What do you think?
Rate this book
America's Army: Making the All-Volunteer Force
In 1973, not long after the last American combat troops returned from Vietnam, President Nixon fulfilled his campaign promise and ended the draft. No longer would young men find their futures determined by the selective service system; nor would the U.S. military have a guaranteed source of recruits.
America’s Army is the story of the all-volunteer force, from the draft protests and policy proposals of the 1960s through the Iraq War. It is also a history of America in the post-Vietnam era. In the Army, America directly confronted the legacies of civil rights and black power, the women’s movement, and gay rights. The volunteer force raised questions about the meaning of citizenship and the rights and obligations it carries; about whether liberty or equality is the more central American value; what role the military should play in American society not only in time of war, but in time of peace. And as the Army tried to create a volunteer force that could respond effectively to complex international situations, it had to compete with other “employers” in a national labor market and sell military service alongside soap and soft drinks.
Based on exhaustive archival research, as well as interviews with Army officers and recruiters, advertising executives, and policy makers, America’s Army confronts the political, moral, and social issues a volunteer force raises for a democratic society as well as for the defense of our nation.
America’s Army is the story of the all-volunteer force, from the draft protests and policy proposals of the 1960s through the Iraq War. It is also a history of America in the post-Vietnam era. In the Army, America directly confronted the legacies of civil rights and black power, the women’s movement, and gay rights. The volunteer force raised questions about the meaning of citizenship and the rights and obligations it carries; about whether liberty or equality is the more central American value; what role the military should play in American society not only in time of war, but in time of peace. And as the Army tried to create a volunteer force that could respond effectively to complex international situations, it had to compete with other “employers” in a national labor market and sell military service alongside soap and soft drinks.
Based on exhaustive archival research, as well as interviews with Army officers and recruiters, advertising executives, and policy makers, America’s Army confronts the political, moral, and social issues a volunteer force raises for a democratic society as well as for the defense of our nation.
- GenresHistoryNonfiction
352 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2009
12 people are currently reading
67 people want to read
About the author
Beth L. Bailey
16 books8 followersBeth L. Bailey is an American historian, who is currently serving as the Distinguished Professor at Kansas University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
December 12, 2020
A concise, brilliantly researched, and well-told account of the transformation of the US Army since the 1970s. The thesis is that because of the Vietnam War a convergence of interests and perspectives occurred among a number of groups that drove the shift from a largely draft army to an all-volunteer force: Nixon's political interests, young people's desire to not get drafted, liberal antiwar sentiment, conservative anti-big gov't sentiment, and teh Army itself, which was reeling from a number of crisis and largely believed that the draft was funneling low quality recruits into the military, bringing society's problems in as well. Thus we moved from a citizen-army based on an ethos of service (the norm in most American wars in the past, although not in peacetime; we never had a large permanent military pre Cold War) and shared sacrifice to an army of volunteers based in self-improvement/fulfillment and consumer choice. That was one of the most fascinating aspects of the book: key designers of the AVF, including economists like Milton Friedman and the ad agencies responsible for selling military service, conceived of it in highly economic/consumerist terms, as one more lifestyle choice or career choice instead of something that all citizens could potentially have to contribute to, small-r republican style.
And it kind of worked! This is not a full-on Bacevichian lament about the AVF's betrayal of national citizenship or the American people's abandonment of their military. THere are elements of that, but Bailey also charts how the Army found ways to successfully advertise itself, and to some extent adapt itself internally, to a new generation, the "me" generation raised in a more prosperous and consumer oriented society. New emphases were placed on low-risk occupations, learning skills/trades, getting $ for education, and advancing progress along the lines of gender and race.
Bailey's chapters on gender and race in the post-Vietnam ARmy are brilliant and fascinating; they are part of what make this book so innovative as military history. She shows that the AVF depended on women and African-Americans filling the ranks, and the book is largely a success story regarding African-Americans, esp AA women. She also shows, however, that the Army didn't want to seem too black, for several reasons. First, this would raise the specter (similar to Vietnam) of a disproportionately black army suffering high casualties for a mostly white nation. On the flip side, many whites might feel like the ARmy was a black institution and be hesitant about joining. Things mostly worked out, despite these fears. AA's joined the Army in disproportionate numbers but the combat infantry sparingly, which has meant that their combat casualties haven't been way out of whack. Also, AA recruits (women too) have generally been of higher quality (better test scores, less baggage, more re-enlistment) than white soldiers, in large part because they are more likely to see it as a career than a chance for adventure and fulfillment. Of course, the gender side of this story is more complicated, as the Army hierarchy was less eager to bring women in
Of course, the Army can be a "social good," as Bailey aptly describes it, when there aren't major wars going on. Once the wars in IQ and AF started, you started to see the cracks. The Army could be much more selective pre-GWOT, leading to higher quality recruits, but it lost this luxury during the GWOT and had to find all kinds of ways to incentivize recruiting. With the military out fighting intractable, bloody counterinsurgencies, the gap between civilian society (which wasn't asked to do jack squat during the GWOT, one of Bush's greatest failings) and the military expanded, leading to a sense of distance and alienation in much of the military. This is where the Army's shift to a free market ethos of consumer choice really started to backfire; it was part of a broader movement in our society, a fragmentation of the larger we, of the responsibilities of citizenship, especially in national defense.
In short, this book is A. fantastic for any late 20th century historian B. Great for the general reader in terms of understanding the social and political history of the military and C. a wonderful companion book to works like Liz Cohen's Consumer's Republic, which show the rise of "consumer citizenship" in the mid-late 20th century. This is one of those "roots of our maladies" type books that is fair-minded, not-too-long, and usually fascinating.
And it kind of worked! This is not a full-on Bacevichian lament about the AVF's betrayal of national citizenship or the American people's abandonment of their military. THere are elements of that, but Bailey also charts how the Army found ways to successfully advertise itself, and to some extent adapt itself internally, to a new generation, the "me" generation raised in a more prosperous and consumer oriented society. New emphases were placed on low-risk occupations, learning skills/trades, getting $ for education, and advancing progress along the lines of gender and race.
Bailey's chapters on gender and race in the post-Vietnam ARmy are brilliant and fascinating; they are part of what make this book so innovative as military history. She shows that the AVF depended on women and African-Americans filling the ranks, and the book is largely a success story regarding African-Americans, esp AA women. She also shows, however, that the Army didn't want to seem too black, for several reasons. First, this would raise the specter (similar to Vietnam) of a disproportionately black army suffering high casualties for a mostly white nation. On the flip side, many whites might feel like the ARmy was a black institution and be hesitant about joining. Things mostly worked out, despite these fears. AA's joined the Army in disproportionate numbers but the combat infantry sparingly, which has meant that their combat casualties haven't been way out of whack. Also, AA recruits (women too) have generally been of higher quality (better test scores, less baggage, more re-enlistment) than white soldiers, in large part because they are more likely to see it as a career than a chance for adventure and fulfillment. Of course, the gender side of this story is more complicated, as the Army hierarchy was less eager to bring women in
Of course, the Army can be a "social good," as Bailey aptly describes it, when there aren't major wars going on. Once the wars in IQ and AF started, you started to see the cracks. The Army could be much more selective pre-GWOT, leading to higher quality recruits, but it lost this luxury during the GWOT and had to find all kinds of ways to incentivize recruiting. With the military out fighting intractable, bloody counterinsurgencies, the gap between civilian society (which wasn't asked to do jack squat during the GWOT, one of Bush's greatest failings) and the military expanded, leading to a sense of distance and alienation in much of the military. This is where the Army's shift to a free market ethos of consumer choice really started to backfire; it was part of a broader movement in our society, a fragmentation of the larger we, of the responsibilities of citizenship, especially in national defense.
In short, this book is A. fantastic for any late 20th century historian B. Great for the general reader in terms of understanding the social and political history of the military and C. a wonderful companion book to works like Liz Cohen's Consumer's Republic, which show the rise of "consumer citizenship" in the mid-late 20th century. This is one of those "roots of our maladies" type books that is fair-minded, not-too-long, and usually fascinating.
April 19, 2023
Long chapters and paragraphs can make this heavy going. It is still an important story.....and it brought back memories. From 1978 until 1981 I was close to the edge of the effort to bring the all=-volunteer force into being.
December 31, 2022
Written well, even if I hate the topic. Required reading.
January 16, 2013
this is a book I flipped through when it first came out, mined it for some specific information for research and teaching, then put back on the shelf. I'm glad I pulled it back off and did a full read today. It was definitely worth the time. Bailey traces the development and formation of the AVF, focusing on its conception and early implementation, but deftly pulls the story through to the contemporary conflicts in the 21st century. The book is organized thematically, as well as roughly chronologically, which means that each chapter makes a somewhat self-contained argument. (It also means that occasionally the information you are looking for isn't quite where you'd expect to find it.) There is excellent analysis of the social history triumverate of race, class, and gender - and a wee bit on DADT and sexuality (though, obviously, the book was published before its recent repeal and renewed conversation on it.) The writing is excellent - for a story without a lot of characters, narrative, or action, Bailey expertly uses advertisements, texts, memos, and other documents to make her case--and makes it interesting at that. The pictures included with the book are well worth a close look, as well. They really augment the argument, rather than feeling like an afterthought.
Read
March 25, 2014Beth Bailey, AM’81, PhD’86
Author
From our pages (Mar–Apr/10): "With the end of conscription in 1973, the U.S. military faced the challenge of creating an all-volunteer force that could respond effectively to world conflicts. Bailey discusses military history since Vietnam, examining how the Army has addressed civil rights, questions of citizenship and its obligations, and how an all-volunteer American military should function during both war and peacetime."
Author
From our pages (Mar–Apr/10): "With the end of conscription in 1973, the U.S. military faced the challenge of creating an all-volunteer force that could respond effectively to world conflicts. Bailey discusses military history since Vietnam, examining how the Army has addressed civil rights, questions of citizenship and its obligations, and how an all-volunteer American military should function during both war and peacetime."
February 2, 2010
A good history of the All-Volunteer Force, but nothing groundshakingly new.
December 19, 2012
An eye opening book about how a nation raises and Army. I used this book for my master's thesis regarding moral waivers in military recruiting. Excellent, excellent book. Top rate research.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews