Olympic skier 18-year-old Eileen Gu is now famous for her accomplishments at the 2022 Beijing Olympics and equally infamous in the United States for choosing to represent China rather than the country in which she was born and raised.
The actions of this young woman are lamentable, and she will rue the day she made such a momentous and disastrous decision. Youth may forgive many transgressions, indulgences, and peccadillos—but not traitorous acts.
The embrace of the Chinese regime’s totalitarianism and the rejection of freedom and opportunity provided to her by the United States should make Americans apoplectic. Her judgement and the lack of loyalty is an insult to the Chinese American community within the United States. It also suggests deeper problems.
First, how does Gu’s generation understand patriotism, loyalty, and fidelity to the United States?
Second, how many will be willing to offer their service to the United States and endure the sacrifices necessary through military or other U.S. government employment?
In other words, how great is the “Eileen Gu” problem for the United States?
If Gu’s solipsism, foolishness, and betrayal are symptoms of a major weakness for the United States, her generation’s patriotism is weak among many that age. Thus, Gu’s action is a symbol of the loss of patriotism among some Americans. It is also a step toward normalization of treason for young Americans.
If these symptoms are indications of a deeper malaise with Gu’s generation, the consequences for the future of the United States will be profound. As a result of years of progressive indoctrination of America’s youth, the country is at a tipping point.
The consequence of this indoctrination is now at the fore: why should progressive young Americans serve a country that they have been taught by the educational system and popular culture, has an oppressive history, and is far worse than other countries?
One result may be that it is more difficult to recruit Americans into governmental service, and more broadly, into public service. That is a deep concern. It will take many years to reveal itself fully as today’s young enter more senior positions, although it is already anticipated by the entry of millennials into mid- and even senior ranks in some fields, including Big Tech.
Military recruitment is an important example. With the end of conscription in 1973, the recruitment of the enlisted force has been a significant challenge in both the Cold War and post-Cold War environments. Broadly, the motivation of the recruit depends on four factors: patriotism; the desire to receive training, skills, and acquire leadership abilities; the health of the civilian economy; and the desire of young people to test oneself through military service.
Thus, an ambivalent patriotism of Gu’s generation may be offset to some degree by the fact that military service will continue to offer considerable opportunity and appeal. This is because it allows the development of skills and training for future employment or for a leadership position in the civilian sector or in public service. Progressivism does not mean the end of personal ambition.
In the future, as in the past, innumerable individuals will seek advantages as they climb what Benjamin Disraeli termed the “greasy pole” of politics. They will realize that the military will serve as an important credential for personal advancement in civilian careers, including politics, and will remain a mechanism for the development of talents and leadership abilities in uniquely challenging circumstances. Economic downturns will also make military service more attractive. Age is important as well.
Historically, young men have sought to test themselves and evinced a desire to be a part of something greater than oneself. Since the ancient Greeks or early Chinese empires, military service has always provided men an ability to experience adversity and hardship, and to challenge themselves in the company of other men in a uniquely severe and unforgiving environment of profound risks and great dangers. That was well captured by the U.S. Marines’ recruiting advertisements years ago that stated they were looking for “a few good men with the mettle to be Marines.”
As important as they are, these motivations will not be sufficient. Americans should enter and remain in public service for reasons of patriotism, not for careerism or the lack of economic opportunity. They should possess a fervent desire to return in some measure what the country has provided. That desire will contribute to their reenlistment in the military—so good people remain in the military for many years or as a career. This is just as important in the civilian sector where patriotism will sustain them in the tests and tribulations that their public service undoubtedly will entail.
Lost with the rise of progressivism has been patriotic education and the positive consideration and reinforcement of patriotism in popular culture. Traditional recruiting appeals furthered messages of freedom and service to the country. Unfortunately, these messages will not be sufficient as patriotism fades in popular memory and its cultural force to entice citizens to do the right thing for the right reasons weakens, too.
A review of the recruiting advertisements suggests that joining the military will allow one “to do good” and develop useful skills and abilities. Judged by their ads, the services seem almost embarrassed to make patriotic recruitment appeals.
Fortunately, for every Eileen Gu, there are many thousands of Americans—including 18 year olds, Chinese-Americans, and Olympic-class skiers—who serve as soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and guardians on the Korean DMZ, in Europe, in intercontinental ballistic missile silos, or protecting freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. These men and women did not betray their country. They are not well compensated. And the public is not likely to know their names. But they are the pillar upon which the security, stability, and prosperity of the country rests.
Gu demonstrates that the United States has problems in its youth, but those who serve shows it also has solutions in that generation. The trouble Gu symbolizes will fade if patriotism is no longer seen as a problem but as a solution.
