Petraeus’ Anti-insugency Field Manual is an act of Literary and Academic Fraud

As it turns out – similarly to every other glorious event publicly rendered to death by the Bush Administration in collusion with those professionals in government who have prostituted themselves in order to remain in favor with Bush and his cronnies – the anti-insurrgent field manual that was published by the esteemed military academics selected by Petraeus is a resounding instance of academic fraud (DAVID PRICE; Counterpunch 2007).

It appears that the field manual is primarily a conglomeration of unreferenced sources; previously published materials left completely unacknowledged in the field manual – consisting of extracts from anthropology textbooks and other sources of information originally designed to appeal to the intellectual penchants and dispositions of freshmen in college. Apparently, this is the level of intellectual contemplation from which our generaliship finds inspiration when codifying its practices as it contends with what must qualify as both the most pressing as well as the most complex series of interrelated problems associated with the defeat of an insurgency.

When questioned over this prolific plagiarism, the Army representative claimed that the grammar for Army field manuals differs from ordinary scholarship, and it does not place importance on referencing as accurately and in as much depth as possible the sources from which it derives its contents. Further, since the primary audience for field manuals consists of army professionals, there is little reason to cite sources, because the readership is simply not interested. On a final and, perhaps, most significant note, the Army representative claimed that all of the extracts from exogenous intellectual sources fell under the provision of Fair Use.

Well, okay. However, the first problem with the Military’s explanation for plagiarism is that this is in no way constitutes an instance of Fair Use, because Fair Use does not cover instances of plagiarism. In other words, it is fine to use materials and sources of information that are outside of one’s own research and writings as long as there is some indication that the author, who is taking advantage of another author’s publications, is calling upon resources that are not his own. Nevertheless, since the Military Generalship appears to be operating on the level of first year college students, we might dismiss a significant amount of the culpability for this act of intellectual fraud.

Perhaps, what is more alarming is the fact that the generalship, who are responsible for the lives of so many young men and women – many of whom come from traditions of service to this country – and have already had their loyalties misused by a cynical Presidential Administration – are currently under the guidance of intellects who are on par with undergraduates.

Finally, let us not forget or forgive the triumphal oratory that the henchmen of Petraeus used when publicizing their prodigious achievement: the Military anti-insurgence field manual. This action on the part of the Military is just as disillusioning as the type of conduct we have come to expect from the Bush Administration: Taking every opportunity to propagandize itself with little or no regard for honesty and the integrity of their own characters. They seem to have no regard for the truth, and have minimized the importance of truth so that it is trumped by considerations springing from Public Relations.

Russell Cole

If you enjoyed this post,
Subscribe to the Free Midwest Populist Party Newsletter

Please consider a donation of $1 or more
to help keep this website active.