The interior journal. [volume] (Stanford, Ky.) 1912-1984, 1917-03-16
MILITARIsM IN
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Editorial in Lincolnian)


Now at the time Of this American
crisis the question of introducing
militarism into our schools comes up.
This question, as all others has both
an affirmative and negative side to
it. We choose TO support the neg
alive side of il and win cndeavor to
show our reasons for so doing. Muir
der is not one of the arts which we
deem wise to teach i'm our schools
There is good reason TO hope that
before the present generation is
grown this business Of killing will
be out of date All the belligerents
of the present war. now solemnly de-
clare that they are fighting to put an
end to the war. Military drill is out
of harmony with the aims of the
school, since the aim of the school is
to train boys for citizenship by dis
covering and developing the best
and highest intellectual powers in
each, to the end that each may make
the largest contribution to the COM
mon welfare of his country. The
aim of military drill is to train men
in the use of defensive weapons to
the end that citizens may defend
their country by force Of arms. But
defense Of the country is not con-
fined to the force of arms, for our
frst defense is citizenship and our
second is civilization. Therefore let
our schools keep to their tasks of
building up these two great means
of American defense. Military
training has a tendency to divert the
attention Of the boys from the main
purpose of the school. 1t also en-
phasizes government by force rather
than by justice and law. While some
form of military force is necessary
for the state and nation, means
should adequately provide il without
injecting it into our public schools.
1t is said that military training is
good for school boys, for the claim
Is made that it emphasizes mental
alertness, value of bodily health and
gracefuiness, obedience, promptncss
to duty, courage, cooperative SER
vice and subordination of self to a
superior will. Such values are of
primary significance. Experience
shows that well selected exercises
in the gymnasium and various forms
of athletic games furnish better ply
steal training than military tactics.
The chief objection to military train
ing as such for school boys is that it
is physically injurious and often re-
suits In permanent injury. On the
constructive side it offers little of
educational value to boy from the
national preparedness point of view
because it cannot be introduced into
the school on a large enough basis
for the student to learn the tactics
that are used most in war.
The Massachusetts, Commission,
which examined the question Of mil
itary training, after many hearings
reported to the Governor in 1915
that they found overwhelming testi-
mony against the value of this train
ing for boys, except the drill and
marching. Military training does
not teach self-control in obedience
to conscience, but only obedience
through fear. Soldiers when mus
tered out are no more chaste than
other men. Self-control, personal
responsibility, the power to reason
why, must be the Republics truest
defense. In the event that Militia
rism is introduced into the schools it
will take practically all of our boys
who are enrolled in the Senior
Glasses of the various High Schools.
out of school and thus deprive them
of the opportunities of higher ed
ucation.
Since all of our leading educators
are opposed to it and since the Gov
eminent authorities have not thought
it fit plan, we may rest assured for
the present that it will not be
adopted.