|
The principal problem they examine, however, is [[empirical]]: to explain how civilian control over the military is established and maintained.<ref>James Burk. 2002. "Theories of Democratic Civil-Military Relations." ''[http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/29/1/7 Armed Forces & Society]''. 29(1): 7–29.</ref><ref>Herspring, Dale. 2005. The Pentagon and the Presidency: Civil-Military Relations from FDR to George W. Bush (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas) {{ISBN|0700613552}}</ref> In the broader sense it examines the ways society and military intersect or interact and includes topics such as the integration of [[veteran]]s into society, methods used to [[Military recruitment|recruit]] and retain service members, and the fairness and efficacy of these systems, the integration of minorities, women, and the [[LGBT]] community into the military, the behavior and consequences of [[Private military company|private contractors]], the role of culture in military organizations, voting behavior of soldiers and veterans, and the gaps in policy preferences between civilians and soldiers.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Shields |first=Patricia |url=https://www.academia.edu/31740598/Civil_Military_Relations |title=Civil-Military Relations}}</ref>
While generally not considered a separate academic area of study in and of itself, it involves scholars and practitioners from many fields and specialties.<ref name="link.springer.com">{{Citation |last=Shields P.|first=Patricia M. (2020) |title=Dynamic Intersection of Military and Society. In:|date=2020 Sookermany A|url=https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02866-4_31-1 (eds) |work=Handbook of Military Sciences. Springer,|pages=1–23 |editor-last=Sookermany |editor-first=Anders |access-date=2023-10-13 |place=Cham https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/|publisher=Springer International Publishing |language=en |doi=10.1007/978-3-030-02866-4_31-1 |isbn=978-3-030-02866-4}}</ref> Apart from [[political science]] and [[sociology]], Civ-Mil (CMR) draws upon such diverse fields as [[international law|law]], [[philosophy]], [[area studies]], [[psychology]], [[cultural studies]], [[anthropology]], [[economics]], history, [[diplomatic history]], [[journalism]], and the [[military]], among others. It involves study and discussion of a diverse range of issues including but not limited to: [[civilian control of the military]], military professionalism, war, [[civil-military operations]], military institutions, and other related subjects. International in scope, civil-military relations involves discussion and research from across the world. The theoretical discussion can include [[non-state actors]]<ref>Robert Mandel. 2004. "The Wartime Utility of Precision Versus Brute Force in Weaponry." ''[http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/30/2/171 Armed Forces & Society]''. 30(2): 171–201.</ref><ref>Robert Mandel. 2007. Reassessing Victory in Warfare. ''[http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/33/4/461 Armed Forces & Society]''. 33(4): 461–495.</ref> as well as more traditional [[nation-states]]. Other research involves discerning the details of military political attitudes, [[voting behavior]],<ref>Donald S. Inbody. 2015. [http://www.palgrave.com/page/detail/the-soldier-vote-donald-s-inbody/?sf1=barcode&st1=9781137519191 ''The Soldier Vote: War, Politics, and the Ballot in America''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151001202110/http://www.palgrave.com/page/detail/the-soldier-vote-donald-s-inbody/?sf1=barcode&st1=9781137519191 |date=2015-10-01 }}. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.</ref><ref>Donald S. Inbody. 2008. "Partisanship and the Military." in ''Inside Defense: Understanding the U.S. Military in the 21st Century''. Derek S. Reveron and [[Judith Stiehm|Judith Hicks Stiehm]] (eds). New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.</ref><ref>Donald S. Inbody. 2009. ''[https://digital.library.txstate.edu/handle/10877/3972 Grand Army of the Republic or Grand Army of the Republicans? Political Party and Ideological Preferences of American Enlisted Personnel]''.</ref> and the potential impact on and interaction with democratic society<ref>Morris Janowitz. 1982. "Consequences of Social Science Research on the U.S. Military." ''[http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/8/4/507 Armed Forces & Society]''. 8(4): 507–524.</ref><ref>Peter D. Feaver and Richard H. Kohn, (Eds.) 2001. ''Soldiers and Civilians: The Civil-Military Gap and American National Security''. Cambridge: MIT Press.</ref> as well as military families.<ref>Jere Cohen and Mady Wechsler Segal. 2009. "Veterans, the Vietnam Era, and Marital Dissolution: An Event History Analysis." ''[http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/rapidpdf/0095327X09332146v1. ''Armed Forces & Society''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210322130222/http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/rapidpdf/0095327X09332146v1. |date=2021-03-22 }}''. {{doi|10.1177/0095327X09332146}}.</ref><ref>Brian J. Reed and David R. Segal. 2000. "The Impact of Multiple Deployments on Soldiers' Peacekeeping Attitudes, Morale, and Retention." ''[http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/27/1/57 Armed Forces & Society]''. 27(1): 57–78.</ref><ref>Richard T. Cooney, Jr., Mady Wechsler Segal, David R. Segal and William W. Falk. 2003. "Racial Differences in the Impact of Military Service on the Socioeconomic Status of Women Veterans." ''[http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/30/1/53 Armed Forces & Society]''. 30(1): 53.85.</ref><ref>David R. Segal and Morten G. Ender. 2008. "Sociology in Military Officer Education." ''[http://afs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/35/1/3 Armed Forces & Society]''. 35(1): 3–15.</ref>
==History==
|
