During the Second Battle of Fallujah in November 2004, 1st Lt. Jesse A. Grapes saved the lives of three wounded marines in his platoon by entering a burning house, where he encountered the enemy soldier who had been firing at his troops. Six years later Grapes was named headmaster of Benedictine College Preparatory, a Catholic military school in Richmond, Virginia. The June 2010 issue of the school’s newspaper, The New Chevron, called Grapes a “patriotic war hero.”
In describing Grapes’ Iraq War exploits, Benedictine’s student newspaper dismissed the fact he was accused of ordering marines under his command to shoot four captured prisoners. Grapes refused to talk to government investigators, citing his Fifth Amendment rights.
It’s quite a lesson for students at Benedictine, which is kind of a poster child for the modern militarized Catholic school. Every year Benedictine requires all juniors to take the military entrance exam. The school operates an Army JROTC program and has a student organization that teaches students how to use small arms. Of course, these are expected activities in a military school. The question is whether these activities are appropriate in a Catholic school.
Discussing his new book, Henry A. Giroux argues that what unites racist killings, loss of privacy, the surveillance state's rise, the increasing corporatization of US institutions and growing poverty and inequality "is a growing threat of authoritarianism - or what might be otherwise called totalitarianism with elections."
Victoria Harper: Your new book has a very provocative and suggestive title: The Violence of Organized Forgetting. How does the title work as an organizing idea for the book?
Henry A. Giroux: We live in a historical moment when memory, if not critical thought itself, is either under attack or is being devalued and undermined by a number of forces in American society. Historical memory has become dangerous today because it offers the promise of lost legacies of resistance, moments in history when the social contract was taken seriously (however impaired), and when a variety of social movements emerged that called for a rethinking of what democracy meant and how it might be defined in the interest of economic and social justice.
In the spring of 2014, I went to observe a career day at Santa Barbara High School, where my son is enrolled. There were a variety of organizations with representatives and literature tables. The Marines and the Navy recruiters were also there. They were soliciting student contact information. The Marine’s “survey” form included questions such as, “Did you know that the Marine Corps has a $150,000 scholarship?” and “Did you know that the qualifications for the Marine Corps are higher than the standards of UC Santa Barbara?” I told them that under the school’s existing recruiting protocol they were not allowed to get student information directly from students, and that they had to go through the Santa Barbara Unified School District office.
I turned around and saw the school's career counselor and approached him, reminding him about the school's recruiter protocol. He didn’t recall that part of the protocol and said he would talk to the military recruiters about it. I asked, “What about the information they have already gathered from students?” I went back to the Marine recruiters and repeated that they were not allowed to solicit student information. I picked up the surveys they had collected and said that I was going to tear them up and throw them out. They consented, so I ripped them up.
I went to the Navy recruiters’ table and told them the same thing. They had a binder with the protocol in it and looked it up. The Navy recruiter said, "That's correct, here it is, in 'G.'" (G. Recruiters visiting schools shall not at any time solicit contact information directly from students or require it as a condition to participate in an activity or receive an award or gift.) I said, "I am going to take this sign-up sheet and tear it up," holding it up for them to see, and they also said ok.
Monica A. F. Lounsbery, Kathryn A. Holt, Shannon A. Monnat, Thomas L. McKenzie, and Brian Funk - Physical inactivity is receiving growing attention given its documented relationship to a variety of chronic health (Strong et al., 2005) and metabolic challenges (Owen, Healy, Matthews, & Dunstan, 2010) and the fact that most adults and children do not meet physical activity guidelines (Troiano et al., 2008; USDHHS, 2008). For over two decades, the importance of schools in providing and promoting physical activity has been consistently emphasized (Institute of Medicine, 2013; Pate et al., 2008), but with the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 2001, school physical activity programs, including physical education (PE), have instead sustained reduced time and resource allocations (McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2009).
PE is a primary strategy because it (a) is institutionalized as part of the K-12 curriculum and as such, has the potential to reach nearly all students, (b) is the only program where the least active children can experience physical activity at higher intensities, and has the potential to significantly contribute to daily accrual of moderate to vigorous physical activity, increase fitness, develop and improve motor and other generalizable skills. Though PE is a key evidence-based strategy for providing and promoting physical activity (Institute of Medicine, 2013; Ward, 2011) and a goal of Healthy People 2020 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2010) there are many practice and policy barriers to its effective delivery; thus, its potential to impact health has not been fully realized (McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2009). Among these policy barriers is the pervasive practice of allowing waivers/exemptions and/or substitutions for physical education. This includes allowing alternative programs such as JROTC (Junior Reserve Officer’s Reserve Corps), interscholastic sports, marching band, cheerleading, and community sports to substitute for PE enrollment (NASPE, 2012), a practice which has been of great concern to the profession (Abernathy, 1960; NASPE, 2006; Sims, 2011) and public health officials (e.g., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011) for many years.
4 January 2012 / Pat Elder / openDemocracy - Almost immediately after the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2001, antiwar groups across the country began organizing their communities in response to Section 9528 of the law. This section provides military recruiters the names, addresses, and phone numbers of high school students provided that parents and students are given the opportunity to "opt out" of the lists being forwarded to recruiters. The law directs schools to notify parents of the right to opt out, but many schools throughout the country failed to do so. Right away, programs sprung up across the country, encouraging parents to opt out and providing forms for them to do so.
Many became convinced that "opting out" kept recruiters at bay, but this counter-cultural cottage industry has been rendered largely inconsequential due in part to a quantum leap in the Pentagon's information gathering capabilities. From electronic trolling of social websites to purchasing information from yearbook and ring companies -- military recruiting services know what's in Johnny's head, if Johnny has a girlfriend, and what she thinks of his decision regarding enlistment. The laptops of local recruiters are loaded with personal information on youth. For instance, the Army's PrizmNE segmentation system combines demographic, consumer behavior, and geographic data pertaining to individual prospects. The information is merged with data from social media sites like Twitter and Facebook and the result is staggering. Recruiters know Johnny reads wrestling magazines, weighs 150 pounds, can bench press 230, drives a ten year-old Chevy truck, listens to "classic rock," and enjoys fly fishing.
The mainstream peace and justice movement is beginning to see that countering military recruitment deserves a higher priority and should be viewed in strategic, rather than tactical terms. Resisting the unprecedented and relentless militarization of American youth transcends the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Countering military recruitment confronts an ugly mix of a distinctively American brand of institutionalized violence, racism, militarism, nationalism, classism, and sexism. It gets to the root of the problem.
Confronting the work of military recruiters, particularly in the nation’s public schools will provide a catalyst for activists to shift gears from the traditional antiwar tactics of vigils, protests, sit-ins, and CD actions to the long-term strategy of opposing the militarization of youth. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. One however, treats symptoms; the other addresses causes.
Simply put, the strategy of the counter-recruiting movement is to put the imperial armed forces of the United States into a kind of vice that squeezes new recruits from the ranks. One end of the vice is the near universal rejection of the return of the military draft. Remember how the House voted 402-2 against reinstating the daft back in October of 2004? Bringing back the draft is unthinkable. Conscription would result in demonstrations of millions that would ultimately end the war and result in a political revolution. The crushing steel on the opposite side of the vice is the counter-recruitment movement, aided by an American public that increasingly recognizes illegal and immoral wars.
Counter recruitment activists are putting on the squeeze. They’re doing it by learning about high school policies that favor military recruiters and they’re organizing their communities to change it. They’re providing youth with training, employment and educational alternatives to military service. They’re engaged with community leaders and the press in promoting a greater awareness of encroaching militarism. And they’re being successful across the country.
The military is feeling the pressure. The Pentagon has seriously dumbed down its enlistment qualifications and lowered its monthly quotas. The Army is dredging the bottom of the barrel by dramatically lowering the bar for enlisting. The percent of all Army recruits without a high school diploma has risen to 18.8%, the highest level since 1981. The Army has also relaxed the minimum scores necessary on the standardized Armed Forces Qualification Test, (AFQT). The percent of soldiers who have been granted waivers for alcohol or drug abuse, criminal misdemeanors, and various medical conditions has been raised from 10% to 15%. The Army has also increased its maximum age for enlistment from 35 to 42. The vice is turning.
Do you know the policies of your local school system regarding military recruitment? This is how we turn the vice. The pentagon must approach vulnerable 16 and 17 year olds and convince them it’s in their best interest to join. It is an insidious practice and chances are you’re allowing it happen.
The military may request a list of the names, addresses and phone numbers of all the high school children in your town. What’s your school district’s policy regarding the military recruitment “opt out” form? Federal law says your schools are supposed to tell parents they have the right to remove their children’s names from lists being sent to the Pentagon. What’s your high school doing? Can students opt themselves out? The law says they can. Once a parent or student removes his or her name from such a list, do they have to repeat the process every year? The law says once is sufficient.
Does your school have a Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) Program? Your local high school has probably been forced by the Federal No Child Left Behind Act to hire highly qualified teachers. Many school districts are requiring classroom teachers to have master’s degrees after a few years of service. Meanwhile, JROTC instructors need only a GED to teach credited courses. The stringent “No Child Left Behind” regulations exempt JROTC instructors. There’s usually little or no curricular oversight to the program. What are they teaching? Certainly more Clausewitz and Machiavelli than Jefferson and Thoreau! What kind of curricular oversight does your high school exercise over this program? If you want to stop wars, you might start asking.
Over 600,000 school children in public schools take the Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) test every year. Does your school offer the test? Why is the Pentagon testing children in the public schools? Military recruiting manuals admit it is primarily to produce leads for recruiters. The ASVAB is supposed to be voluntary, but many schools require all juniors and seniors to take it. Students are forced to sign a “Student Privacy Statement,” to take the test. This may violate your state’s laws. One Maryland school district thought so and requires its students to have a signed permission form from their parents to take the test. Does your school automatically forward the results from the four hour test to military recruiters? Most do. Some school districts have stepped in to protect student privacy and have stopped this practice.
Are military recruiters allowed to greet children as they enter the cafeteria during lunch while college recruiters are required to meet with students by appointment in the Guidance Office? Federal law calls for military and college recruiters to have equal access to children. Schools across the country have ordered the military to meet with students in guidance and career centers, rather than allowing recruiters to have access to the entire student body. This is the toughest nut to crack in some districts.
Do you know if your local high school lets children out of class to shoot M-16 rifle and M-9 pistol simulators in the increasingly popular Army recruiting vans? You should! Are military recruiters frequenting some schools more than others due to racial and economic factors? You ought to know. Call your local high school principal and start asking questions. They’re your schools and you’re paying for them, even if your children don’t attend. The war starts in your community and it can end there too.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. is a co-founder of the DC Antiwar Network (DAWN) and is a member of the Steering Committee of the National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth, (NNOMY). Pat is currently involved in counter-recruitment projects in a dozen jurisdictions in the DC metropolitan area. Pat’s work has prominently appeared in NSA documents tracking domestic peace groups.
Subscribe to NNOMY Newsletter
NNOMYnews reports on the growing intrusions by the Department of Defense into our public schools in a campaign to normalize perpetual wars with our youth and to promote the recruitment efforts of the Pentagon.
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues connected with militarism and resistance. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Donate to NNOMY
Your donation to NNOMY works to balance the military's message in our public schools. Our national network of activists go into schools and inform youth considering military service the risks about military service that recruiters leave out.
During the Second Battle of Fallujah in November 2004, 1st Lt. Jesse A. Grapes saved the lives of three wounded marines in his platoon by entering a burning house, where he encountered the enemy soldier who had been firing at his troops. Six years later Grapes was named headmaster of Benedictine College Preparatory, a Catholic military school in Richmond, Virginia. The June 2010 issue of the school’s newspaper, The New Chevron, called Grapes a “patriotic war hero.”
Monica A. F. Lounsbery, Kathryn A. Holt, Shannon A. Monnat, Thomas L. McKenzie, and Brian Funk - Physical inactivity is receiving growing attention given its documented relationship to a variety of chronic health (
4 January 2012 / Pat Elder /