Comment by tyingq | Hacker News Reader

Comment by tyingq | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Perhaps you're younger? It was, at one time, pretty common to base the rage abuse on the recruit's religion, place of birth or induction, personal items/photos in the locker/wallet, observations on what made the recruit react, records, tests and so on. It was not hidden or subtle. There was a pretty big swing in the training in the 90's, following the Tailhook and other scandals where the physical stuff, constant swearing and humiliation was phased down. There have been a few rounds of this, over the years, usually following pressure from a scandal.

I've also been in basic training, but in the late 1980's. I definitely got the personalized plan. I also got to hear the DI yell about other people's specific details. Who didn't have a father listed, who had a criminal record, who had to fill out details of pre-induction drug use, who almost flunked the ASVAB, who had a GED instead of a high school diploma, what idiot would be a JEE-HOVAS-WITNESS and so on.

And worse. Didn't happen in my stay, but "blanket party beatings" and other hazing for some recruits was sometimes encouraged. My DI was more careful with physical stuff, though he did have this thing where he would drive his stiff hat brim into your eyes, lips, ears, etc. And quite a lot of saliva sprayed in my face whilst being yelled at.

I grew up with an Army 101st DS/JAG/Judge. They do this at home too. During the same time period. My “personalized” training was reminding me my father left, I wasn’t his son, I was a ne’er-do-well, I’ll never amount to anything, I’m lucky my mother found him, and that I was lazy.

F’king brutal for an 11 year old.

I left home at 17 after I graduated early and scored 99/100 on the ASVABs just to rub it in his face, didn’t join, and went into tech for the last 20 years and made more than he has seen in his lifetime. The training worked.

Damn. It’s really impressive you were able to turn that treatment around into such a motivating force.

I often half-jokingly say I am raising my kids too cushy for them to ever create something extraordinary. Extraordinary achievements take extraordinary effort, and history seems to show the necessary drive for extraordinary efforts comes from brutal lessons that teach endurance and perseverance.

Or as the saying goes…

Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. Weak men create hard times.

Pithy but useless sentiment.

I suggest you read Bret Devereaux's "This Isn't Sparta" [0] series. He dismantles the myth the "hard times" cycle you mentioned.

For contemporary examples, just look at North Korea or Russia. Life is undeniably harder for citizens living in these countries, but where is the expected "strength" and "good times" that should result?

[0] https://acoup.blog/2019/08/16/collections-this-isnt-sparta-p...

I think the problem lies in the fact that this is a necessary but not sufficient component of the cycle.

There’s also an interesting micro vs macro level distinction.

Timeframe too. Are they not yet out of the hard times phase? The idea I think fits into the wider complexity that is life—those operating in the hard times regime are burning a wick that eventually runs out and the situation becomes intolerable or non operational. At which point strong men step up and say “to heck with this I’m going this direction” in the ensuing anarchy and try to erect some degree of order in another direction.

In the complexity of life we can only afford so many mistakes before they take a toll and opportunities become squandered and one is effectively outcompeted. It’s like a sick tree, once under assault nature has creatures that read the signal, insects bore into the wood, fungus finds a home, slow rot begins. All the while the tree still stands, but eventually the strong winds come and in that condition the tree gives way. What precise balance North Korea sits at with their cohesion is probably not known, even by them, just guessed at.

I generally agree however, opportunities are endless if you have the right mindset. Yes, it takes its toll, however a strong will creates oneself and if you have the drive to learn or take a direction, you’ll do it. Bonsai tress are heavily stressed trees whose outcome becomes something remarkable. Some withstanding generations. The support you gain keeps you upright, pruned, watered, and living. Don’t leave yourself alone in the woods, find people willing to give you support.

Surely there was a better example in the book than expecting hard times to lead to good times without regime change?

If there wasn't, the book isn't worth reading.

The strength is there for those that leave and set their kids up for good times in a better place.

This is empirically not true.

To pick just a handful of obvious counter examples: Bill Gates was comfortablely upper middle class, Steve Jobs comfortablely middle class, both with solid family lives.

> This is empirically not true. To pick just a handful of obvious counter examples...

Do you believe "Donald Trump is a liar" to be empirically true?

It just means, "Grit boosts rates of success. Indulgence wakens grit".

Yeah, I don’t see it as motivation or a positive in my life. I was on that track regardless but he still would say things. He didn’t care. Now that’s he old, it’s different, he looks back with fond memories and calls me his son now. Ironic. I don’t hold it against him, it’s who he was. He truly believed it all. 3 tours of Vietnam and 3 Purple Hearts will do that to a man. I respect him. I did things vastly different with my children.

Thank god you are so understanding. There's a whole generation of soldiers who went through Iraq and Afghanistan who're loaded with PTSD and the feeling of "no one understands" is what drives so many to suicide

My brother. My friends. I was the only one who didn’t go. I stood there’s at MEPS with a life-decision. I stand by my decision. I also have a great connection with those who chose different. We, the elder millennials, paid a heavy price for freedom. Like you said, some paid the ultimate price.

Unironically brings a tear to my eye.

Not to be too glib, but what freedom are you talking about here? Iraq and Afghanistan were both invasions on the other side of the globe.

Here-in lies the problem. I’ll leave it as is because freedom means different things to different folks depending on where they stood. I totally get what you’re saying.

Sorry for your losses. I served in Afghanistan and although I came out relatively mentally unscathed I lost a friend and also had soldiers under my command who were completely destroyed by PTSD.

The thing I wrestle with every day is whether it the price was worth it at all.

Thank you for your service and I’ve spoken with many who wrestle with whether it was worth it. Especially the way we left.

Unfortunately the aphorism is created by victims of trauma in order to justify their experience. "Hurt people hurt people" is accurately based in reality.

Intense hardship creates mostly trauma. While highly traumatized individuals may have excellent strategies to cope with specific stresses, they also keep paying the price for it and walk around with the triggers and limitations of the unhealed trauma - which ultimately decrease their ability to face challenges in open, highly creative, sustainable ways.

Think of how much toxic masculinity is mixed into army culture for example.

More that hard times kill everyone who isn't strong. Strong men kill other cultures, and then redefine their own as good. Good times let a thousand flowers bloom. A thousand flowers create conflict and hard times.

Evolution and selection bias are the most powerful forces in the universe. The world is the way it is not because it's just or moral, but because everything that didn't survive, didn't survive.

> Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. Weak men create hard times.

I love that it's mostly chuds sharing this quote, oblivious to the fact that they are the weak men creating the hard times (often unnecessarily too)

I completely agree with this and think it's spot in. Think what you want, but you have to really want something that's difficult to get. If you're too comfortable you lose that hunger.

The recipients sometimes transfer the treatment to home as well. Which is something that I feel that the government should be able to be sued for.

> Perhaps you're younger? It was, at one time, pretty common to base the rage abuse on the recruit's religion, place of birth or induction, personal items/photos in the locker/wallet, observations on what made the recruit react, records, tests and so on. It was not hidden or subtle

Funny that you're mentioning older protocols in a thread about 60s mind control...

The military around that time was seen as a "correctional" institution to turn bad boys into men. Everything you describe about personalized treatment is a necessary step to breaking the willpower of someone with any sort of oppositional/defiance disorder.

You have to figure out their mental weakpoint and rub both shit and salt in that wound to bring them to heel, because they won't listen to reason or respect/fear authority otherwise-- these are the types who'll laugh in the drill instructor's face. They'll do pushups and clean toilets all day out of spite.

All of this should have started changing post-Vietnam.

I have certainly experienced and given 'personalized' treatment, but it was never about going deep on personnel records – and always about the character, performance, and expectations at hand.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com