Suchergebnisse

This essay introduces a special issue of Armed Forces & Society examining sociology at military academies around the globe. Articles represent nine countries—Canada, France, Japan, the Netherlands, Russia, South Africa, Sweden, Turkey, the United States. We begin with a brief history of sociology and the military and growth of military sociology as a subfield, followed by the development of military academies in general and sociology at military academies more specifically. The essay concludes with six trends found across the nine nations and ten academies—the stigma of sociology; the cannibalization of sociology courses; co-optation of sociological concepts; charismatic leadership; radical social change; and revitalization.

Despite its content being perceived as highly relevant to Canadian Forces (CF) leader development and current and future role demands, sociology has not become permanently embedded in the Canadian military college (milcol) curriculum. We argue that among other factors, this has been the result of such influences as lack of interest and/or support from academic sociologists outside the military; hegemony of other disciplines within the military; reaction of the military system to sociological topics and results; the number and organization of uniformed and civilian sociologists internally; and the failure of military sociologists to adequately market themselves or to follow up on the gains they have made. Notwithstanding, the authors note that recent developments both outside and inside the military college environment offer some promise of improved prospects for sociology (and anthropology): preferably, within a more multidisciplinary instructional context.

Recent work on war and the military has addressed two broad questions: Why do states and societies wage war as they do? And what difference does it make that war is, or has been, waged in that manner? Building on the Clausewitzian focus on relations among the state, the armed forces, and society, responses to these questions emphasize the need for the analyst to recognize that the state may not possess a monopoly of force, interstate and civil wars may intertwine, and meaning and valence may figure prominently in war and its consequences. Scholarship in this area tends to focus on three broad domains: mobilization into war, treatment of the enemy, and signification. Each has its own distinctive analytics and historical pattern of transformation and development. How these three domains intersect holds real promise for future work.

The purpose of the article is to acquaint with the history of military sociology and the peculiarities of its development in Armenia. Military sociology, which developed in connection with the need for theoretical and applied knowledge in the military field, occupies an important place among the sociological disciplines of the middle level. It develops theoretical and methodological concepts and approaches and expands the possibilities of their use. For a better understanding of the theoretical foundations of military sociology, the scope of research and its practical significance, it is necessary to comprehensively consider the scientific environment, prerequisites and reasons for the emergence, as well as the stages of development of military sociology in the country.

This article examines the periods of military sociology in Russia. The Russian State system of periods of the military sociology had an effect on the evolution of sociology as a science and as an educational discipline in Russia. These periods include a pre-revolutionary period, a post-revolutionary period, soviet I, soviet II, and a modern period.