¶ … military and National Guard career spanning more than four decades, Michael D. Doubler (2003) is highly qualified to chronicle the history and evolution of the National Guard. Doubler's (2003) analysis roots the National Guard in the original colonial militias, showing how colonial and then state militias morphed into a formidable and cohesive federal force. Although the author avoids political analysis or critique of the roles the National Guard has played, Civilian in Peace, Soldier in War does provide an ample outline of National Guard history. The book accomplishes more than a simple chronology, however. Doubler also details the function and readiness of National Guard in different situations.
The National Guard occupies a curious role in the American armed forces. That role has also shifted dramatically over time, in response to factors like changing domestic needs, changing domestic policies and politics, and also changing international realities. Currently, the National Guard falls under the rubric of armed forces and therefore also under the blanket of the Department of Defense. The Guard is mainly a reserve force, and therefore readiness issues are central to its effectiveness. How the United States Department of Defense manages the National Guard in order to ensure readiness remains one of the core questions Doubler (2003) addresses in Civilian in Peace, Soldier in War. The title of Doubler's (2003) book encapsulates the function of National Guard members who are civilians most of the time yet constantly vigilant for the call to serve in times of crisis.
Doubler's (2003) book does not present an argument as much as it offers a historical and organizational framework for understanding the National Guard. The theoretical standpoint Doubler (2003) uses in the text does, however, include necessary references to the constitutionality of the National Guard as a militia force. Doubler (2003) accurately states that the Constitution of the United States expressly supports and affirms the use of a militia force for suppressing "insurrections," protecting national security from external incursions, and helping to enforce and execute laws (xviii). Thus, Doubler (2003) does welcome debate about how to legally define such problems as a domestic insurrection or rebellion. Should a domestic conflict arise, the executive branch of government would summarily be entrusted with the responsibility of determining when, how, and why to invoke the National Guard. Generally, and gratefully, the National Guard serves a rather clearly defined role within the American armed forces. Doubler (2003) also describes the National Guard as a flexible, not static, force. The role of the National Guard might change from one generation to the next, depending on things like political climate or international affairs.
Likewise, the author spends some time discussing how the National Guard might alter its organizational structure and culture. Organizational structure and culture are relatively stable within any Department of Defense organization, but changes could have a strong and direct bearing on logistics and readiness. For example, Doubler (2003) makes sure to mention how weaponry, training, and personnel decisions do change rather regularly in the National Guard. The National Guard is distinct from, but inextricably linked to, the Army. A little like fraternal twins, the Army and National Guard have different appearances, outlooks, and even political approaches to military matters and public policy. The differences between the Army and the National Guard often do become political problems, which ultimately resolve themselves in a manner not unlike the system of checks and balances in Washington. Role clarity is not as big of a problem as it might seem, Doubler (2003) points out. Rather, collaboration and cooperation on major issues and crises are sometimes difficult to attain. The origins of the National Guard are traceable to the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1636. As such, the National Guard predates the standing army, which was effectively created in 1775 as the Continental Army.
Civilian in Peace, Soldier in War: The Army National Guard 1636-2000 is divided into three sections. The first part covers the years between 1636 and 1897. Entitled "The Militia," this part traces the evolution of the National Guard from the colonial militia forces through the Revolutionary War, and finally resting on the stage of volunteer militia services that proved to be critical during the formative years of the nation. Throughout this period, the National Guard cannot be called such; it was an era of the volunteer militia model that reflected entrenched anti-federalist beliefs.
Doubler (2003) breaks off the first...
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now