THEY USED to be looking for "a few good men." Today, they're just looking for a few warm bodies. The military is having an especially hard time recruiting these days. Specifically, the service academies have seen a dramatic drop-off in numbers of applicants.
That trend is worrisome for two reasons: One, it threatens our military readiness and therefore our collective security. Two -- and perhaps more importantly -- it's a bad sign for the character of our generation.
The decrease in service academy applicants is particularly significant because it flies in the face of two nationwide college trends.
The service academies have been losing applicants during a period of time in which many schools across the country are seeing record increases in their numbers of applicants. For example, in the past 10 years, the United States Naval Academy has seen almost a 40 percent drop in applications. Meanwhile, the number of students applying to college has risen to two-thirds of all high school graduates.
Also relevant to the application decline is the rapid rise in the cost of an undergraduate education at most institutions. Many schools are well over $30,000 per year now. The service academies, on the other hand, are free. In exchange, students agree to serve as officers for five years after graduation -- with salary and benefits.
What explains the decline in applications, when these two trends suggest that the academies instead should be seeing large increases?
One likely factor is recent economic prosperity. The present job market is so favorable for those graduating from college that the relative allure of the military's training and job security is diminished.
The major concern in response to this explanation is that with time, a decrease in the number of applicants usually causes a decrease in the quality of applicants. And if the best and brightest aren't going into the military anymore because of better opportunities elsewhere, who does that leave to run our military? Who, then, are we forced to trust to protect our nation?
Perhaps, though, both the explanation of this trend and the appropriate reaction to it go deeper than military capability.
Four years at a military academy is no picnic. Cadets and midshipmen endure a rigorous physical training regimen, a challenging academic curriculum and strict disciplinary codes. They make considerable sacrifices -- during and after their time at the service academies -- in exchange for the privilege of leading our nation's armed forces.
That sort of a bargain is certainly not something that appeals to everyone. It requires a specific type of character, leadership ability and fortitude. But for generations, it has appealed to many. With a 40 percent drop in the past 10 years, we need to ask if our generation is different from all those that have come before.
If you know anyone who attends one of the academies, you know that they talk a bit differently from the average college student. They routinely use words most of us don't -- words like "honor," "code," "commitment," "discipline," and "courage."
They have to be a slightly different breed from the rest of us. I'm glad I'm not the one being screamed at, hazed, humiliated, drilled and pushed. I'm not eager to make those kind of sacrifices for the responsibility of taking care of the security of our country.
But at the same time, I'm glad that for the past 225 years, there have been plenty of people willing to make those sacrifices -- our nation's survival depends on them. Every generation before ours has had enough men and women eager to accept that task. Does ours not?
Our generation hasn't had a major war or economic hardship. Our lives have been years of relative peace and wealth -- pretty cushy times, relative to the Great Depression and two World Wars.
Don't get me wrong -- I don't yearn for poverty, unemployment and bloody conflict. But those experiences, as our grandfathers often said, build character. They create people who understand and accept the need for discipline and sacrifice.
Our generation, more so than many before, has not had to make sacrifices. Instead, many have taken the path of least resistance. Of course, that's in large part because they can, in ways our grandfathers could not. Getting paid to play computer Solitaire all day wasn't an option then. The path of least resistance has widened with technological advancement and economic boom.
But we should be able to enjoy easier times without becoming soft. The ability to take the path of least resistance and still be comfortable is no reason to do so. Discipline and hard work are still desirable, even if they aren't necessary for our basic survival.
The armed services certainly aren't for everyone. But we should be worried about the kind of people our generation has if they are no longer for anyone.
(Bryan Maxwell is the Cavalier Daily Opinion editor.)
Read More
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 22 hours agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | April 18, 2024Our independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
