Veteran worship obscures criticism of military policy
The systematic elevation of veterans to untouchable moral status serves a specific function: it makes criticism of military policy virtually impossible without appearing to attack the people who executed it.
This is not coincidental. It is a sophisticated form of value manipulation that protects institutional power by weaponizing human sympathy.
The Shield Function
“Support our troops” has become the ultimate conversation terminator. Question a military intervention, and you’re accused of disrespecting those who served. Criticize defense spending, and you’re painted as ungrateful to those who “defended your freedom.”
This creates an impenetrable shield around military policy. The personal sacrifice of individuals becomes a protective barrier for institutional decisions they had no role in making.
Veterans themselves become unwilling human shields for the very systems that deployed them.
The Individual vs Institution Conflation
The fundamental sleight of hand operates through deliberate category confusion.
Military policy is created by politicians, defense contractors, and strategic planners—none of whom face combat. Yet criticism of their decisions is deflected by invoking the sacrifice of enlisted personnel who executed those decisions.
This is like making it impossible to criticize a CEO’s strategy by constantly invoking the hard work of employees. The conflation is so complete that most people don’t even notice it happening.
The Moral Hierarchy Construction
Veteran worship establishes a moral hierarchy where military service grants special authority on all policy matters, regardless of expertise or area of service.
A logistics specialist becomes a foreign policy expert. A mechanic becomes a strategic analyst. A communications officer becomes an authority on international relations.
This elevation serves power by creating a class of people whose opinions carry disproportionate weight while being more likely to defend the institutions they served.
The Perpetual Debt Narrative
Society is told it owes veterans an unpayable debt. This debt extends beyond reasonable benefits and support to include intellectual deference.
The narrative goes: “They sacrificed for your freedom, so you owe them your agreement.”
This emotional debt becomes a form of ideological control. Questioning military policy becomes a form of ingratitude, a violation of the social contract with those who served.
The Historical Amnesia Function
Veteran worship requires selective memory about military history.
Veterans of failed or morally questionable conflicts must be honored equally with those of clearly defensive wars. This creates pressure to retroactively justify every military action to maintain the consistency of veteran reverence.
Vietnam becomes a “noble cause.” Iraq becomes “fighting for freedom.” Afghanistan becomes “defending democracy.”
The need to honor veterans becomes a need to honor the wars they fought, regardless of their actual purpose or outcome.
The Dissent Suppression Mechanism
Military families and veteran communities often contain the most informed critics of military policy—people who understand the human cost of strategic incompetence.
But veteran worship creates pressure within these communities to remain publicly supportive. Criticism from inside the military community is seen as betrayal of the brotherhood.
This silences the voices most qualified to offer meaningful critique.
The Corporate Capture Element
Defense contractors and military-industrial interests actively promote veteran worship because it serves their business model.
Every criticism of overpriced weapons systems, unnecessary conflicts, or strategic blunders can be deflected by invoking veteran sacrifice. The human cost of bad policy becomes a reason to continue bad policy.
“How can you cut the defense budget when veterans are suffering?” becomes a way to maintain profitable contracts regardless of their actual effectiveness.
The Automation Paradox
As warfare becomes increasingly automated and technological, the symbolic function of veterans becomes more important than their operational role.
Drone warfare requires fewer traditional soldiers but more veteran mythology. The human element must be preserved symbolically even as it becomes strategically irrelevant.
This creates a bizarre situation where society worships an increasingly obsolete form of warfare while ignoring the actual nature of modern military operations.
The International Comparison
Other developed nations honor military service without creating intellectual prohibition zones around defense policy.
German, Japanese, or Canadian societies can have robust debates about military spending and foreign intervention without being accused of disrespecting veterans.
This suggests that veteran worship is not a natural consequence of military service but a deliberately constructed cultural phenomenon.
The False Choice Architecture
The entire framework rests on a false choice: either you worship veterans or you hate them.
This eliminates the rational middle ground of honoring individual service while criticizing institutional policy. It makes nuanced discussion impossible by forcing binary emotional positions.
You must choose between uncritical support for all military policy or being labeled as anti-veteran.
The Value System Inversion
In a healthy democracy, institutions should be scrutinized more heavily than individuals. Policy should be debated more vigorously than personal sacrifice.
Veteran worship inverts this hierarchy. Individual reverence trumps institutional accountability. Personal honor becomes more important than policy effectiveness.
This inversion serves power by making systemic criticism emotionally and socially costly.
The Recognition Without Examination Model
True respect for veterans would include honest examination of the policies that put them in harm’s way.
Sending people to fight in unnecessary wars and then honoring their sacrifice while refusing to question the decision-making that created the sacrifice is a form of institutional sadism.
Real support for troops would include holding leadership accountable for how they deploy human resources.
The Democratic Deficit
In functioning democracies, citizens have the right and responsibility to question how their military is used.
Veteran worship undermines this democratic function by making military policy criticism socially unacceptable. It creates a sacred sphere where democratic accountability cannot penetrate.
This is fundamentally incompatible with civilian control of the military and democratic governance.
────────────────
The highest form of respect for military service is ensuring that such service is only requested when absolutely necessary and for clearly defined, achievable objectives.
Veteran worship serves the opposite function: it protects the system that wastes military service on poorly conceived missions while making criticism of that waste impossible.
True honor would demand better.