Burt Lancaster heads the cast as First Sergeant Milt Warden, a top soldier trapped in an infantry company commanded by the incompetent and corrupt Captain Dana "Dynamite" Holmes, played by Philip Ober.
Brian Martin's website Superficially, military forces are a prime root of war. They are responsible for fighting, the organised use of force against human and technological opposition. Without military forces, there would be no war as currently conceived. At a deeper level, military forces may seem to be a consequence of the war system, namely as agents of ruling groups.
Modern military forces are mobilised by the state, as a defence of the interests of state elites against external and internal enemies. Without addressing the dominant social interests in the state, a focus on eliminating the military alone is quite inadequate.
But although military forces do indeed serve the interests of the state, the military is not purely a tool. Military personnel, and especially military elites the officer corps have their own special interests.
Military elites will not sit by idly while state power is dissolved or transferred to interests seen as hostile to military interests. The many military regimes around the world testify to the potential semi-independent political role of military forces.
Military forces may serve state interests, but this is often contingent on state interests serving military interests. The state and the military support each other, and they need to be addressed both separately and jointly.
Even in societies where military forces are overtly subordinate to civilian elites, military perspectives and interests can penetrate deeply into a society's fabric.
This process of militarisation has been especially noticeable in industrialised countries since World War Two. Since then, 'peacetime' military spending has provided a rationale for continuing state intervention into economies and for the turning of industrial and professional efforts toward military priorities.
Bureaucracy can be seen as a root of war because it facilitates the maintenance of elite power and smashes or pre-empts non-hierarchical and self-reliant forms of human interaction.
The military is bureaucratic in form, and indeed in many ways is a pioneer and model bureaucracy. Thus the military is closely intertwined with the state and bureaucracy, two other key roots of war. In addition, as described in the following chapters, the military is strongly interconnected with patriarchy and with science and technology.
The close connection between the military, bureaucracy and state is shown by the revolutionary role sometimes played by military elites. Ellen Kay Trimberger in Revolution from Above has analysed several instances in which a revolution a forcible alteration of class forces has been implemented by military elites acting as state administrators.
She uses the examples of Japan beginning inTurkey in the s, Egypt under Nasser since and Peru under the generals since In each case military bureaucrats, having captured state power without mobilisation of the populace, proceeded to destroy the power of the dominant economic class, such as the aristocracy.
There are several conditions necessary for revolutions to be sponsored from the top ranks of military administration. The military must be independent of the class controlling the means of production, and key members of the military must be politicised and cohesive.
The revolution from above is a response to nationalist movements from below demanding an end to national humiliation at the hands of foreign powers.
And there must be opportunities in the international system for moves to increase national autonomy. The military elites undertake their revolutionary course in order to create the conditions for successful national economic development which had been held back by conservative ruling forces.Bureaucracy is a by-product of s Industrialization as a method to efficiently rationalized complicated processes.
Complicated problems are problems which have a very large yet finite number of variables, which therefore can be broken down into pieces .
“Characteristics of Bureaucracy” Bureaucracy refers to the management of large organizations characterized by hierarchy, fixed rules, impersonal relationships, rigid adherence to procedures, and a highly specialized division of labor. “Characteristics of Bureaucracy” Bureaucracy refers to the management of large organizations characterized by hierarchy, fixed rules, impersonal relationships, rigid adherence to procedures, and a highly specialized division of labor.
Methods to Satirize Military Bureaucracy and Capitalistic Enterprise experiences as a U.S. bombardier during World War II. It was published in . Military bureaucracies are formed out of perceived necessity. The U.S. military bureaucracy took shape during World War II. Dwight Eisenhower gave a great explanation that admirably answers your question as .
Keywords: bureaucracy, officialdom, civil service, military rule Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.