Caleb Campbell is neither a hero nor a coward
May 9, 2008 – 8:53 pm by JohnThis is the true lesson of our history: war, preparation for war, and foreign military interventions have served for the most part not to protect us, as we are constantly told, but rather to sap our economic vitality and undermine our civil and economic liberties.
—Robert Higgs
It was a national sports story, but maybe non-Michigan residents didn’t hear about West Point graduate Caleb Campbell, who played safety for the Army football team and was picked by the Lions last month in the seventh round of the NFL draft. He was part of West Point’s athlete-only track, where if they can enter a professional sports program after graduation, they won’t have to serve in the same capacity as regular graduates, meaning they can stay in the city of their sports team and work at a recruiting station in the offseason rather than be shipped overseas for combat duty. Campbell, the Lions, and just about everyone else who paid much attention to the NFL draft (or had it shoved down their throat) knew that if a team was nice enough to draft him, it would save him from being shipped to the Middle East.
This spurred some amount of discussion and debate on the radio and internet, some of which was, expectedly, critical, both of the Army’s program that gives athletes special treatment, which is a problem in our society from schoolchildren all the way up to professionals, and of Campbell himself for being a coward and taking the easy way out by serving the easiest, cushiest assignment possible—recruiting.
Take, for instance, radio host Bill Simonson, who hosts the Huge Show, an afternoon sports-talk show broadcast on a lot of stations across Michigan, and apparently also has a blag at mLive.com:
Caleb Campbell hopes to play in the NFL instead of join his fellow 2008 West Point grads in combat. Campbell is a hard-hitting safety who the Detroit Lions drafted Sunday in the seventh round of the NFL draft. He has chosen pro football before country.
What is puzzling about Campbell’s story is that West Point is centered on building leadership qualities. Yes, the rules are there to help market the academy’s sports programs by giving good athletes the opt-out early parachute.
If Campbell was a leader and a man of the highest character, wouldn’t he turn down the Lions and honor his duty to this country?
Even before the Lions picked him, the Army had stooped to using him in uniform as a military mascot during the NFL draft.
Is this duty, honor, country?
Campbell and the Army are spinning this as a great thing if he makes the Lions’ roster. That way he can recruit for the Army for two years in Detroit to fulfill his active-duty commitment.
Think a guy like Campbell looks good as a recruiter after taking the easy way out? How does a guy leave his cadet brothers at graduation at the academy knowing they could be in harm’s way and he is playing football for a living?
It is misguided and in fact very historically ignorant to conflate serving in the military with serving your country; commanding or fighting in the military is serving your government, not your home, your culture, your people, or (hopefully) your values. It is true that country (or nation-state) and government are the same thing in a lot of contexts, but rarely does anyone try to construe “serving your government” as anything good. Well, okay, maybe it isn’t rare, but they don’t phrase it like that, and it isn’t good despite what Statists say.
Therefore, referring to someone who abandoned a productive and lucrative life at home to fight and possibly die in his government’s war (e.g., Pat Tillman) as a hero is to place the affairs and goals of the State above the everyday lives and activities of individual private citizens. It is difficult to think of a better definition of nationalism than that.
I want to mention that I can’t take anything away from the fact that Pat Tillman and thousands of other enlisted men and women made sacrifices and decisions that were harder than any I’ve made, so they should be respected or admired or something, if not as heroes than at least as pretty courageous people. It reminds me of the time a Jewish acquaintance of mine explained why rabbis and priests commit themselves to a lifetime of celibacy: not because there is anything inherently special about abstinence in and of itself, but because it is a decision and a commitment that the ordinary person can’t make; it takes a special, dedicated mindset to commit yourself to that and stick to it your whole life, which is more difficult than the average person can manage, so it places them above us, in some sort of respectable, admirable position. I feel like that about people such as Pat Tillman, not because of the decision per se or because the result or objective of his actions were admirable, but because of the personal sacrifice involved in the decision and the (unfortunately) lifelong commitment.
That doesn’t make him a hero, though. Personal sacrifice doesn’t make any serviceman a hero. Using a sort of technicality to get out of life-threatening military service overseas doesn’t make you the opposite of a hero, either. It makes you wise and sensible. Caleb Campbell might very well be jaded like so many servicemen who donate money to Ron Paul and other anti-war political candidates. Or he might just have a lot of common sense.
A fair amount of ire was directed at West Point Academy for implementing this athletes-special-treatment program, which is okay—I don’t have a big problem with either West Point’s athlete-coddling policy or people who are critical of its athlete-coddling policy. Much ire was also directed at Caleb Campbell for sort of reneging on his promise to the Army by bolting for the NFL to get out of combat duty. Bill Simonson expressed this sentiment when he wrote, “Caleb Campbell chose West Point. He was not forced to go there. If he wanted pro football then there are a ton of colleges where you can chase your dream.” I.e., if he wanted to avoid military service and play football instead, he could have gone almost anywhere instead of to a school where it’s understood that you repay the Army for your education by serving in the Army. That would be a good argument except, to my knowledge, he knew about this opting-out policy before he went to West Point, or if he didn’t, then West Point offered him the option; it wasn’t like he lobbied for it or anything, so what’s wrong with taking what your school voluntarily gives you? Nothing.
The last point I wanted to make: Despite the typically shameful and depressing quality of the comments section of blag posts, YouTube videos, etc., the first few comments to Simonson’s blag post contained surprisingly intelligent, informed, sober opinions about Campbell, Simonson’s arguments, and the military in general. I didn’t read past the first few for fear of ruining this rare and good thing.
