Who is a “Public Intellectual” and why does the public listen to them? Is the Public intellectual some cable news T.V. pundit who throws out his own opinions on a number of different contemporary issues? I think not. As we will see, the public intellectual is much more than that. The public intellectual is not just a talking head academic who offers his or her own opinions on specific issues in a public forum. Rather, the public intellectual is one who offers both insight and solutions on specific issues that are relevant to the general public. Most importantly, the public intellectual is someone who has legitimacy with the public; they have had experiences in the issues that they are discussing, which makes them a credible and influential source.
Nathaniel C. Fick, the C.E.O of the Center for a New American Security, is a Public Intellectual who has served eight years as an infantry officer in the United States Marine Corps. His experiences on his tours of duty in Afghanistan and Iraq make him a credible expert in his fields of expertise, which include Terrorism & Irregular Warfare, U.S. Foreign Policy, U.S. Military Forces & Operations, and U.S. National Security Strategy. (cnas.org) What is so interesting about Fick is that he is different from your stereotypical “jarhead” marine. He graduated from the liberal arts school, Dartmouth, with a degree in the classics. While at Dartmouth, Fick became disillusioned with the typical path that he saw his classmates taking. Many of them were off to be consultants, or investment bankers and he couldn’t fathom what a 22-year-old kid, fresh out of college could possibly be consulted about. Fick wanted to “go on a great adventure” to prove himself and serve his country.[i] Fick’s great adventure in the Marines has made him a reliable and influential Public Intellectual.
Although Nate Fick is the CEO of a academic think tank, he has found a way to engage the general public by offering his own story in his book One Bullet Away: The Making of a Marine Officer. In his book, Fick explains in plain language, his time in the Marine Corps. He isn’t engaging in a complicated analysis of our military or foreign policy. Rather, he tells us his story and gives us insight on issues facing our military a manner in which everyone can understand. He does this by relaying his personal experience in the Marine Corps and commenting on what he saw as valuable lessons or detrimental problems with the Marines that he saw while in service. While in the Marines, Fick often asked the tough questions and sometimes challenged his superiors on things that he saw were flawed or detrimental to the greater mission at hand. He did this both in Afghanistan and in Iraq. On one specific occasion while on a combat patrol in Afghanistan, he stormed up to his Company Commander and demanded to know why his (Fick’s) Marines were carrying over 200lbs. of gear each while Marines in other platoons were riding in Humvees. [ii] Fick ended up obeying to his superior officer, but he wanted his Marines to know that he was looking out for their best interest and not just blindly following orders.
Fick’s questioning of what he saw as flawed orders from his superior officers and his criticism of some of the problems he experienced with the leadership of the military can be found throughout his book. His frank writing style is also apparent in a number of his current works such as his report on General James Mattis taking over for the United States Central Command and in his commentary of President Obama’s firing of General McChrystal. Fick has a great ability to discuss things how they are without worrying about a political backlash or something of the sort. He can be critical and brutally honest on many issues, which are attributes that are essential to a public intellectual as Mack stated in his “Decline” essay “Elshtain’s point is that the public intellectual function is criticism.” Mack goes on further;
And if intellectuals are in a better position to perform that function it’s not because they are uniquely blessed with wisdom—and it’s certainly not because they are uniquely equipped to wield social or political power. It is only because learning the processes of criticism and practicing them with some regularity are requisites for intellectual employment. It’s what we do at our day jobs.
It can be agreed upon that public intellectuals must be critical and frank. And while it is true that public intellectuals inherently learn the processes of criticism and put them into practice on a daily basis, that is not the sole reason why they are more equipped to criticize policies or be more influential in their comments. Public intellectuals have and very well should, have had a great number of experiences and credentials in the field that they are speaking. At least when it comes to military affairs and foreign policy analysis such as the case of Nate Fick, a public intellectuals’ background and their experiences elevate the importance of what they are criticizing or commenting on. It makes people want to listen to them. The “average Joe” would rather listen to Nate Fick discuss the War in Afghanistan than listen to his accountant neighbor discuss the same topic. The key that makes the public intellectual influential is legitimacy and that comes from their experiences. Nate Fick has certainly experienced a lot in his relatively young life and when he talks, people want to listen.
Sounds like Fick has done a good job of reaching out to the public while having a great career. Interesting to read about his experience in the military.
ReplyDelete