Military Education Must Include Civil-Military Relations History to Preserve Democratic Norms

Source: Kori Schake. "The Lecture I Couldn’t Give - The Atlantic." March 22, 2026. www.theatlantic.com

The Gist

The author argues that military schools should keep teaching about the history of civilian control over the military, especially now when politicians are increasingly using the military for political purposes. She believes this education is crucial for maintaining democracy and military professionalism.

Conclusion

Military educational institutions should continue teaching the history of civil-military relations, especially now when political leaders are increasingly politicizing the military and restricting military education content

Premises

  1. The Defense Department under Pete Hegseth has excluded people and institutions from military education for ideological reasons, creating a climate where subordinates preemptively comply with restrictions
  2. America's Founding Fathers feared standing armies threatening civilian governance, making civil-military relations a foundational concern requiring ongoing education
  3. Historical precedent shows that proper civil-military relations developed through examples like George Washington's deference to civilian authority and key legislation like the Posse Comitatus Act
  4. Recent political leaders, particularly Trump, have increasingly politicized the military by deploying forces over local objections and using military personnel as political props
  5. The military's ability to resist politicization depends on the professionalism of the force, which requires understanding the historical foundations of civilian control
  6. Restricting military education on civil-military relations undermines the very knowledge needed to maintain democratic governance and military professionalism

Assumptions

View this argument on LogicFirst.ai