DRIFT THE UNMOORING OF AMERICAN MILATARY POWER

BENJAMIN OSEI ETHICS 5337 SPRING 2012

Drift" is an extended coverage of American culture as becoming militarized at the expense of ethical, social technological, economic, and international/global programs. The writer, Rachel Maddow's theory is that there has been a persistent battle between the priorities of the national security sector and civilian life, with national security winning. Maddow said the United States is engaged in a continual war, the effects of which most Americans do not feel. This comes at a high moral cost to the country. The result, she believes, is that the civilian population feels that the military is not engaged in protecting the country, but the governments interests. From my reading, I realized that the military has become isolated from the political process. By making it easy to go to war for whatever reason without angering Americans, the war for profit machine in the United States has been allowed to grow out of control because Americans have become desensitized to the horrors of war. It stems from the fact that the past six presidents since Reagan has tried to make a case for war for political gains without getting the full buy-in of both congress (which represents the people within the arms of government) and the American people. There is a difference in what is best for the American people and what is best for the world. Just like what is better for the future, and what is better for the present or what is better for the employer or the employee. No question about it the American people have lost almost all control of this government process. Congress themselves may have lost control of this government if war can be initiated and the government only informs congress we are going to war after getting approval from the United Nations. Maddows theme in the book consistently sounds off a warning about the deep erosion of perhaps the central aim and claim of the country's founding document: War is costly not only militarily but also the loss of precious American lives. A government of free people must place the responsibility for deciding to use force in the hands of the people or else we will continue to have a government of, by and for war. When I read the book, the theme that kept ringing in my ear was communication. It is true that each of the wars that were fought had a justifiable reason but issue is how it was executed. Some were for political gains and pondering to a special interest as in the case of Reagan leading to his reelection. However, communication and getting the peoples involvement in the decision-making, was mostly lacking. The resounding theme of communication in Maddows book can easily be applied to organizations. It must be noted that communication is an effective tool in the success of a business or an organization. I will link the president to the CEO of a company, congress as the upper level management, and the American people as the board of directors, shareholders. This is a purely principal and agent issue as discussed in class. When the CEO of a company is not able to effectively communication his or her vision to both the upper level managers and shareholders, it is bound to fail though it may be the right thing to do for the

company at that point in time. Leaders of organizations need to ensure their operational strategy is well communicated through a top-down approach. Communicating with your employees is central to managing your workforce. Poor communication can result in misunderstandings and mistrust as seen in these long drawn out wars in the US. Introducing proper procedures for informing and consulting with ones employees can take time and money but one will benefit from improved products, productivity and competitiveness. Other benefits of effective communication and information sharing include improved employee commitment and job satisfaction, particularly if employees understand what the business is trying to achieve and the effect of their contribution, provision of accurate information or guidance, which helps avoid misunderstandings, e.g. on health and safety policies, business performance, staff changes and job structures, improved management decision making, due in part to feedback from employees, improved management/employee relations, improved exchange of ideas and consistent approach and strategy across the business. If employees are given inadequate or unclear instructions, they could act in breach of regulations without meaning to it. A good example is how organizations build or mold their ethical identity. It may be possible that the CEO and upper management have a good handle on the corporate culture. If they dont do a good job of passing that information down to the employees, they could run into major problems. In times where the CEO has to make a decision about the future of the company (could relate to the gulf war during Bush seniors term), the best tool the CEO has is communicating effectively to the shareholders (the American people in times of war). The lack thereof of basic communication around the problem, what has been found, the goals of any practical solution, and what plan is in place to prevent another occurrence of the issue, could make the shareholders cringe. In conclusion, leaders need to know how they got to where they are just like the president of the United States ought to know how they got there. A wise woman once told me that the people you meet going upstairs, are the same people youd meet coming downstairs. When the leaders of organizations turn to greed in order to fulfill their selfish dreams, it hinders progress and constraints prosperity. A moral hazard is caused in the long run and the effects could be unprecedented. Presidents have lost elections because they pandered to special interests and placed their political future ahead of the needs of the electorate. Some CEOs are serving prison time because of the need to fulfill their personal aspirations. I can safely say that the best for any leader to be successful across the E-STEPING framework is to sell his vision to the shareholders/stakeholders convincingly enough to be their full buy-in before development and execution. It is the main idea that sticks to me in Maddows book Drift.