Historically, the U.S. Armed Forces have been seen as leaders in reducing racial disparities in the nation. While this is largely true, the journey to equality was filled with challenges. In her book, Beth Bailey provides a detailed and insightful look at the U.S. Army's struggles with racial tension and the difficulty of making changes in such a large organization. This well-researched work is essential for historians and anyone interested in modern military issues.

Although I never served in the U.S. Military, my family has ties to all branches of the armed forces. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book. I received an advance review copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.

A great overview of the racial tensions within the U.S. Army at the height of the Vietnam War. Bailey does an excellent job of tracing the roots of racial tension over previous conflicts. The comparison with the 'Double V' campaign during WWII provides excellent contrast between competing views of black masculinity and racial pride. While Bailey attempts to illustrate the breakdown of the 'same mud, same blood' philosophy that created a détente between black and white soldiers, I feel the examples provided indicated flashpoints more than complete rejection of racial cooperation. A fascinating work that contextualized the black soldier experience at the height of the Civil Rights movement.

An Army Afire by Beth Bailey tells the historical account of race relations in the US military during the Vietnam war. I requested this book so that I could learn more about the inner workings of the military at the time President Harry Truman ended racial segregation in the US Armed forces.

I learned so much about the history of how the race problem was viewed and defined during the 60s and the attempts the military made to establish race relations education and training. It took the situation escalating to crisis level for the heart of the issue to be addressed. The text defines two pillars of importance to the solution of the race problem:

1. Black soldiers needed to feel seen, respected, and to have their cultural identity honored
2. White soldiers needed to understand and respect Black culture and be confronted with their own prejudices

While I do not come from a military family or background, I found that the historical accounts in the text where easily accessible and the military terms did not take away from my ability to understand and connect with the text. I enjoyed reading about The Defense Race Relations Institute that trained military staff to serve as race relations instructors tasked with ensuring that equal opportunities initiatives were carried out effectively.

The section on hair and the advocacy of a younger generation of Black soldiers who wanted to wear their afros out loud and proud and the shifts in conversation this caused in the military was one of my favorite sections of the narrative. I also enjoyed the section on the history of roTC which was new learning for me though I knew prior to reading that roTC provides high recruitment numbers for the military into the present day.

The author ends the book by speaking to the present day demographics of the army and the changes that did occur as a result of the work that was done to move toward racial justice. Overall, this is a great historical read for those interested in learning more about the inner workings of the military during racial integration.

Thank you to the author and publisher for the e-arc copy!

Social Historian Beth Bailey Ph.D has written a social history of the United States Military during Vietnam. Dr. Bailey has used her experiences in writing social histories of sexuality in the midwest during the post-World War Two era as well as in World War Two Hawaii and has created less of a military history concerning the Vietnam Era and more of a Sociological study of the United States Army in particular. Dr. Bailey does provide cogent and well-reasoned arguments concerning the impact of race relations as it was then called by the United States Military. Is the military a social institution that needs to be reflective of the broader society? Is the military culture so outside of the mainstream of society that makes it reflective and detracts from the purpose of the military? The lessons put forth in this work are even more important in todays world. During the Vietnam Era, roughly ten percent of that generation served in the United States military, In today's all-volunteer military less of the total population has any service affiliation directly and roughly 3.7 million have served in the past twenty years. This is a vast gulf between those who have served and those that have not. Should the military practice Democracy or defend it and at what cost?