DCA slams abstract, jargon-heavy language as a killer
Share the post "DCA slams abstract, jargon-heavy language as a killer"
Addressing last year’s Chief of Army’s History Conference, Deputy Chief of Army Major General Chris Smith delivered a remarkable and controversial speech, which was only recently made public.
CAPTION: Deputy Chief of Army Major General Chris Smith addresses the Chief of Army’s History Conference 2025. Video screenshot.
“While governments often neglect the Army during peacetime, the Army also neglects itself, particularly its professional foundations,” Major General Smith said.
“A key symptom of this neglect is the Army’s use of abstract, jargon-heavy, managerial language [that] obscure the violent reality of war and disconnect soldiers from the true nature of their profession.
“This abstraction fosters complacency, intellectual shallowness, and hubris, reinforced by ignorance of military history.”
In this inspiring address, Major General Smith illustrated his argument with [controversial/damming] examples from Rwanda and Afghanistan, describing complacency, poor discipline, weak leadership, and a lack of moral courage – that led to avoidable loss of life.
.
.
.
.
Well, his caree is finished. I bet he knew that; that is why he finally spoke up.
As a 33 year soldier I realised far too late that the Australian Army has very little to do with fighting wars. It is all about getting a up the ladder. ADFA is by far the breeding ground for that; but unfortunately the WO and NCO corp is very much the same.
Deploying to a war zone made little difference. It was a sad experience in many ways after training so hard in the early days of my soldiering.
Bloody well said Sir!
Deputy Chief of Army Major General Smith is absolutely correct; however, I reckon that the problems he highlighted started even earlier than he recognises.
As a baggy-arse digger in the 1970s, and before that as a kid growing up in Puckapunyal, I was told that our soldiers were better than most because they could use their initiative and take action without the need for unnecessary approval from above. DCA’s example of inaction in Rwanda and the consequential massacre(s) is heart-wrenching and helps to explain why Rwanda veterans can be terribly troubled all these years later.
Enough of the namby- pamby talk. No more abstract, jargon-heavy, managerial language. Say what needs to be said and get on with the job, be that training for war or fighting in war.
Although a soldier, I was embedded in a US Air Force unit for three years. The Yanks used to be briefed about working with Aussies. They were told that we are the masters of the understatement, that we are direct when we speak and we don’t waste words. They were warned not to be offended. It seems to me that working so much with the Americans lately has allowed their apparent love of verbosity to become our new normal. Oh yeah, they were also told that we cuss a lot and that they should not be offended.
Although the DCA did not mention it, I believe that a lack of resilience, as it affects some of our soldiers, and others including the general community, could be attributed to many of the points he made.
It’s almost saddening that an honest presentation would be considered a “remarkable and controversial speech”. Let’s hope it has the impact that the DCA intended.
Very well put and pertinent.
Reminds me of the comment, get me a digging implement and you will end up with anything from a teaspoon to an earthmoving machine rather than the shovel you wanted or need.
Not to mention as young 18-year-old NASHOS being brought to reality by the Platoon Bombardier in plain colourful Australian, that we were training for war and not a picnic