Back in the bad old days, once known as the brown
boot Army but probably better known in the modern era as the
pre-PC military, the prevailing philosophy was "do
the best job you can". Most people were glad to have a job,
almost any job, and they exchanged their skills for some economic
security. As one old dog put it: "If you dig ditches,
take pride in digging good ditches!"
This is not to idealize the past, but to accurately depict the
dominant social mores prevailing at the time when this novelty
patch was created. It seems that there has always been (and
probably will always be) feather merchants and
ladder monkeys, but character seems to be
losing out to the khaki maffia in the modern era.
However, as has been re-learned in the latest Mid-East
operations, there are two very different militaries: the one in
garrison and the one on the battlefield ... the former oriented
to red tape and spit 'n' polish, while the
latter is oriented to creativity and innovation
... the former is about appearances while the latter is
about results.
This is not to say that infantrymen are the only ones who ever
actually do something vital to
accomplish the mission; because if it weren't for the cooks and
quartermasters, mechanics and armorers, the proverbial dog
face and red leg and prop jockey couldn't
do their jobs. War has not been about brute strength for the last
several thousand years, but the stereotypical soldier is still
perceived as a knuckle-dragger instead of a surgeon or
scientist ... military intelligence has won more battles than
gross force or foolhardy courage ... so it's understandable that
the average soldier, doing his honorable duty just as loyally as
anyone else, resents the elitists who garner all the glory.
It's important to remember that Wingate's long range
reconnaissance concept was originally a tactic that could be
employed by any suitable unit, and it was only much later that
this doctrine became the exclusive practice of select units.
Furthermore, the history of the early elite units shows
that men retrained from regular units (eg: Merrill's Marauders)
performed as well as those specially selected (eg: Devil's
Brigade) for their expertise. Between World War Two and Vietnam,
both the Army and Marines debated the efficacy of separate
elite units which would deplete regular units of their
most talented personnel ... a state, in the opinion of some, that
harmed both organizations. These detractors advocated for the
retention of superior troops, augmenting their native skills with
special training that would be shared with their parent unit, as
in I & R sections under the battalion S-2. The
ruinous effects of the call in the experts mentality was
demonstrated in both Korea and Vietnam without appreciably
advancing the mission of those conflicts. It remains a valid
debate in the current war on terrorism.
When initially conceived by the old breed, this novelty
Non-Ranger patch was a put-down to the ambitious
overachiever ... those ticket-punching soldiers who
could not do an outstanding job without some kind of special
recognition. Telling a grunt with a starred CIB that he
was not as important as an athletic masochist was truly
offensive; telling the same to an EOD specialist
or door gunner was just stupid, and telling the
same to a supply clerk or truck driver was simply
divisive ... so is it any wonder that the
great unwashed hoi polloi innocently ridiculed their
betters? In time this discrimination would reverse, such
that the Non-Ranger appellation is now a put-down to
anyone who's not invested or festooned with an appropriate
elitist garland.
In and of itself, discrimination is not bad ... it's how we
distinguish between right and wrong, better and best, acceptable
and not. When a meritocracy like the military begins apologizing
for its hierarchy and excusing inferiority, it is inviting defeat
and courting disaster. Contrast the achievements of the
citizen soldier during the intense four years of World
War Two with the hyperextended political compromises of the
professionals since then. Soldiers knew the enemy then and
ignored any rules that didn't win the war; soldiers
likewise know the enemy today, but are prevented from
victory by excessive restrictions. The purpose of the
military is national defense ... it is not supposed to be about
equality or political-correctness ... or about
making all the little people feel good. Soldiers
feel good when they do good ... that is, do
their very best in accomplishing their shared mission!
The Non-Ranger novelty patch existed in two forms: one
resembling the black-and-gold tab awarded to graduates of the
Ranger school, and the other resembling the red-and-white scroll
representing Ranger units. Most were kept with other novelty
militaria, but some were mounted in displays with other
unauthorized insignia. And a very few were actually worn on a
uniform by a couple of defiant individuals ... such irreverence
was well worth its story value once the inevitable rebuke had
been issued.
Whether representing underachievers or overachievers, this
novelty Non-Ranger scroll signifies an historic phase in
the development of the modern military.
|
