The Minerva Consortium

[marct]

From Savage Minds

Camelot Revisited: The Department of Defense’s New Plan for Academia
Posted by oneman

In a recent speech before the Association of American Universities, Defense Secretary Robert Gates described his ideas for a new military-academic partnership. The “Minerva Consortium”, as he calls his vision, would offer funding and research assistance for researchers across academia, in order to build up the military’s understanding of the world the operate in and create a pool of experts the military can draw on.

More...

The text of SECDEF Gate's speech is here.

[SteveMetz]

Originally Posted by marct

From Savage Minds


The text of SECDEF Gate's speech is here.

Thanks a lot--I'd gone all morning without anything pushing my blood pressure into the red zone.

Summary of the blog entry: "It would really irritate me if people doing policy relevant research had more money than I do for my irrelevant research."

[marct]

Originally Posted by SteveMetz

Thanks a lot--I'd gone all morning without anything pushing my blood pressure into the red zone.

Now Steve, you know I only posted it when the sensors mentioned that your blood pressure was dropping to unacceptably low levels !

Originally Posted by SteveMetz

Summary of the blog entry: "It would really irritate me if people doing policy relevant research had more money than I do for my irrelevant research."

LOLOL - One line from the speech that really caught my attention was

The government and the Department of Defense need to engage additional intellectual disciplines – such as history, anthropology, sociology, and evolutionary psychology.

Evolutionary psychology? Man, perilously close to bringing biology back into Anthropology - something that is generally verbotten (see here from here). Actually, I thought the SM entry was pretty mild on the whole .

There are some very interesting, IM, areas in this proposed consortium including a number that I would really like to work on since they tie diretly into my own research. Then again, the likelihood that my university would join or that DoD would even consider accepting a Canadian university is prety darn low .

[SteveMetz]

This issue is of intense interest to me. One of my institute's missions is to serve as a bridge between academia and the U.S. Army. We do this in a number of ways: 1) our own professors are active in their academic professions; 2) we co-organize conferences with universities and scholarly organizations (I'm heading for one this Sunday dealing with AFRICOM where our partner is Women in International Security); 3) we publish policy-relevant research by academics, some contracted, some gratis; 4) we have a couple of visiting professor slots (currently held by Phil Williams of Pitt and Sheila Jager of Oberlin); and, 5) we are trying to get pre-doctoral and post-doctoral fellowships.

My sense is that certain disciplines and subdisciplines are inherently adverse to--depending on one's perspective--cooperating with the military or doing policy relevant research. Anthro seems to be the worst. Within political science, there is a lot of hostility from Middle East and Latin America specialists, some from Africanists, and less from other subfields.

[marct]

Hi Steve,

Originally Posted by SteveMetz

This issue is of intense interest to me. One of my institute's missions is to serve as a bridge between academia and the U.S. Army....

My sense is that certain disciplines and subdisciplines are inherently adverse to--depending on one's perspective--cooperating with the military or doing policy relevant research. Anthro seems to be the worst. Within political science, there is a lot of hostility from Middle East and Latin America specialists, some from Africanists, and less from other subfields.

Oh, I agree that, on the whole, there is a lot of vocal antipathy from within Anthropology to the military, especially the US military. I read Hugh Gusterson's piece in the latest Annual Review of Anthropology and was pretty peeved with his "conclusions".

More empirically, certain subjects are urgently in need of ethnographic study.

• In war-torn countries: life alongside landmines, the role of diasporic communities in inciting war, the cultural consequences of childhood soldiering, war orphans, the new mercenary companies, suicide bombing, and insurgency, the role of religion in combat, the efficacy of truth and reconciliation commissions, and resource conflicts and war.
• Within the United States: veterans groups; the cultural dynamics of basic training; ROTC; military blogs; the debate on gays and the military; the Senate Armed Services Committee; military contractors and lobbyists; the militarization of public health since 9/11; video games; Hollywood war cultures; and activist campaigns against military recruiting,landmines,and new weapons systems.

Anthropology has much theoretical and empirical work to do to illuminate militarism, the source of so much suffering in the world today. If we sell our skills to the national security state, we will just become part of the problem.

What truly bothered me was that this appeared, to me at least, to be the agenda of an activist and not a scientist. Now, I have nothing against people being activists, but I do have a major problem with people passing off activism as science.

In a similar manner, and again speaking personally, I have only a limited interest in public policy, but I happen to have a great interest in the perceptual and symbolic models that shape policy and in how that relates to lived reality (implementation). To me, both of these are scientific issues surrounding how humans construct, negotiate and maintain their "realities". Let me toss out the last part of Hugh's conclusion:

Anthropology has much theoretical and empirical work to do to illuminate militarism, the source of so much suffering in the world today. If we sell our skills to the national security state, we will just become part of the problem.

and take this a clause/meme at at time.

• Anthropology has much theoretical and empirical work to do to illuminate militarism, - Totally agree, this is a very valid statement, IMO, on an area of research.
• the source of so much suffering in the world today. - Analog of the "guns kill people" meme; unproven, except in the most obvious sense, and an irrelevant and misleading statement
• If we sell our skills to the national security state, - a) assuming a market exchange relationship, b) assuming that your[our] skills are not already being sold to other actors, c) assuming that "the State" is the sole purchesor of these skills (what about AQ?), d) assuming that "the state" exists in a specific form (i.e. "national security" with implications of X-Files-esque paranoic conspiracy theories).
• we will just become part of the problem. - analog to "if you're not part of the solution, you are part of the problem" meme; unjustified assumption of reality as a series of polar oppositions; uncritical and unthinking in that by denying any relationship of X to Y a strong (negative) relationship between X and Y is created.

I think you get what I mean when I say that this agenda is that of an activist and not a scientist .

On t'other hand, I think that the Minerva consortium, if handled well, has the possibility of actually allowing some of the scientists inside Anthropology to get some good research done. A present, that's only a glimmering hope - we'll just have to wait and see.

[SteveMetz]

I myself could see some value in an ethnographic analysis of the delusional leftist ideology that seems to dominate much of academic anthropology.

[marct]

Originally Posted by SteveMetz

I myself could see some value in an ethnographic analysis of the delusional leftist ideology that seems to dominate much of academic anthropology.

I'm just reading an LA Times article linked in one of the Inside Higher Ed comments on that very subject .

[SteveMetz]

I'm thinking this through. If I'm going to go out and do field research among academic anthropologists for an ethnographic analysis, I'll need to fit in enough to not alarm them. I'll go for birkenstock's with socks, and a Che Guevara tee shirt. That should work.

[marct]

Originally Posted by SteveMetz

I'm thinking this through. If I'm going to go out and do field research among academic anthropologists for an ethnographic analysis, I'll need to fit in enough to not alarm them. I'll go for birkenstock's with socks, and a Che Guevara tee shirt. That should work.

Well, in California, maybe . Up here in Canada, sandals and socks are fairly normal from, oh, March to December . If you really want to fit in in terms of clothes, don't wear a suit - toss on jeans and an old shirt w/ a sweater. Oh yeah, if you want to fit in with the real Anthropologists, etter practice up on drinking . If you want a friendly field run, come on up to Ottawa for CASCA next month.

[SteveMetz]

So anthropologists aren't like NGO types who never wear anything except black on black on black? You can go into a packed auditorium in DC and pick out the NGO folks by that uniform.

But, in fairness, other tribes have their uniforms. Military guys in civilian clothes will have a navy blazer, khakis, and a J.C. Penny tie that is knotted about three inches too short. Cheap digital watch set to beep every fifteen minutes required. One of those green, cloth covered notebooks a plus. My own tribe--the primal wonks--is more in the Brooks Brothers or Joseph Banks suits with french cuff shirts, a fountain pen (Visconti in my case--Mont Blanc is too "look at me--I just passed the bar exam"!), and a mechanical movement Swiss watch (mine is Oris).

[marct]

Originally Posted by SteveMetz

So anthropologists aren't like NGO types who never wear anything except black on black on black? You can go into a packed auditorium in DC and pick out the NGO folks by that uniform.

Nah - just look for the worst dressed men and the women with the biggest jewelry . And what's wrong with black on black?!? I like the way I look in a tux (or riding cape for that matter; more importantly, s does my wife ).

[marct]

Originally Posted by SteveMetz

But, in fairness, other tribes have their uniforms. Military guys in civilian clothes will have a navy blazer, khakis, and a J.C. Penny tie that is knotted about three inches too shrt. My own tribe--the primal wonks--is more in the Brooks Brothers or Joseph Banks suits with french cuff shirts.

I used to play "guess the sub-discipline" at American Sociology Association meetings - too simple a game . Yeah, clothing and other forms of appearance (hair styles and length, jewelry, body stance, etc.) are all tribal markers.

[Stan]

Anthropological Perspectives on Clothing, Fashion, and Culture

These links should clear up any confusion between Africans in trousers, and NGOs in conferences with Anthropologists

Abstract Clothing research has attracted renewed interest in anthropology

An Anthropologist's Dress Code: Some brief comments

Steve, sounds like the military are still attending "Dress for Success" (Typical DIA classes back in the early 80s). I bought my shirts from Land's End however

[SteveMetz]

I once wore a $1200 suit when I got called for jury duty, figuring no lawyer would want someone on the jury dressed better than they were. That cost me three days of my life.

[Randy Brown]

At least, in evoking Minerva, the ancient Roman goddess of warriors and wisdom (and commerce, poetry, medicine, crafts--she was apparently a bit of a professional student), the Pentagon didn't come up with a credibility-zapping name, like the "Center for the Non-Lethal Study of Indigenous Peoples" or somesuch.

A couple of random thoughts:

ROTC, Foreign Languages, the Off-Campus Movement

I appreciated the SECDEF's comments regarding ROTC and study of foreign languages. I find it interesting that, since my own undergraduate experiences back in the 1980s, my alma mater has since eliminated its foreign language department. The university now encourages students to study abroad for a semester or two. It seems like it would be a good thing for future Army (in my case) leaders to be exposed in this way, not only for language-acquisition, but for developing cultural awarness. Too many lieutenants' first experiences with someone unlike themselves happen inside the sandbox. Better to build perspective prior to deployment.

As a personal aside, I also appreciated his comments regarding ROTC-off-campus movement. Back in the day, it was the sociology faculty that initiated such a movement on my undergraduate campus. ROTC was subsequently moved into an off-campus building, but the program there, I'm pleased to report, continues to this day. Ironically, the sociology tribe backfilled the office space that had been academically cleansed of the warrior caste.

The morale to the anecdote: As a potentially secondary effect, I'd hope that efforts such as the Minerva Consortium would help break down some walls within the ivory tower, and build some mutual understanding among those wearing tweed jackets and those wearing a uniform.

Applied vs. Basic Soft-Science

I wonder whether Minerva Consortium efforts might also result in some questionable avenues for academic research. I recently spent a couple of years on the campus of a land-grant (heavy on the engineering, design, and applied-science stuff) university, on which some architecture professors were targeting "homeland security" grant monies. Homeland security was a big pot o' gold, particularly when compared to the grant amounts typically available to the humanities.

In this citizen-soldier-taxpayer's opinion, the research proposals I encountered there passed the common-sense test only if they resulted in a deliverable product/concept applicable, in the relatively short-term, to the soldier/field/battlespace.

In short, in comes down to Ye Olde Question of applied vs. basic research. The proposed applications had better make sense, too. In terms of architecture, for example, I'm all for studies such as "how to construct or manufacture lighter and stronger blast-walls," but not so much a fan of "how to make temporary U.S. military housing feel more like home, while also making the exterior reflect the cultural context of its surroundings."

In terms of anthropology, I'm more apt to argue for a hands-on "community planning" approach--how can we support governance at a local level, for example--rather than a more purely academic approach about this sheik, his father, and his father's father.

Anyone have any king-and-grantmaker-for-a-day suggestions on how to ensure any future Minerva research funding would best be used? What metrics would be applied?

In the meantime, I'll be dusting off my senior design project--an interpretative dance about building community consensus around a village center constructed of concrete-impregnated Kevlar.

[marct]

Originally Posted by SteveMetz

I once wore a $1200 suit when I got called for jury duty, figuring no lawyer would want someone on the jury dressed better than they were. That cost me three days of my life.

Should have worn the $12,000 suit then !

On another note, do you have any gut feeling if this new consortium/program will influence SSI at all?

[SteveMetz]

Originally Posted by marct

Should have worn the $12,000 suit then !

On another note, do you have any gut feeling if this new consortium/program will influence SSI at all?

My $12,000 suit was at the cleaners.

Hard to say. We're not looking for new missions but if OSD comes a callin, I'm sure we'd answer.

[marct]

Hi Randy,

Originally Posted by Randy Brown

At least, in evoking Minerva, the ancient Roman goddess of warriors and wisdom (and commerce, poetry, medicine, crafts--she was apparently a bit of a professional student), the Pentagon didn't come up with a credibility-zapping name, like the "Center for the Non-Lethal Study of Indigenous Peoples" or somesuch.

Probably because she was the last surviving Etruscan deity in pantheon of late comers . But, yes, a good name choice.

Originally Posted by Randy Brown

I appreciated the SECDEF's comments regarding ROTC and study of foreign languages. I find it interesting that, since my own undergraduate experiences back in the 1980s, my alma mater has since eliminated its foreign language department. The university now encourages students to study abroad for a semester or two. It seems like it would be a good thing for future Army (in my case) leaders to be exposed in this way, not only for language-acquisition, but for developing cultural awarness. Too many lieutenants' first experiences with someone unlike themselves happen inside the sandbox. Better to build perspective prior to deployment.

Touch hard for me to comment on since we don't have anything like that up here. I will note that my university (Carleton in Ottawa) is actually expanding its language programs (especially Mandarin) as well as international placements. The program I teach in, Directed Interdisciplinary Studies, really pushes placements and has for decades.

Originally Posted by Randy Brown

I wonder whether Minerva Consortium efforts might also result in some questionable avenues for academic research. ...
In terms of anthropology, I'm more apt to argue for a hands-on "community planning" approach--how can we support governance at a local level, for example--rather than a more purely academic approach about this sheik, his father, and his father's father.

I find myself in a rather odd position here; I am primarily a theoretician who does an incredible amount of applied work. If we use the physical sciences as a model, I would think that the best avenue to take would be some fairly wide open basic research. I think that limitations to studies of governance issues or community building is a major mistake (BTW, I've studied and theorized about these issues in a variety of settings). Also, as an FYI, one of the classics in kinship studies, E.E. Evans-Pritchard's The Nuer used fieldwork that was paid for by the Colonial Office at the request of the British military.

One of the things I would like to see would be a bonus for multi- / inter-disciplinary proposals that incorporate both theoretical and applied research from many different disciplines.

[selil]

I found the article disturbing based on the meetings and audience. DOD, is attempting to use a hierarchical model to reach academia and by going through the University presidents hopes to achieve some objective. Yet University presidents are basically figure heads who are seeking funds. Especially the R1 types. Oh, and don’t let me started on R1 theory theocracies where applied science is a death knell. So, if they (DOD) want to get academia involved their method is to jump past the independent researchers and grab the top people who have the least influence on the scholarship being done.

Why didn’t they invite the top researchers in the disciplines they want to see completed? It wouldn’t take a genius to roll up the names of the top researchers in specific disciplines. Oh, wait they are trying to repair the discord that exists. I can just imagine my University President going down to the gray beards in liberal arts (R1s are heavily populated by aging baby-boomers) and saying forget the 60s lets go place nice with the Army. Oooh. That might be fun to watch….

Minerva? The virgin goddess of warriors? Virgins and warriors are few and far between on our campus.

[marct]

Hi Sam,

Originally Posted by selil

I found the article disturbing based on the meetings and audience. DOD, is attempting to use a hierarchical model to reach academia and by going through the University presidents hopes to achieve some objective. Yet University presidents are basically figure heads who are seeking funds.

Well, I suspect he already had an in with that group given that he used to be one. While university presidents may be figureheads, they do have influence on some policy decisions, especially if there are great wacks of money involved.

Originally Posted by selil

Why didn’t they invite the top researchers in the disciplines they want to see completed? It wouldn’t take a genius to roll up the names of the top researchers in specific disciplines. Oh, wait they are trying to repair the discord that exists. I can just imagine my University President going down to the gray beards in liberal arts (R1s are heavily populated by aging baby-boomers) and saying forget the 60s lets go place nice with the Army. Oooh. That might be fun to watch….

Yeah, I can just imagine his talking with Hugh, David and Katherine !!!!

Actually, his best bet is to establish a series of "independent researcher" funding awards for social scientists who have been marginalized in the academy (by guess who?) and for junior faculty and PhD students working in the areas.

Originally Posted by selil

Minerva? The virgin goddess of warriors? Virgins and warriors are few and far between on our campus.

Total misunderstanding of the root meaning of "virgin" - technically it means "unowned by a man" and she certainly was that .