Battles Beyond the Field in Vietnam: The Class Divide and Demoralization

At the time of the Vietnam War, 27 million “baby boomer” men were becoming of draft age. Of the 27 million, the relatively small portion of these young men that were enlisted and served in Vietnam were not representative of the population as a whole—rather, roughly 80% of them came from working-class and poor backgrounds (Appy). According to Appy, “class, not geography, was the crucial factor in determining which Americans fought in Vietnam.” Soldiers came from major urban centers with high levels of poverty, midsize industrial cities with large working-class populations, rural and small town America, and everywhere in between. But, no matter where in the country they lived, they almost always had one thing in common: a disadvantaged economic background.

In particular, there was an influx of young men who came from working-class families enlisting and serving in the war, hence Appy’s argument that Vietnam was a “working-class war.” Commonly, working-class children were directed toward the armed forces while their wealthier counterparts were directed toward college. Young men from wealthy families were able to avoid the draft, and very few volunteered. It was the young men whose parents worked physically demanding—and often dangerous—jobs that ended up being the ones serving our country in Vietnam. Appy points out that this created a very interesting parallel between these Vietnam soldiers and their working-class parents: both did the nation’s “dirty work” under strict orders and with little compensation, and both groups believed the nation had “little, if any, appreciation for their sacrifices” (Appy).

A lack of appreciation for their sacrifices is just one of the many examples of why U.S. troops became demoralized by the late 1960s. As DeGroot points out, the violence and gruesome war tactics—namely punji stake traps—“slowed patrols and eroded morale.” Additionally, as the number of enemies killed increased, so did the number of men that “changed from green recruit to tired, desensitized veteran” (DeGroot). A general lack of purpose in the war was also a concern voiced by many American soldiers. When commenting on this, Vietnam veteran David Parks said that he simply “fought to stay alive and killed to keep from being killed.” Morale was so low among U.S. troops that some soldiers went as far as to paint “UUUU” on their combat helmets, which stood for “the unwilling, led by the unqualified, doing the unnecessary, for the ungrateful.” Finally, drugs were a serious problem among military personnel. In fact, “by 1971 marijuana use stood at 50.9% of military personnel, heroin and other narcotics 28.5%, and hallucinogens 14%” (DeGroot).

Because of the decline in morale, soldiers often had very little respect for those in authority. Instances of fragging—when a soldier threatens, injures, or even kills a superior officer—became a serious problem that impacted the ability of commanding officers to lead. Further, racial tension was prevalent. Confederate flags could be seen attached to Army jeeps and African American enlisted men experienced discrimination within the military. War crimes were also prevalent and those committing them were often not held accountable for their actions. However, even with morale at the basecamps becoming almost nonexistent, DeGroot points out that on the battlefield was a different story. Battlefield morale survived much longer, and that’s because “the glue that helped [the soldiers] together was the duty felt to each other.”

I would argue that a class divide still exists in the U.S. military today, largely because of recruitment programs that target working-class and low-income individuals with incentives like education, scholarships, signing bonuses, job training, etc. While these incentives can also benefit individuals from wealthy backgrounds, they are particularly useful for those with fewer financial opportunities—those that, unlike their wealthier counterparts, wouldn’t be able to afford pursuing higher education without the tuition assistance or sign-on bonus programs through the U.S. military. Therefore, I think even though the U.S. military is an all-volunteer force, economic disparities contribute to those from working-class or low-income backgrounds being more likely to volunteer to enlist.