Comments on: More on the Military’s ‘Culture Rush’: Brian Selmeski interview http://culturematters.wordpress.com/2008/10/19/more-on-the-militarys-culture-rush-brian-selmeski-interview/ Thu, 10 Dec 2009 11:09:39 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Ed http://culturematters.wordpress.com/2008/10/19/more-on-the-militarys-culture-rush-brian-selmeski-interview/#comment-4997 Ed Mon, 02 Feb 2009 15:00:33 +0000 http://culturematters.wordpress.com/?p=521#comment-4997 governmental - please correct typographical ommision of the letter "n". Thank you. governmental – please correct typographical ommision of the letter “n”. Thank you.

]]> By: Ed http://culturematters.wordpress.com/2008/10/19/more-on-the-militarys-culture-rush-brian-selmeski-interview/#comment-4996 Ed Mon, 02 Feb 2009 14:53:55 +0000 http://culturematters.wordpress.com/?p=521#comment-4996 My observations of the U.S. military's embrace of new understanding of culture and its support for the generation of new knowledge (research) suggest that the primary motive for a "rush" is the experiences they have endured in a new sort of engagement with an enemy in asymmetrical warfare. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, where serious combat is underway, and in an expanding arena across Southeast Asia and Sahel Africa, American forces are expected to succeed in carrying out duties that involve allied forces, friendly non-combatants and hundreds of non-govermental organizations. The operative phrase is "expected to succeed." The military will do whatever it thinks will help it succeed - so if the mission is to provide massive aid following a tsunami in Indonesia or series of earthquakes in the mountains of Pakistan, or to win the "hearts and minds" of local villagers, or to work with fishermen to locate and intercept shipments of illegal drugs or weapons -- the U.S. military will seek out and adopt the knowledge needed. That is why they now awaken to the importance of culture and cultural competence. My observations of the U.S. military’s embrace of new understanding of culture and its support for the generation of new knowledge (research) suggest that the primary motive for a “rush” is the experiences they have endured in a new sort of engagement with an enemy in asymmetrical warfare. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, where serious combat is underway, and in an expanding arena across Southeast Asia and Sahel Africa, American forces are expected to succeed in carrying out duties that involve allied forces, friendly non-combatants and hundreds of non-govermental organizations. The operative phrase is “expected to succeed.” The military will do whatever it thinks will help it succeed – so if the mission is to provide massive aid following a tsunami in Indonesia or series of earthquakes in the mountains of Pakistan, or to win the “hearts and minds” of local villagers, or to work with fishermen to locate and intercept shipments of illegal drugs or weapons — the U.S. military will seek out and adopt the knowledge needed. That is why they now awaken to the importance of culture and cultural competence.

]]> By: Michaela http://culturematters.wordpress.com/2008/10/19/more-on-the-militarys-culture-rush-brian-selmeski-interview/#comment-4812 Michaela Sat, 29 Nov 2008 04:30:28 +0000 http://culturematters.wordpress.com/?p=521#comment-4812 just an anecdotal comment on "And the Air Force teaches what it calls “cross-cultural competence,” or the idea that soldiers can be taught to comprehend and act in a culturally complex environment, even without having any past experience in that part of the world." the air force also runs, or used to run, courses on culture and language for the spouses of air force workers, my father was in the R.A.F. (Royal airforce, british) and the R.A.A.F. (royal australian air force), before being posted to malaysia my mother as his spouse had to attend a course on the culture, language etc... my parents understood this to be a sort of orientation program to reduce culture shock, become familiar with relevant laws etc, but it also informed their ideas of the different ethnicities, where they had/ve a rigid understanding of the class structure as related to ethnicity.... so it shaped the way they and other RAAFy's integrated or distanced themselves within the host society and landscape. I wonder if the idea of culture has been around for some time in military institutions, but the use of anthro. concepts is more recent.... or the way culture is being used or thought of has undergone change within these institutions.... just an anecdotal comment on
“And the Air Force teaches what it calls “cross-cultural competence,” or the idea that soldiers can be taught to comprehend and act in a culturally complex environment, even without having any past experience in that part of the world.”

the air force also runs, or used to run, courses on culture and language for the spouses of air force workers, my father was in the R.A.F. (Royal airforce, british) and the R.A.A.F. (royal australian air force), before being posted to malaysia my mother as his spouse had to attend a course on the culture, language etc… my parents understood this to be a sort of orientation program to reduce culture shock, become familiar with relevant laws etc, but it also informed their ideas of the different ethnicities, where they had/ve a rigid understanding of the class structure as related to ethnicity…. so it shaped the way they and other RAAFy’s integrated or distanced themselves within the host society and landscape. I wonder if the idea of culture has been around for some time in military institutions, but the use of anthro. concepts is more recent…. or the way culture is being used or thought of has undergone change within these institutions….

]]> By: TA http://culturematters.wordpress.com/2008/10/19/more-on-the-militarys-culture-rush-brian-selmeski-interview/#comment-4746 TA Thu, 30 Oct 2008 14:02:42 +0000 http://culturematters.wordpress.com/?p=521#comment-4746 This echoes Ian Roxborough's observation about Minerva in which he reminds scholars: "It is these people, the military intellectuals, with whom we will be in contact. They already know quite a bit about us: many of them have graduate degrees in history and the social sciences. In fact, they know more about us than we do about them. They have spent time amongst us, and we have (generally speaking) not spent much time among them. Analogically speaking, they are the anthropologists, and we are the tribe. The flow of knowledge is going largely in one direction. We cannot have a meaningful conversation if we only hold it on our territory; we need to send members of our tribe into their territory to learn more about them and engage them in locales where they set the frames for discussion." http://www.ssrc.org/essays/minerva/2008/10/29/roxborough/ This echoes Ian Roxborough’s observation about Minerva in which he reminds scholars:

“It is these people, the military intellectuals, with whom we will be in contact. They already know quite a bit about us: many of them have graduate degrees in history and the social sciences. In fact, they know more about us than we do about them. They have spent time amongst us, and we have (generally speaking) not spent much time among them. Analogically speaking, they are the anthropologists, and we are the tribe. The flow of knowledge is going largely in one direction. We cannot have a meaningful conversation if we only hold it on our territory; we need to send members of our tribe into their territory to learn more about them and engage them in locales where they set the frames for discussion.”

http://www.ssrc.org/essays/minerva/2008/10/29/roxborough/

]]>