Books in Brief: Young Men and Military Service

Young Men and Military Service, by Jerome Johnston and Jerald G. Bachman (Institute for Social Research, U. of Michigan, 254 pp., $8; $5, paper). This is the fifth part of a research project that interviewed 2,213 young men as they progressed through and beyond high school. One result is some valuable evidence on who enlists in the Armed Forces and why: The enlistees were not of lower intelligence or from deprived backgrounds, they were not individuals who had done poorly in school or who were looking for an easy job. Instead, the main difference between enlistees and non-enlistees (aside from anti-Vietnam sentiment) appears to hinge on the lure of higher education versus immediate financial gain. The authors therefore suggest using high-school counselors to explain an expanded GI Bill— one which would provide up to $10,000 for college expenses in exchange for four years of service (before or after college). The arguments against a volunteer army are completely demolished in Chapter Eleven, but the authors admit that voluntarism alone will not automatically provide a broadly based force with a substantial proportion of non-career men. Educational incentives would appeal to those who aren’t responsive to short-term monetary rewards, and excessive professionalization could be prevented by encouraging turnover through, for example, partial pensions before twenty years of service. The unique achievement of this study is that it asks what motivates young men to enlist, and then designs a system of incentives to attract the right type of volunteer army.

AR

About the Author

A. Reynolds

Featured Tags

Young Men and Military Service, by Jerome Johnston and Jerald G. Bachman (Institute for Social Research, U. of Michigan, 254 pp., $8; $5, paper). This is the fifth part of a research project that interviewed 2,213 young men as they progressed through and beyond high school. One result is some valuable evidence on who enlists in the Armed Forces and why: The enlistees were not of lower intelligence or from deprived backgrounds, they were not individuals who had done poorly in school or who were looking for an easy job. Instead, the main difference between enlistees and non-enlistees (aside from anti-Vietnam sentiment) appears to hinge on the lure of higher education versus immediate financial gain. The authors therefore suggest using high-school counselors to explain an expanded GI Bill— one which would provide up to $10,000 for college expenses in exchange for four years of service (before or after college). The arguments against a volunteer army are completely demolished in Chapter Eleven, but the authors admit that voluntarism alone will not automatically provide a broadly based force with a substantial proportion of non-career men. Educational incentives would appeal to those who aren’t responsive to short-term monetary rewards, and excessive professionalization could be prevented by encouraging turnover through, for example, partial pensions before twenty years of service. The unique achievement of this study is that it asks what motivates young men to enlist, and then designs a system of incentives to attract the right type of volunteer army.