The National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth Turns 20

The National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth (NNOMY) is a vital network that brings together national, regional, and local counter-recruitment and peace groups to resist the increasing influence of the military in young people’s lives. As it celebrates its 20th anniversary, let’s delve into its journey and impact.

NNOMY has been at the forefront of advocating for youth rights and challenging the Pentagon’s encroachment into schools and communities. Counter-recruitment came out of the anti-draft movement from the Vietnam war. (1) The U.S. war in Vietnam triggered the most tenacious anti-war movement in U.S. history, beginning with the start of the bombing of North Vietnam in 1964 and the introduction of combat troops the following year. Over the next decade, hundreds of thousands of young people become radicalized in a largely nonviolent, diverse and sometimes inchoate popular culture of war resistance, employing tactics ranging from comical street theatre to industrial sabotage. Students, government officials, labor unions, church groups and middle class families increasingly opposed the war as it climaxed in 1968, forcing a gradual withdrawal of U.S. forces. Anti-war activities, particularly large-scale resistance to military conscription, forced an end U.S. combat operations in Vietnam and a suspension of the draft by January 1973.(2)

The National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth (NNOMY) was founded in 2004 after the national counter-recruitment conference “Stopping War Where it Begins” in Philadelphia. It’s a network of peace organizations that opposes the militarization of schools and young people in the USA. Their mission is to stand up against the growing intrusion of the military in young people’s lives, particularly in disadvantaged communities where the Pentagon’s influence is felt most acutely. NNOMY plays a crucial role in advocating for youth empowerment and opposing involuntary JROTC placement in schools, which some argue may violate constitutional rights. If you’re passionate about these issues, NNOMY is a valuable resource for information and activism. (3)

In order to plan the first convening of the network, a group of organizations had initially volunteered to form an ad-hoc steering committee (a regular steering committee will be formed when the network first meets). Ad-hoc SC volunteers so far are:

Here are some key points about NNOMY

Mission and Focus: NNOMY’s core mission is to oppose the militarization of education and youth programs. It actively campaigns against programs like JROTC (Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps), Young Marines, DoD Starbase, and DoD STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics).

On the weekend of July 17 2009, over 250 activists from across the country converged on Roosevelt University in Chicago for the largest meeting ever of counter-recruitment and anti-militarism organizers. Retirees from Florida and California, concerned parents from Ohio and Massachusetts, veterans from New Mexico and Oregon, grandmothers from Texas and North Carolina joined with youth organizations such as New York’s Ya-Yas (Youth Activists-Youth Allies) and San Diego’s Education Not Arms to consolidate a movement intent on resisting the increased militarization of U.S. public schools.

The building overlooking Lake Michigan vibrated with the positive energy of the diverse participants—people from different generations, regions, and ethnicities mixing together and exchanging stories about their struggle to demilitarize local schools. For many senior citizens from the East Coast this was the first time they had met much less learned from Chicana high school students who live in border communities near San Diego. For those relatively new to the counter-recruitment movement, the experience taught them more about the on-going process in which young people are increasingly subjected to military values and aggressive recruiting techniques.

Organized by the National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth (NNOMY), an alliance of over 180 organizations, the conference included workshops and caucuses on a variety of subjects ranging from the role of class and culture in counter-recruiting, women in the military, and legislative approaches to challenging militarization.

The growth of the counter-recruitment movement benefited greatly from the Bush administration’s slide into totalitarianism. While established organizations like Project YANO of San Diego and the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) Youth and Militarism program had been working for decades to demilitarize youth, the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 for the first time alerted many to the insidious nature of military recruiting in schools. Many newcomers to the movement began with “opt-out” campaigns to protect students’ privacy and then moved on to the issue of military aptitude tests (ASVAB) that are often administered covertly in school districts nationwide.

Although some activists during the Bush years saw counter-recruitment solely as an antiwar tactic, the participants at the NNOMY conference understood that militarism is an issue that must be confronted with long-term strategies. As many of them told me, it is less an issue of stopping current wars (although that is important) than it is of inhibiting the power of the military-corporate-educational complex with the goal of slowly transforming an interventionist and imperial foreign policy. (5)

Challenges and Activism: NNOMY raises awareness about the impact of military recruitment in schools, especially in disadvantaged communities.

The U.S. military utilizes a number of different recruitment methods to garner new enlistments, but their target audience has consistently remained the same: high schoolers, particularly young men from low-income and rural areas. Eighteen is the youngest age one can join the military without parental permission, but the armed forces still regularly market military propaganda in schools. Although the military does enjoy support within the public system, a grassroots movement of students, teachers, parents, and organizations has led efforts to reduce military recruitment presence and activities on high school campuses.

“We face an uphill battle not only because of the prominence of militarism in our society but [also] because there has been a lack of foresight by progressive people who aren’t thinking about what can happen 10 years down the line,” said Rick Jahnkow, former program coordinator for the nonprofit Project on Youth & Non-Military Opportunities (Project YANO) and a current member of the organization’s board of trustees. (6)

NNOMY highlights how corporate and conservative alliances threaten democracy and the rights of parents, students, and educators.

Over the last four decades, the Pentagon,conservative forces, and corporations have been systematically working to expand their presence in the K-12 learning environment and in public universities. The combined impact of the military, conservative think tanks and foundations, and of corporatization of our public educational systems has eroded the basic democratic concept of civilian public education. It is a trend that, if allowed to continue, will weaken the primacy of civilian rule and, ultimately, our country’s commitment to democratic ideals. (7) NNOMY’s activism includes counter-recruitment efforts, advocating for informed choices, and defending constitutional rights.

Recent Developments:

In June 2024, Congress discussed expanding draft registration to include young women alongside young men. The Senate Armed Services Committee approved this proposal, while the House of Representatives considered making registration automatic for men only. NNOMY remains vigilant, ensuring that youth voices are heard in these critical discussions. As NNOMY reaches this milestone, its commitment to empowering youth and safeguarding their rights remains unwavering. Let’s celebrate their two decades of impactful work!

What will be the impact for counter-recruitment groups if the Military continues to miss their enlistment quotas?

With a record low number of potential recruits and few of those willing to enlist, the U.S. military is trying to boost its numbers by targeting low-income and working-class communities of color for recruitment drives and altering how it markets military propaganda in schools to students of color who view enlistment as a potential means of escaping cycles of poverty. As national population demographics continue to trend toward an increase in non-white communities (especially among people under the age of 18), anti-recruitment advocates have noticed an alarming uptick in military efforts to attract Latinx students and their families in particular, reflecting the growth of Latinx communities across the U.S.

Although Latinxs currently make up a smaller portion of the U.S. military, recruiters and their higher-ups are keenly aware that they are one of the fastest growing demographics at or reaching enlistment age in the general population and the fastest growing population in the U.S. military. In fact, according to the Department of Defense Latinx recruits currently comprise about 16% of all active-duty military personnel, and recruiters are shifting their strategies accordingly.

“The tactics have become more sinister—the military uses monetary incentives to sway students, especially Latinos and other students of color from marginalized backgrounds,” said Cassy Hernandez, an SDSU Chicano studies graduate and the current program coordinator for the nonprofit counter-recruitment organization Project on Youth and Non-Military Opportunities (Project YANO), which works to counter the effects of militarism on people and communities by presenting alternatives to joining the military.

This intensified recruitment push has been especially visible in Project YANO’s home city of San Diego, which has 111,000 active-duty people stationed within the city and is also home to the nation’s largest concentration of military personnel. Organizers cite how various military branches have revamped their marketing campaigns to include Spanish-language advertisements targeting Spanish-speaking parents on television networks such Univision and Telemundo, the country’s two largest Spanish-language networks. Likewise, the military has also expanded their marketing campaigns to include radio and Spanish-language print publications. Unsurprisingly, recruiters have also noticeably increased their presence in schools and neighborhoods with significant Latinx populations. (8)

If the military consistently misses its enlistment quotas, several potential impacts could affect counter-recruitment groups:

Increased Visibility and Relevance: As the military faces recruitment challenges, counter-recruitment efforts gain more visibility. Counter-recruitment groups can leverage this moment to engage with a broader audience and emphasize alternative paths for young people.

Heightened Opposition: The military may intensify its recruitment strategies, leading to more aggressive tactics in schools and communities. Counter-recruitment groups would need to be vigilant and responsive, advocating against misleading information and promoting informed choices.

Policy and Legislative Changes: If enlistment quotas consistently go unmet, policymakers might reevaluate recruitment policies. Counter-recruitment groups could influence policy discussions, advocating for transparency, ethical practices, and youth rights.

Youth Empowerment: A struggling military recruitment system highlights the importance of empowering young people to make informed decisions. Counter-recruitment efforts can focus on education, organizing workshops, and providing resources to empower youth.

Collaboration Opportunities: Counter-recruitment groups could collaborate with other social justice movements. Shared goals related to education, civil rights, and youth empowerment can strengthen collective efforts.

Remember that these impacts depend on various factors, including public awareness, political climate, and the military’s response. Counter-recruitment groups play a crucial role in shaping the conversation and advocating for youth rights.

Should counter-recruitment activism emphasize opposition to military service by recruitment aged youth as the prospect of continuous conflicts escalate with Russia and China?

US - Russia China Conflict Context Matters: Escalating conflicts with Russia and China heighten global tensions. Counter-recruitment activists must acknowledge geopolitical realities while advocating for peace and diplomacy.

Some professions are more dangerous than others. American football players risk concussions. Online content moderators, reviewing harmful materials, risk psychological trauma. Members of the military are exposed to the risk of death, serious injury, and PTSD. But there’s another type of risk that sets military service apart from other dangerous professions: the risk of committing serious moral wrongs. This risk is disproportionately borne by young people from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Military service presents opportunities for serious wrongdoing, such as killing or injuring people in an unjustified war or killing a non-combatant whilst fighting in a justified war. Imagine being on the ground and making split-second moral decisions: “is that person a civilian or an enemy combatant?” In a new APSR article, Jonathan Parry and Christina Easton argue that current military recruitment practices do not take these “moral risks” of the profession into account. They argue that recruitment practices should be evaluated in terms of whether they distribute moral risk fairly. (9)

As counter-recruitment activism evolves, it faces complex considerations. Let’s explore the nuances:

Balancing Perspectives: Counter-recruitment efforts should provide balanced information. While emphasizing opposition to military service is essential, it’s equally crucial to present alternative paths and empower youth to make informed choices.

Critical Thinking Skills: Rather than outright opposition, encourage critical thinking. Highlight the risks, benefits, and consequences of military service. Discuss the impact on mental health, family dynamics, and personal goals.

Diverse Approaches: Some youth may actively resist military recruitment, while others may choose service. Counter-recruitment can include storytelling, workshops, and community dialogues. Address systemic issues like economic inequality and lack of educational opportunities.

Youth Empowerment: Equip young people with knowledge about military contracts, rights, and alternatives. Foster agency and autonomy in decision-making.

Remember, nuanced conversations lead to informed choices.

Should you refuse military selective service registrations enforced by the government and oppose a military draft if that policy gets re-instituted?

The decision to refuse military selective service registration or oppose a military draft is deeply personal and depends on individual convictions, values, and circumstances. Here are some considerations:

Conscientious Objection: Some individuals choose to be conscientious objectors, refusing to participate in war or military service due to moral, ethical, or religious beliefs. Conscientious objection is recognized in some countries and allows alternative service (such as noncombat roles) or exemption from military duty.

Legal Implications: Refusing selective service registration or draft can have legal consequences. In the United States, for example, failure to register for selective service can result in fines, loss of federal benefits, or even imprisonment.

Activism and Advocacy: Opposing a military draft involves activism and advocacy. Joining or supporting organizations that promote peace, demilitarization, and alternatives to war can be a way to express opposition.

Historical Context: Understanding historical contexts (such as Vietnam War protests) can inform your stance. Research how draft policies have impacted communities and individuals in the past.

Community and Solidarity: Engage with like-minded individuals and communities. Collective action can amplify your voice and influence policy.

Remember that each person’s decision is unique, and it’s essential to consider legal, ethical, and personal factors.

War: It's a choice

Many of the victims of war are blameless; war is not their choice. Others have the power to make different choices: not only those who wage war, but those whose support is necessary to keep it going. War and other injustices are maintained by people. And people can do things differently.

We are often told that war is human nature. Injustices from slavery and colonialism to homophobia and sexism have been defended on the grounds that they are "natural" and "inevitable". War, like these other unjust practices, is not natural. It was created by people.

Wars are not the result of innate aggression. Neither guns nor nuclear weapons are built by people driven by an aggressive instinct. They are built by people who simply want to earn a living and are often disconnected from the results of their daily work.

Killing strangers whether by pulling the trigger, pressing the button, making the weapon, sending out the invoice or acquiescing in a social system that results in death is not our inevitable future. Wars and violent conflicts have many causes, crucial amongst them the conscious, deliberate decisions taken or not taken by the antagonists. Wars also have a long build-up during which many choices and actions can be taken and only some will result in violence. (10)

Noncooperators

Some people will not cooperate with the conscription system. They are conscientiously opposed to participation in war and they conclude that the conscription system furthers war.

Many of them refuse to register for the draft. Others, having already registered, have stopped complying with the requirement to keep Selective Service informed of a change of address. (There is no legal process for "unregistering")

The Selective Service System does not recognize conscientious objection to participation in the conscription system, even though the draft, itself, serves the purposes of war.

Registration for the draft was begun in 1980 to "send a message" to the Russians. The Director of Selective Service called it a "weapon in our arsenal like a bomber or missile;" Others have valued it because they believe it helps "deter" the enemy from attacking us.

Conscientious objection is not acknowledged by the government at registration. Nor are COs allowed to decide not to register.

In previous periods of conscription, too, many refused to cooperate. During World War II over 5,000 went to prison for their beliefs.

In the first six years of the current draft registration hundreds of thousands of people did not register, but only twenty nonregistrants were brought to court. All but one of them had been open about their nonregistration and many of them wrote to Selective Service explaining their beliefs.

The maximum possible sentence for draft violators is now five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Of those finally convicted for nonregistration, most have served short sentences, been ordered to do community service, been put on probation, and/or paid fines of $10,000 or less.

Nonregistrants are denied federal aid for education and job training, and are barred from most employment with the federal government. Some states have enacted similar provisions. A few colleges and religious bodies have arranged to provide assistance to make up for these penalties. A national Fund for Education and Training (FEAT) has been initiated to supplement these programs or provide them where they are not available to individuals. Write to Center on Conscience and War (CCW) for information about the fund. (11)

In 1948, the issue of the right to "conscience" was dealt with by the United Nations General Assembly in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It reads:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

The proclamation was ratified during the General Assembly on 10 December 1948 by a vote of 48 in favour, 0 against, with 8 abstentions.^[13]

Claiming conscientious objection to school militarization: ASVAB, JROTC, DOD STEM, & Military Recruitment in school

The Pentagon and the military complex of services and industries have made many inroads into the public school system to influence youth to be receptive to military service and national defense issues. Programs like ASVAB testing, military corps programs in the middle and high schools like Young Marines and the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps and science and "educational" programs like Department of Defense STEM classes have intervened into the public educational space for many years and are ultimately designed for recruitment purposes. Students can decide to take a principled stance to not to be involved in these programs with repercussions. These individuals are practicing a form of claiming conscientious objection to school militarization: ASVAB, JROTC, DOD STEM, & Military Recruitment. This "objection" can be supported by parents or by religious or deeply felt ethical positions assumed by minor aged youth. There are organizations that can offer advice and possibly support to those considering making such a decision such as peace groups in your community or national organizations.

If you are interested in making that choice you can find out more at the following organizations:

Peace Resources for conscientious objection and counter-recruitment:

Alternatives Career Sites to Not Join the Military

Counter-recruitment Training for Activists

Introduction to Counter Recruitment Work / https://nnomy.org/counterrecruitment/
NNOMY Campus: Activists Demilitarizing Our Public Schools / https://nnomy.org/index.php/en/resources/counter-recruitment/webinars.html
Back-to-school Kit for Counter-recruitment and School Demilitarization Organizing / https://nnomy.org/backtoschoolkit/
We Are Not Your Soldiers / https://www.wearenotyoursoldiers.org/
Whatcom Peace & Justice Center / Counter-recruitment work Volunteer Training Opportunities / https://www.whatcompjc.org/alternatives-to-military-service.html

Organizing tools & informational documents for Students, Families, & Activists (From the Project on Youth & Non-military Opportunities (Project YANO)

Toolkits and Guides from the National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth (NNOMY)
https://nnomy.org/index.php/en/resources/downloads/toolkits-guides.html

Document Downloads & Websites for activist training and student distribution:

Sources:

Please consider supporting The National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth
and our work to demilitarize our schools and youth by sending a check to our fiscal sponsor "in our name" at the
Alliance for Global Justice.
Donate Here

###

Revised: 07/14/2024 GDG

The National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth Turns 20

Share this

FAIR USE NOTICE

Contact NNOMY

Mobile Menu