Government getting involved with education in this way is fraught with conflicts of interet. Government certainly has an interest in well-educated military personnel, but there needs to be another way to do this. One way already exists: military academies. That said, military personnel should never succumb to intimidation, whether about wearing their uniforms or anything else.
I haven't asked national ROTC commanders as to the reason for the national one-week caution on wearing ROTC uniforms on campus, but I'm told it was based on very specific information. I don't know what that was, but one can imagine that if there was concern that the National Guard would be called up to deal with the campus protests, students might have mistaken other students in ROTC for National Guard troops.
I don’t claim that there can’t be some benefits to educating military on civilian campuses, but I think there are real potential downsides to that which can outweigh the benefits.
Some of the other URLs at https://advocatesforrotc.org/issues/ address other possible objections, though the first URL in my original reply addressed what seemed to be the most common and serious objection.
One additional objection to ROTC is the vague notion that having ROTC students will "militarize" the campus. We didn't write an article about that, but we did email around a photo of a female ROTC student moving into a dorm with the comment "When people said having ROTC students would militarize the campus, I bet they didn't picture them arriving in pink running shoes".
I'd be interested in learning about other objections to ROTC not covered above.
The article has something of a negative spin about Harvard's attitude towards ROTC, ignoring the role of President Larry Summers in initiating restoration of ROTC and the role of President Larry Bacow in tripling the number of ROTC students. It states: "As recently as this past semester, ROTC cadets were advised not to wear their uniforms on campus due to concerns for their safety during pro-Palestinian protests." This advisory was not Harvard-specific, it came from the national ROTC commands, was based on information about possible violent protests, and was in effect for one week.
Hi, Dr. Segal. My name is Charlie, and I'm the author of this piece. I would love to get in contact with you and speak about the work you're doing for ROTC. More broadly, I was intrigued by your work, as I'm also aspiring computational neuroscientist.
I'd be happy to talk any time and hope we are able to connect!
Government getting involved with education in this way is fraught with conflicts of interet. Government certainly has an interest in well-educated military personnel, but there needs to be another way to do this. One way already exists: military academies. That said, military personnel should never succumb to intimidation, whether about wearing their uniforms or anything else.
I haven't asked national ROTC commanders as to the reason for the national one-week caution on wearing ROTC uniforms on campus, but I'm told it was based on very specific information. I don't know what that was, but one can imagine that if there was concern that the National Guard would be called up to deal with the campus protests, students might have mistaken other students in ROTC for National Guard troops.
As for doing ROTC instead of a military academy, one key argument is that training on a civilian campus does a lot to reduce the civil-military divide. There is a good discussion of this at https://advocatesforrotc.org/issues/compatible/ and https://advocatesforrotc.org/issues/ocs/
Michael Segal '76 MD PhD
National Coordinator, Advocates for ROTC
advocatesforrotc.org
I don’t claim that there can’t be some benefits to educating military on civilian campuses, but I think there are real potential downsides to that which can outweigh the benefits.
Some of the other URLs at https://advocatesforrotc.org/issues/ address other possible objections, though the first URL in my original reply addressed what seemed to be the most common and serious objection.
One additional objection to ROTC is the vague notion that having ROTC students will "militarize" the campus. We didn't write an article about that, but we did email around a photo of a female ROTC student moving into a dorm with the comment "When people said having ROTC students would militarize the campus, I bet they didn't picture them arriving in pink running shoes".
I'd be interested in learning about other objections to ROTC not covered above.
I don't think having ROTC students would militarize a campus, unless perhaps they were to represent a major portion of the students.
What do you think are those downsides?
The article has something of a negative spin about Harvard's attitude towards ROTC, ignoring the role of President Larry Summers in initiating restoration of ROTC and the role of President Larry Bacow in tripling the number of ROTC students. It states: "As recently as this past semester, ROTC cadets were advised not to wear their uniforms on campus due to concerns for their safety during pro-Palestinian protests." This advisory was not Harvard-specific, it came from the national ROTC commands, was based on information about possible violent protests, and was in effect for one week.
Michael Segal '76 MD PhD
National Coordinator, Advocates for ROTC
advocatesforrotc.org
Hi, Dr. Segal. My name is Charlie, and I'm the author of this piece. I would love to get in contact with you and speak about the work you're doing for ROTC. More broadly, I was intrigued by your work, as I'm also aspiring computational neuroscientist.
I'd be happy to talk any time and hope we are able to connect!
cbbratton@college.harvard.edu
Glad to talk. I sent contact information.