So in the beginning of the book the author spends some time giving something of a primer on the Marine Corps. Its interesting to read because I've never really stepped back to think about some of the nuances and details. For example he talks about the really junior guys (Pvt-LCpl) and says that basically there are four groups: boots, outcasts, former LCpls, then the giant mass that is the LCpl. Boots are obvious, and as he interestingly noted, are generally viewed as communal property. Everyone else belongs to a particular fireteam / squad / platoon / company, and even if you outrank someone you can't just grab them and tell them what to do. Boots are the exception. Outcasts are those individuals who are former LCpls and were busted down for doing something really stupid or un-Marine like. They aren't boots, but are treated somewhat like them, though they will often try to bully the actual boots. Former LCpls are the guys who were busted down for less critical issues -- usually underage drinking or similar. They are definitely not boots, and retain some respect. They will boss around the boots when they are lumped in with them. Then there is the mass of LCpls. "Being a LCpl is like being caught in a real-life version of Lord of the Flies. Boots survive by doing what they are told. LCpls excel through alpha male characteristics of strength, cleverness, skill, and force of personality. LCpls who possess greater leadership ability ... are promoted into more senior positions, such as SAW gunners. The strongest among them become fire team leaders. They are given omnipotent power by the gods of the Marine Corps over the lives of three other Marines".
He goes on to deconstruct other areas as well. He talks about the umbiquitous "who you with?" question and how the response is almost always just two number (i.e. 3/11) and what that means in the Marine Corps.
There are other areas he goes into, but basically I think he does a pretty good job giving people an introduction into the background and mindset of Marines.
The area I found most interesting is his treatment of the Marine Corps view of Order/Disorder. He talks about how the Marine Corps embraces both incredible detailed Order and fully chaotic Disorder. More specifically how individuals, especially leaders, have to walk a balance between the two while paying respect to both. He brings up the standard rank and file Order down to every squad leader has a list of every item each of his Marines has and their serial numbers. The list go on up the chain, so every platoon / company etc has some massive amount of detail - trying to establish Order. Operations are planned, briefed, rehearsed, prepared for, inspected, etc -- again trying to establish Order. Then however there is the ultimate Disorder - combat - which Marines seem to be able to excel in, and which the Marine Corps tells Marines they have to be able to operate in. On top of that leaders have to establish their own balance between the two for everything. Follow every rule and you'll be know as an unimaginative, uninspired robot and Marines will think less of you and not want to follow you. Flaunt every rule and you'll be know as a loose cannon and not a team player. Marines will think less of you and not want to follow you.
One example -- any squad leader worth his salt will not let another squad leader tell his Marines what to do (except for the communal boots for things like working parties). This, he says, is adherence to order. Trying to make things and authority clear and unambiguous. However that same squad leader, faced with a disciplinary problem within his squad, will shun the orderly and established disciplinary enforcement process. He will prefer, and be more respected for, not following the rules and coming up with his own methods. He will even be given at least tacit approval by the chain of command to do this. In fact, it is almost viewed as a failure to resort to the orderly and established process.
On a broader level he talks about the extreme order and discipline the Marine Corps is known for. Then he talks about how the Marine Corps also prides itself on an 'expeditionary mindset' -- embracing the disorder, and basically saying "just drop us off and we'll figure things out". This leads to things like in 29Palms - hey I need a new radiator hose for my HMMWV. Well I'll put in a request for one, but I know they won't get one here soon, so I'll see if I can scrounge one off of that old truck they dropped off for use as an arty target.
I'm rambling, but I thought it was quite interesting. The Marine Corps own yin/yang concept. I know you think I'm such a big rule follower,* but you should know that in the field I'm known to be more on the disorder side. I always get into a little trouble for being too much of a cowboy about things. Even here. (The latest was not wearing a cover on Camp Fallujah. We come in in full combat attire. We de-gear and walk the 50 yards from our vehicles to the chow hall. I don't see a point in covers, and we don't always know when we are coming in so sometimes we don't have them with us. It irritates the hell out of people because "its a base regulation to wear covers blah blah blah" -- I've been talked to a couple times about me or my guys not wearing covers).
One last interesting tie in. He knows how Marines love the Spartans and their view of things. He brings up that the order/disorder and rules/expeditionary mindset is similar to what the Spartans tried to instill. He brings up the Spartan agoge - the military training all Spartan males had to attend starting at age 7. At the agoge the boys were not given enough food, but they were also drilled on the importance of laws and rules. The Spartans intentionally made it so the boys had to steal food to survive (or at least to thrive in the agoge) even though it was specifically against Spartan law (the thing they were training to protect). The Spartans tried to instill respect for the orderly, but also a resourcefulness and ability to operate within disorder.
Bookmarks