Any utopian ideals are disconnected from reality and the luxury of fools. National defense is the primary duty of western Government.

A Professional standing Army and Navy are why you can be as apathetic or condesending as you wish. The young soldier has experienced reality and the right ordering of lifes priorities that the pampered society he serves lables disorder in order to perpetuate the illusion of their self righteousness.

If you question the employment of your local law enforcement you have recourse to the law and elections. That's not due to any mass sense of agreement for the greater good but because rough men stand ready to do violence on your behalf. The same goes for the employment of your National defenses.

In the case of Iraq, The Stans, and the numerous other areas where we are engaged in varying levels of conflict; a lack of subsequent 9-11 attacks should remind you that the policy of engagement and proactive intervention is working.

A withdrawal and consolidation of our forces to secure our borders, and tighten security around major metropolitan areas would be in the National interest and within the rights and duties of the governments but would spark even greater whining of martial law.

So you are left with a choice. Go after our enemies wherever they may hide, or hide while the world burns down around us only delaying our own demise. Even formerly peaceful nations are effected and, without an organized, proactive, and unified resolve, that same peace and prosperity is divided and conquered. Freedom has a flavor the protected never know. Enjoy the blissful ignorance that the professional cop and soldier purchase for you.

Reply from The Daily Bell

"Go after our enemies wherever they may hide, or hide while the world burns down around us only delaying our own demise."

We would argue, as do many on the 9/11 Commission, that there are an extraordinary amount of questions about the attack on 9/11 that remain unresolved. In any event, attacking Afghanistan and Iraq likely did not make the US safer but may have only increased the antipathy of the Muslim on the Street to the "bully" from the West.

Also, this is the same argument that justified the Korean and Viet-Nam wars. Why didn't the Vietnamese attack America once the war was lost?

  Posted by Peteris Martinsons on 03/11/10 11:42 AM

Just have been reading Dave Grossman's book "On Killing", where the process of killing in wars and its psychological consequences are analyzed. He is a former military himself, and a scientist.

It seems, that without special military training, no more than 20 percent of men are ready to shoot at their adversaries; and only 2 percent of men can kill others without becoming psychically traumatized (strictly speaking, they are already insane - sociopathic personalities).

Modern military conditioning, that was used increasingly after the second world war, makes at least 90 percent of soldiers ready to kill without second thought. However, this ability comes at a price of later psychological breakdown...This book is invaluable at understanding the problems of modern warfare.

  Posted by Civil Westman on 03/11/10 11:35 AM

The warrior's excruciating dilemma is remarkably poignant, as are the comments here. It touches the core of modernity's angst as we live it in the West, and 'cognitive dissonance' is probably an understatement of the emptiness felt by millions of us, even as we live in unprecedented material comfort (notwithstanding the loud whining about inequalities of the distribution of such affluence).

I hardly know where to begin...The film, "We Were Soldiers" offers a civilian like me some insight into the question of how men steel themselves to fight wars. The soundtrack during the credits features a hymn entitled,"The Mansions of the Lord," written by the producer, Randall Wallace. It is worth hearing and reading the words, should one wish to gain some insight.

Of course, it leaves aside the question of why men fight, and others here have pointed to the difference between today's wars and WWII. Without going into detail, I must say I am deeply ambivalent about our plight, as it is no longer necessary to marshall the resources of a nation state to inflict death upon millions of innocents.

Today, a tribe armed with hatred, money and surreptitious support of a nation state can, and well may, bring down civilization. Further, we seem to live in a civilization so pessimistic about its future that it refraining from even reproducing in sufficient numbers to continue.

Of late, I find myself wondering whether human societies can adapt to life where millions are freed from the toil of mere subsistence. For most of history, meaning was found in merely staying fed, warm and alive. Incomprehensible forces beyond the ken of men shook their lives. They turned to God for what comfort and meaning they could find. The warrior in question here became, in this sense, like our ancient ancestors. No esoteric search for meaning required, just survival. Undoubtedly we are hard-wired for this.

Instead, today, in seemingly addictive fashion, we substitute consumption, drugs, alcohol, gambling, risk-taking, hedonic pleasures, etc. for fulfillment - bread and circuses, so to speak. The response of power elites is to harness these impulses to the extent it can further their power over us; to coerce us to conform to their version of utopia.

For those of us who still value the individual above all else, the task is to form voluntary organized communities where we valuable and valued.

I am afraid that the history of mankind since that liberation from subsistence living for the majority, bodes ill for our eventual success. As you can see the article and comments were deeply thought-provoking, and I apologize for my inability to do it justice.

Reply from The Daily Bell

No ... thank you for a most insightful feedback.

  Posted by Bob Georgius on 03/11/10 10:59 AM

Mr. Scotti has articulated the same feelings I experienced upon my return from Vietnam. I suspect that his feelings are shared to greater or lesser degree by every combat vet regardless of which war they fought in. It's not about Afghanistan, or Iraq, or US Military policy; it's about reality.

Combat strips away the veneer of civilization completely and life is reduced to its simplest necessities. Important things, like survival, become really important (as they always are) and non-essentials - drop in relative value to insignificance, even annoyance.

Hygiene,for example, is important - style? not so much; a healthy diet matters - the presentation of the meal matters not at all.

And when you return to civilization and attend a formal wedding where style and presentation are everything, and watch everyone there react to style and presentation but not to substance it can be literally frightening.

These are the people who define societal objectives, set political policy, send you and your buddies to war and they do not have a clue about the realities of their decisions or even the realities of life. Scary!

There would be a lot more free market thinkers if everyone did a combat tour. That's real. Most of civilized life as we know it is sophisticated. (One of the definitions of "Sophisticated" by the way is "Useless.") On the other hand it is my fervent prayer that no one ever have to learn about life in such a brutal fashion.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks for the thoughtful feedback.

You write: "There would be a lot more free market thinkers if everyone did a combat tour."

Yet from what we can tell, military indoctrination seems to provide at least some young individuals with a kind sociopolitical schizophrenia. While some, or many, may come to understand better the abiding positives of free society, they also in aggregate seem to share a spoken or unspoken support for the trillion-dollar plus American military industrial complex with its 16 separate spying organizations, serial wars and growing authoritarianism. Is this an unfair generalization?

  Posted by Finninsweden on 03/11/10 10:03 AM

Well, excuse me, but I cannot have respect for anyone who has the choice of either staying home or helping politicians wage wars in foreign lands. I do however have sympathy for those who are forced to fight by their own masters.

  Posted by Adrian W on 03/11/10 09:30 AM

Second thought about the subject. Isn't the present American administration labeling returning war vets as domestic terrorist possibilities? Talk about alienations!!

  Posted by Harry on 03/11/10 09:27 AM

While I understand your intelligence and need to analyse the feelings of a soldier, most do get it wrong. Put simply it is

1. When a soldier goes to war he gives everything for his country, his time,security, happiness, family but when he returns home he realizes his return is not acknowledged by the same people for whose security he has fought so valiantly and he sees the wastage in every aspect a civilian carries on and on without realizing the sacrifices his friends and he had made, for those wastages.

2. The people who understand him and stand by him in life and death are back there and that feeling does not emerge from any of his civilian counterparts and even his own family cannot comprehend that feeling of brotherhood and patriotism - so it is back to the army.

A vicious circle.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Yes, but as much as we are sympathetic to the plight of young men and women in wartime, we would also argue that combat is a kind of false reality - or perhaps a hyper-reality, often sustained (in the West, anyway) by geo-political gamesmanship.

The soldier finds a compelling psychological narrative that fulfills the hunter-gatherer instincts of two million years but the larger goals are not his or hers but the projection of the very power and authoritarianism that the soldier finds vexatious at home.

This is cognitive dissonance - that the soldier fights a war in a far-off land for the very civil society that he or she flees from at the first opportunity.

  Posted by Adrian W on 03/11/10 09:23 AM

I have respect for any person that is a vet just because of the difficulties and sacrifices one faces in that position. Its the soldiers that face combat that must be respected the most.

Unless a person experiences combat there is no other way of appreciating the gravity of the moment nor his comrades fighting next to him. The experience of survival at its most primal core. Veterans throughout history have shared a unique bond due to this. One a civilian can only imagine to appreciate...

In the end though. War is Hell, no matter the reasons for fighting or whose side your on.

  Posted by Ranger on 03/11/10 08:57 AM

Gentlemen: Combat is like cocaine. Every man feels the lure of the god like power to kill and destroy. In the military you are told killing and destroying are necessary and virtuous. Nothing else comes close to the utimate game of kill or be killed. All other activities soon seem pointless. Very quickly you do not need to rationalize it--you love having the power to kill. It sets you apart from lesser men. And presidents loving having the power to have someone killed.

Reply from The Daily Bell

A very good point. Another reason why civilian life seems "meaningless." But we would argue in its best sense that a meaningful life in a successful civil society is something to be aspired to, and something that can be most fulfilling.

  Posted by John K on 03/11/10 08:56 AM

Greetings. I speak about the British military, but it is valid. I served in several war theatres and this was back in the '60s and 70's, but still find myself somewhat at a loss to understand those who have never been (thankfully) in a similar situation.

As has been said, those who have not been there, just do not know what it is like. But life goes on. The up-side is getting back with those who did experience the same things, but we just get labelled "old foggies", so I get to be proud of that!

Regards, and best of luck.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks for commenting.

  Posted by Amishfarmer on 03/11/10 08:10 AM

I was not around for WW11 but I do remember, as a little kid, a place named Korea. I asked my father why we were fighting in Korea. He answered that he did not know but he had a feeling that we were not there to "win".

And that is the heart of the matter as I see it. War is a nasty business since both sides in the conflict are not totally "right". As historians look back now, it is obvious that Woodrow Wilson and Roosevelt purposely got us into wars where we had no business being. (There is more and more proof that FDR "knew" that the Pearl Harbor attack was coming and let it happen because he needed a war to get the country out of the Depression).

Communications then, not being as open as now, hid from American citizens the real truth so that they thought that they were fighting to save democracy; when in fact they were fighting to save the New World Order and Americans volunteered by the hundreds of thousands to serve their country.

My heartfelt thanks to "Mike" and all of the others who go in harm's way to protect the rest of us. However, I think that today more and more people are looking at the American Society and finding out that the "old" America is no more. Any nation that "protects" perverted behavior, like Ancient Rome, is heading for a big fall.

  Posted by Adam on 03/11/10 07:22 AM

Dear Wayne, If you find this article useful then please forward it to other marines. I hope you are forgiving enough of one word that you don't miss the big picture.

  Posted by Alvaro on 03/11/10 05:02 AM

OMG, that's life in South America!"

People lead inauthentic lives of quiet desperation because they have to make a living, even though they know they are not truly contributing to the general welfare of society - or even furthering their own family's prospects, generationally."

Reply from The Daily Bell

Well we have made the point that increasingly the US resembles a South American country - in that the middle class is being squeezed and income disparities continue to grow.

  Posted by Sally Preston on 03/11/10 04:54 AM

Sometimes, I try to discuss "the power elite" and "fiat money" with my cube-mates, but they only look at me with blank stares. They laugh and enjoy their days, never once thinking about the crumbling economy, disappearing liberties, etc. "Dancing With The Stars" is enough, apparently. I, too, feel like an alien. I often think "I've got to get out of here." But where does one go? I'm too old to go to A-Stan.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Join a libertarian tea-party group?

1 2 Next