Image courtesy MastersDegree.net
After three years part-time, gentle reader, I've graduated in my M.A.
Resuming study in your seventh decade is perhaps a little unusual, but I need a goal, and I'm a lousy golfer.
I already had two degrees from the seventies and eighties, when I got a leg-up post Vietnam through a Department of Labour and National Service rehabilitation scholarship, so I had no problem getting admitted once the University of Queensland dug up my academic record.
I wasn't so lucky in getting a statement from my post-graduate diploma from Griffith University, as it had been lost in a warehouse in the 2011 flood, but they did write a letter of confirmation of enrolment.
Academia has changed more than a little in forty plus years, but the principles remain the same. You simply have to do a little work each day. It's straightforward when you're retired.
These days, information technology is all the goal, so I had to brush up a little on my computer skills. None of that was around in the seventies.
My project was an examination of the old myth "Every national serviceman who went to Vietnam was a volunteer". Others have already exposed it as nonsense, but I wanted to investigate it myself, and did so by interviewing Vietnam veterans who were Nashos. I managed to find a few volunteer Nashos, but they're like hens teeth.
Bizarrely, some of those who applied for early registration finished up as accidental volunteers - strange but true.
Because the experience was so enjoyable, I'm considering continuing, although I'll need an institution, a new supervisor and a new project. I'm open to suggestions.
In the meantime, here's a link to my thesis. It's not exactly light reading, but some of you may be interested.
Comments closed.
14 comments:
"I managed to find a few volunteer Nashos, but they're like hens teeth."
Actually if you had manage to get some of your fellow "Pigs" to talk to you, you would have found out that they had volunteered for Seven RAR, following recruit training, knowing they were headed to Vietnam, rather than go through Singleton for Infantry Corp training. They numbered many more than hens' teeth, Bobby, and learned their trade with the Battalion.
If you read the thesis, although they're not named, you'll note that quite a few I interviewed were ex 7 RAR. Anonymity was a condition I had to maintain to get ethical approval. I found only four volunteer Nashos, and two of them actually volunteered by mistake. The department of Labour and National Service took early registration as volunteering, something these blokes didn't realise until it was too late. The one volunteer who was 7 RAR (and was in my rife section) now says quite clearly that he regrets his decision. The myth I successfully debunked was "Every national serviceman who went to Vietnam was a volunteer", a myth that continues to do the rounds in ex-service networks. It's a lie, and dis honours the memory of every Nasho who died there. That myth had been debunked by people like Dapin years ago, but I wanted to do my own research. The sad part about it is that it had been taught in schools for about a decade until I had it removed by the ANZAC Day Commemoration Committee. It was indoctrination, not history. Read the whole thing. It's the voices of the men you served with.
How many is quite a few? I know there were at least two busloads conveyed to Holsworthy. You found 4, so your search for what you did not wish to find was almost fruitless. There were at least 8 from my platoon from Pukka and they ended up in Charlie company and support company.
As a researcher you haven't done much of a job, but I suspect you only did enough research to correspond with the result you wanted.
As noted above I found four who identified as volunteer Nashos. If you knew anything about Academic rigour you’d understand that no University will accept a false conclusion to a research project. The examiners awarded a distinction to the work, so obviously it met the required standard for accuracy. The point is, the word “every” has only one meaning, and the myth is debunked. Using statistical projection, the most likely proportion of Nashos who registered early (the only way a Nasho could volunteer without signing up as a Reg) was between 5 and 10 percent of enlisted Nashos. Of the blokes I interviewed who regarded themselves as volunteers, every single one of them expressed regret at the decision. Read the transcripts. You can’t change history because you don’t like the outcome.
Your statement was about nashos (in general) volunteering to go overseas, not volunteer nashos, of which I am one. My comment stands...I know of at least 2 busloads of nashos who volunteered to join 7RAR knowing they were going to Vietnam. I have never heard the term you claim which included the word "every". From memory 4 men are not sufficient to fill two buses.
If your claim that the fellows you found regretted the experience, that does not indicate that they did not volunteer. Your paper is based on selective information and may well have bamboozled academics who thought highly of your prose and did not do any investigation of their own, which is not surprising given the stance of the academic world at the time in relation to the conflict.
I have never heard the term you claim which included the word "every". Then you need to go back and read what I reported on this blog under the title Setting the Record Straight (7th August 2018).Here's the link -http://1735099.blogspot.com/2018/08/setting-record-straight.html
The worst thing about this reference was that it was indoctrination, pure and simple, and sat on a website used for schools for over a decade.
I advertised for participants for my study in the 7 RAR newsletter and newsletters of all other battalions that are still published. Your allegation that my thesis is selective is simply because it comes to conclusions that you can't accept. I interviewed everybody who was interested. I would have happily interviewed you, and your responses would have been accurately reported.
History is like that sometimes. It's about what actually happened, not what you wanted to happen. The thesis is comprised of the voices of the men I interviewed. I faithfully published all their memories, and recorded word for word everything they said. I then transcribed their responses and sent them back to be checked for accuracy. I have never denied that some Nashos did "volunteer" (in quotation marks because the logic of conscripts volunteering is bizarre). Simple question - How did these "volunteers' end up in the army in the first place? Does the fact that they had their birthdates drawn in a ballot have anything to do with it? It they were fair dinkum about volunteering they could have enlisted as regulars.
I did not "claim" that the blokes I interviewed regretted the experience. I stated that most of them said that the decision to volunteer was a poor decision in hindsight. All the statements made by the volunteer Nashos are contained in the appendix. Read what they said, not what I wrote. I chose the title "A Sweet Use of Adversity" because it was obvious that most of them made the most of the experience. That is not "regretting" it. I doubt you have read the whole thing. If you haven't yet, read the appendix (p 155 - 171). Those are the words of the men I interviewed, not my words. You could also read "One National Serviceman's Story (pages 133 - 138) which demonstrates the political nature of the conflict, and its cost in blood.
Of the 2400 or so 7Rar servicemen,who served in SVN, how many responded to your request for interviewees and in total how many other returned servicemen replied? My bet is you got replies from disgruntled members and many could not be bothered or like myself did not go on line to check servicemen"s blogs and sites. Your finding of 4 volunteer nashos is not the true figure of nashos who volunteered for service in Vietnam once they had completed recruit training.
"I did not "claim" that the blokes I interviewed regretted the experience." So sorry, but what is this quote " The one volunteer who was 7 RAR (and was in my rife section) now says quite clearly that he regrets his decision." and "most of them said that the decision to volunteer was a poor decision" sounds like regret or ruing the decision, to me.
"the logic of conscripts volunteering is bizarre"...really? There were lots and your denial will not change the facts. Being a socialist that chose not to avail himself of the chances to stay at home and still cries about it you wrote a tale that suited your purposes and not necessarily the facts. This was swallowed by academics who like yourself were happy to find a like mind to bolster their beliefs.
Oh yes... not every nasho that served in Vietnam volunteered, as indicated by your example. I am sure there were others, but you only had to volunteer your own history to counter the claim of "every".
"If they were fair dinkum about volunteering they could have enlisted as regulars." A volunteer nash was someone who decided that 3 yrs or 6 years service was undesirable in the event that the job choice was not what they desired. In those days once you signed up there was no resigning if you didn't like it and two years was the lesser period. Not all nashos went to SVN but a number of them following recruits either volunteered or were pushed into the infantry and thus became eligible for overseas service. Our intake was made aware that Seven was headed overseas and there would be no requirement to go to Singleton if we did the corp training with the battalion prior to the tour, hence the volunteers for the trip.
I did not "claim" that the blokes I interviewed regretted the experience." So sorry, but what is this quote " The one volunteer who was 7 RAR (and was in my rife section) now says quite clearly that he regrets his decision." and "most of them said that the decision to volunteer was a poor decision" sounds like regret or ruing the decision, to me.
I simply reported what he told me. There's a difference between regretting the decision, and regretting the experience. You can make the best of a bad decision. One of the characteristics these men had in common was that they did exactly that - hence the title of the study.
Being a socialist that chose not to avail himself of the chances to stay at home and still cries about it you wrote a tale that suited your purposes and not necessarily the facts. This was swallowed by academics who like yourself were happy to find a like mind to bolster their beliefs. Now what "beliefs" would those be? There are some indisputable facts (not beliefs) about conscription for Vietnam. -
1. It killed 200 nashos, wounded 1200, and traumatised thousands.
2. It accomplished nothing, except to help keep the Coalition in power until 1972.
3. Vietnam veterans were treated abominably for 15 years after the withdrawal, until the VVAA organised the Welcome Home march with assistance from the then Labor government, and Redgum released "I was Only Nineteen".
I don't "cry about it". I've done very well out of my service, as like the men I interviewed, I made the best of it by using the rehab course to set me on the path of a successful career.
I doubt you have read the thesis and won't engage with you until you have. Here's a question - Who did I reference in the discussion Chapter describing the relationships that developed between Nashos? Name the reference, and provide the sentence that describes his view of mateship. When you have done this, I will know that you at least put the time into finding it, and are in a position to comment. At the moment, you're simply trolling. It's probably time you read this as well, if you haven't already done so -https://independentaustralia.net/australia/australia-display/reflections-on-the-fall,4404
I merely comment on the posts you put up, assuming that you attempt to be truthful in an effort to bolster your opinions. Truth is a perception by the individual. With that in mind I point out your errors based on what you put up here rather than go over your historical writings.
As you have not given the numbers of interviewees from Seven, can I assume that your writings were garnered from minimal sources and with minimal information due to the lack of interest you were able to raise in the people you used as subjects?
Truth is a perception by the individual.
Perhaps. But first you must inform that perception. Apparently you are unprepared to have your perceptions challenged by others, even men you served with and whom I interviewed. I've just spent a couple of days with some of them in Canberra, and we discussed the different perceptions of incidents we remember. If you compare those perceptions, you can arrive at a pretty good version of the truth by comparing them, and identifying consistencies. Read the thesis, and prove that you've done so by answering my question above. Until you do that, there's no point in further discussion.
As previously stated, Bob, I comment on your post content not on your historical writings. I have no interest in your perceptions. I have spent much of my life interpreting the truth and the way in which we all see the same occurrences differently. It is my perception that if any two or more persons describe the same thing in identical fashion then it is rehearsed and possibly fabricated.
I have supplied you with information relating to the numbers of nashos you seem to have been unable to reach out to and you cling to the minimalistic numbers you claim. You have not replied in relation to previous requests for numbers of personnel interviewed, bearing in mind that "2400 or so 7Rar servicemen" went to Vietnam and a higher than usual proportion of the second tour were sourced from National serviceman. Perhaps it is you that needs to research the full facts rather than cherry pick to justify your writings.
I have no interest in your perceptions.
You have no interest in any fact that conflicts with your prejudices. Whether you like it or not, the vast majority of national servicemen were not volunteers, and besides my work, historians such as Dapin, Stanley, Ross and Morris, amongst others, have examined the history, interviewed those involved and found the same. It's sad that you are going to take a shabby myth, which dishonours the men you served with, to your grave. The truth will always prevail...
As previously stated, Bob, I comment on your post content not on your historical writings. I have no interest in your perceptions. I have spent much of my life interpreting the truth and the way in which we all see the same occurrences differently. It is my perception that if any two or more persons describe the same thing in identical fashion then it is rehearsed and possibly fabricated.
I have supplied you with information relating to the numbers of nashos you seem to have been unable to reach out to and you cling to the minimalistic numbers you claim. You have not replied in relation to previous requests for numbers of personnel interviewed, bearing in mind that "2400 or so 7Rar servicemen" went to Vietnam and a higher than usual proportion of the second tour were sourced from National serviceman. Perhaps it is you that needs to research the full facts rather than cherry pick to justify your writings
Of the 2400 or so 7Rar servicemen,who served in SVN, how many responded to your request for interviewees and in total how many other returned servicemen replied? My bet is you got replies from disgruntled members and many could not be bothered or like myself did not go on line to check servicemen"s blogs and sites. Your finding of 4 volunteer nashos is not the true figure of nashos who volunteered for service in Vietnam once they had completed recruit training.
"I did not "claim" that the blokes I interviewed regretted the experience." So sorry, but what is this quote " The one volunteer who was 7 RAR (and was in my rife section) now says quite clearly that he regrets his decision." and "most of them said that the decision to volunteer was a poor decision" sounds like regret or ruing the decision, to me.
"the logic of conscripts volunteering is bizarre"...really? There were lots and your denial will not change the facts. Being a socialist that chose not to avail himself of the chances to stay at home and still cries about it you wrote a tale that suited your purposes and not necessarily the facts. This was swallowed by academics who like yourself were happy to find a like mind to bolster their beliefs.
Oh yes... not every nasho that served in Vietnam volunteered, as indicated by your example. I am sure there were others, but you only had to volunteer your own history to counter the claim of "every".
"If they were fair dinkum about volunteering they could have enlisted as regulars." A volunteer nash was someone who decided that 3 yrs or 6 years service was undesirable in the event that the job choice was not what they desired. In those days once you signed up there was no resigning if you didn't like it and two years was the lesser period. Not all nashos went to SVN but a number of them following recruits either volunteered or were pushed into the infantry and thus became eligible for overseas service. Our intake was made aware that Seven was headed overseas and there would be no requirement to go to Singleton if we did the corp training with the battalion prior to the tour, hence the volunteers for the trip.
Post a Comment