Why is this surprising? When people leave the military, they still need jobs. My brother is a veteran, now he's a SWE at Facebook. All large companies have veteran recruiting efforts: https://www.facebook.com/careers/facebook-life/veterans

Its not surprising. Just might come into play in ways people have not thought about. Like there's been a lot chatter of a military coup online in the last year. Due to Covid, Riots, Election, and mostly China's growing power. If such a scenario were to pass. It will matter which side industry will take. For example, will truckers strike. Its something I did not think about. But having former military at top, makes me think industry will follow military. This is not totally hypothetical. Like even as recently as last week this topic has been on CNN.

That chatter is mostly from people outside the military, the military itself is not inclined to coup in the US. It goes against what it stands for, it's also almost guaranteed to fail in any meaningful sense. The military itself would become disbanded in the process and it would mean not just the end of the nation at the top (change from democratic republic to military authoritarianism) but a fracturing of the nation itself.

The chatter inside the military is mostly, "How stupid are those asshats that want a coup?"

I mostly agree. But I think most people see it as brief intervention period, and then the military would be restoring political democracy. I personally don't think it would be positive at all for the reasons you mentioned. But also life would lost for sure. Though I do think if the riots continued last year, at some point military would have stepped in.

However, I remember when the US early in the pandemic ran out of masks, since the masks were manufactured in China and was telling its people masks were not necessary, to preserve supplies for healthcare workers. Recently the chip shortages are causing car manufacturing to grind to a halt.

Is the US military anything without industry? Seems to me like almost under all scenarios, US military success, is heavily based on US industry's ability to supply its weapons and logistical needs. With politicians behind outsourcing so much to China, can the US even sustain any direct conflict. Seems to me, that diminishing industrial capability has to be a giant sore point for the military. Especially when there are money trails of some politicians accepting money from China.

Who are these "most people"?

The military would not have "stepped in" under its own accord. It may have been called in (probably in the form of the state national guards).

If so many former military officers are positioning themselves so well in industry to effect this coup, maybe they could also step in and restore a larger portion of US manufacturing and sidestep the issue of your last paragraph. It would certainly be easier than destroying a country.

> Who are these "most people"?

Judging from 4chan, twitter, gab, I think currently its the "stolen election" Trump supporters. But it might be a growing coalition of those that oppose "communism" as they see it. Progressive policies, reparations, and so on. The disgruntled right. Which is actually a lot of red states...most of geographic land area of the US.

Good luck to them, they're still not "most people" and can (mostly) be safely ignored.

How is this surprising? Military is a breeding ground for leadership, that's like literally the whole point of going to West Point is to be a professional leader. After the armed services, corporate leadership has got to be a total breeze.

My ex-military officer friends tell me the corporate world is considerably harder than the military. Maybe it also depends on where you work / what you do.

I concur with your friends. The reason is due to the fact that in the military, people understand where they fall within the chain of command and that they must follow orders or there will be severe consequences. This strict structure is needed in life and death situations - I wouldn't know personally, but I'd imagine the medical industry (hospitals and such) have a similar respect for chain of command. It's more difficult to lead when employees have little respect for authority or directives coupled with companies that do not enforce chain of command rules.

You can hire a master artist to paint you a portrait, but if you only give them Jello and a steel 'canvas' to work with, your painting isn't going to be so great.

I have a few decades in private sector, 8yrs as a reserve officer, and I recently was publically berated by a junior engineer after simply asking him to explain his work (which was, incidentally, incorrect). He was forced to publically apologize in the face of losing his job, but this was an extreme example. An event like this would virtually never happen in the military, but I see it happen fairly routinely to other senior staff, albeit less extreme cases, with junior employees that do not have a military background.

There is a professional and orderly way to handle dissagrements with authority. The military helps teach you how to handle those situations in a more productive and stable manner.

Just on a side tangent. A lot of great art, comes out in part from the restriction of materials being used. A portrait from Jello and steel would be awesome.

> After the armed services, corporate leadership has got to be a total breeze.

“Total breeze” is probably an overstatement given the culture differences between the military and civilian worlds, but otherwise I agree.

Yeah, its probably harder to get people to follow direction when they can't be court-marshalled if they don't.

Its not surprising, just something I never thought about. It's more like when you notice the wall's of the cage you're in moment. With that said, West Point is a great school.

Isn't the DoD a civilian institution?

The US DoD includes civilian agencies and all of the US armed forces.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_De...

> I took it as some sort government control of industry collusion.

Why?

The more mundane explanation is that the military teaches you how to tolerate command chain bullshit on a daily basis.

Large companies are more about navigating political waters than they are about getting stuff done.

Or that wars and retail dominance are both won by logistics and the leadership skills are transferrable. Lots of former military at every level of Amazon.

That isn't the reason. It's that the leadership training and experience of someone who has been placed in command of a large military unit is roughly equivalent to the demands placed on a corporate executive. In many ways, we're perfect targets, not just because of the leadership training and experience, but the extreme devotion to mission and personal sacrifice. Where else are you going to find people who regularly worked 20 hour days 7 days a week for up to 15 months in a foreign country? No matter how much you ask of an employee, you can't possibly ask more than the military did. Every time I read about Amazon employees pissing in bottles, I can't help but think of how many times I did just that when I was commanding tank crews. Working yourself to death and never taking a break is just an ordinary day in the service.

Where we struggle is in what others have identified in this thread. As a military leader, you're used to having complete control of your subordinates. You can confine them and in some cases execute them for not following orders. It takes some getting used to being in a situation where your reports have personal liberties guaranteed by the Constitution and you have to follow labor laws and what not. I've seen a lot of former military officers struggle with this. My wife's ex boss (and part of the reason he is now an ex boss) reported a hospitalization incident all the way up his chain of command, seemingly unaware of the existence of HIPAA. Soldiers don't have privacy rights, but ordinary citizens do.

There's also a dichotomy. Companies following rules, doing things the way they always did, inevitably leads to stagnation. You need creative people that break these rules and innovate. Sometimes even burn off parts of a companies portfolio that are still successful, to get to the next thing. Just from my brief study of personality types.