Skip to Main Content
Article navigation

Interrelated conflict and transformation are associated with post World War II U.S. military. Conflicts within the command structure are depicted by military officers in their writings. Transformation, characterised by military sociologists as a process of “civilianisation,” has informed understanding over the past few decades. However, neither the officer‐writers‘ “close‐up” perspective nor, in retrospect, the sociologists’ sanguine formulations effectively interrelate structural transformation and conflicts in command. In this respect, these literatures suggest relevant analogies: officer‐writers reflect existential crisis not unlike many traditional peoples experiencing consequences of externally induced economic change; sociological characterisations of “civilianisation,” like those of “modernisation,” fail to account for adverse and conflictual consequences of such “development”. Both the “crisis in command” and sociological failures to explicate it may be related to political economy's transformation of the military. That is the argument entailed in this article.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.
Don't already have an account? Register

Purchased this content as a guest? Enter your email address to restore access.

Please enter valid email address.
Email address must be 94 characters or fewer.
Pay-Per-View Access
$39.00
Rental

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal