By DAVID EPPS
Pastor

The Chief of Staff of the United States Army, General Eric Shinseki, is about to put the 474,000 men and women of the Army in black berets. Up until this point, the beret has been reserved as a reward to those who become part of one of the Army's elite forces. Those who complete Jump School and become U. S. Army paratroopers are awarded the right to wear the maroon beret.

Of course, nearly everyone recognizes the special nature of the green beret worn by U. S. Army Special Forces. But the "black hat" has, at least up until now, been reserved for use by the elite Army Rangers who have to pass through both Jump School and the grueling Ranger training course at Fort Benning.

Comments among members of the Army have been mixed. One officer that I spoke with last week liked the idea. He said that the concept was to see the entire Army as an elite force, thus, the black beret conveyed the idea that everyone in the Army uniform was someone to be reckoned with. He, however, is in the minority. Several other Army officers that I contacted thought the whole thing was a bad idea at best and, at worse, a joke.

Needless to say, members of the Rangers have been howling. Two staff sergeants that I spoke with were so disgusted that they could barely find the words to express their contempt for the general's move. For the past two decades, the black beret has been the exclusive property of the Rangers. Those who pass through the 54 days of desert, swamp and mountain survival training earn the designation of "Ranger," the "Ranger" uniform tab, and the black beret.

General Shinseki's plan is to put all the 1.4 million Army troops in the black beret, including the reserve and National Guard units.

One officer shared with me that the Army is having a morale problem and that the black hat move is an attempt to raise the pride and morale of the soldiers.

The general's action, which will cost taxpayers $26.6 million, is a bad idea all around. First of all, morale is always a leadership problem. The Army's morale has plummeted during the eight years of the Clinton Administration. Poor recruiting results, over-deployment, and a lack of a sense of mission have contributed to the problem. Having a commander-in-chief who had a history of contempt for the military and who engaged in activities that became a global embarrassment didn't help the morale situation.

Secondly, young men and women have been misled and lied to in the Army recruiting efforts. The army is not about "being all that you can be." The army is about defending liberty against aggressors, about breaking things, and killing people, while staying alive and returning home to kith and kin. People who enter the Army with the idea that the military is a kind of "college campus and self-esteem course in uniform" are quickly disillusioned.

And what is this new campaign, urging young people to be "an Army of one"? I realize that the commercial panders to the postmodern autonomous individualistic impulses of isolated youngsters raised in front of computer screens, but it's a stupid idea. The Army is all about teamwork and mission, shared struggles and sacrifices. An "army of one"? Try winning a battle all by yourself and see how long you survive.

Thirdly, one does not make everyone feel better about themselves by dumbing down the process. When children are small, it's perfectly fine to award everyone on the soccer team a trophy just for showing up and completing the season. But, as children get older, trophies and awards should be given only for accomplishment, not for self-esteem.

Self-esteem is gained by earning it through achievement not by saying, "Here's a black hat. Now, don't you feel elite?"

When I was a sophomore, our high school instituted the first junior varsity football team in the school's then-50-year history. For a school that had won more state championships than any other school in Tennessee, a varsity letter in football was a coveted thing, a symbol of adolescent manliness.

That year, I was a starter on the JV team and a third stringer on the varsity. I didn't play enough that year to earn a varsity letter. However, the coach awarded everyone on the JV squad a letter, although it was a different color than the varsity symbol.

Interestingly, almost no one wore it. Many, like me, bought a letter jacket, but refused to sew the JV letter on it, choosing to wait until the space could be filled by the coveted symbol of became meaningless.

Prior to the general's action, the black beret was a symbol of toughness, achievement, pride, and accomplishment. To wear a "black hat" was to be instantly recognized as a member of an elite fighting force and to be seen as a soldier who was a cut above all the rest. Now, thanks to the misguided feel-goodism of the general, the coveted black beret, universal symbol of toughness, worn proudly by Rangers for nearly 20 years, is about to become just a hat.

What will it mean to wear the black beret? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. No wonder the Rangers are howling.

[David Epps is rector of Christ the King Church in Peachtree City. He may be contacted at FatherDavidEpps@aol.com or at www.ChristheKingCEC.com.]

Back to Opinion Home Page | Back to the top of the page