essay about uniform bring dignity and unity

Uniforms: Threads of Unity and Identity

An essay on uniforms can explore their multifaceted roles across various domains—education, professions, service, sports, and cultural contexts. It can delve into the symbolic significance of uniforms as more than attire, symbolizing unity, identity, and belonging. The essay might discuss their impact on equality in educational settings, the professionalism they signify in workplaces, the trust they instill in service industries, the team spirit they foster in sports, and the preservation of traditions and heritage in cultural contexts. Furthermore, it could examine the ongoing debate about uniforms stifling individuality versus promoting discipline and inclusivity. Ultimately, this essay would highlight how uniforms transcend material form, weaving a narrative of unity and identity within the diverse fabric of human experiences. Moreover, at PapersOwl, there are additional free essay samples connected to Identity.

How it works

Uniforms are more than threads; they’re woven with the fabric of unity, identity, and purpose. Beyond mere garments, they encapsulate symbolism, shaping perceptions, fostering camaraderie, and delineating roles across multifaceted domains.

At their essence, uniforms transcend attire; they’re potent symbols of belonging. In academia, they equalize, erasing socio-economic disparities and focusing on learning over superficial differences. Whether it’s a classic blazer and tie or a simple polo shirt, these uniforms instill pride and cohesion among students, cultivating an environment primed for academic growth.

Transitioning into the professional arena, uniforms metamorphose into badges of professionalism and identity. From tailored corporate suits exuding confidence to healthcare scrubs symbolizing expertise, these attires embody dedication and competence. They’re not just clothing; they’re visual statements commanding respect and trust from clients and patients.

In the realm of service, uniforms embody trust and reliability. Consider the crisp attire of flight attendants or the authoritative garb of law enforcement officers. They signify safety, service, and authority—an assurance for the public, fostering a sense of security.

In sports, uniforms unify, forging team spirit. Identical jerseys worn by athletes symbolize unity and a collective drive for victory, transcending individual identities for the sake of teamwork.

Moreover, uniforms hold cultural significance, preserving traditions and heritage. Traditional ceremonial dress represents history and values, connecting generations through symbolic attire.

The debate around uniforms isn’t one-sided. Critics argue they stifle individuality and creativity, enforcing conformity. Yet, proponents tout discipline, equality, and a sense of belonging, outweighing constraints on personal expression.

Beyond debates, uniform evolution mirrors societal shifts. Modern uniforms prioritize functionality and inclusivity, accommodating various body types and cultural sensitivities.

As society progresses, uniforms adapt. In the digital age, virtual uniforms—consistent online branding—create visual identities. From influencers to online businesses, these digital uniforms convey credibility in a screen-dominated world.

In essence, uniforms embody ideologies and values, transcending material form. They symbolize unity, equality, and identity in education, professions, service, sports, and cultural contexts. Balancing conformity and cohesion, uniforms spark debates, shape perceptions, and etch their mark on society’s fabric. Uniforms thread together narratives of unity, purpose, and collective identity in the diverse tapestry of human experiences.

Cite this page

Uniforms: Threads of Unity and Identity. (2023, Dec 22). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/uniforms-threads-of-unity-and-identity/

"Uniforms: Threads of Unity and Identity." PapersOwl.com , 22 Dec 2023, https://papersowl.com/examples/uniforms-threads-of-unity-and-identity/

PapersOwl.com. (2023). Uniforms: Threads of Unity and Identity . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/uniforms-threads-of-unity-and-identity/ [Accessed: 27 May. 2024]

"Uniforms: Threads of Unity and Identity." PapersOwl.com, Dec 22, 2023. Accessed May 27, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/uniforms-threads-of-unity-and-identity/

"Uniforms: Threads of Unity and Identity," PapersOwl.com , 22-Dec-2023. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/uniforms-threads-of-unity-and-identity/. [Accessed: 27-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2023). Uniforms: Threads of Unity and Identity . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/uniforms-threads-of-unity-and-identity/ [Accessed: 27-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

The Significance of Wearing Uniforms: Fostering Unity, Equality, and Identity

Lily summers.

• November 28, 2023

Uniforms have long been a staple in various sectors of society, ranging from schools and workplaces to military and sports teams. While the styles and colors may vary, the underlying principle of wearing a uniform remains constant – to create a sense of identity, promote equality, and foster unity. In this article, we will explore the multifaceted importance of wearing uniforms in different contexts.

One noteworthy example of the significance of uniforms is evident in the offerings of Đồng Phục Đông Đô . This company exemplifies the importance of uniformity in diverse settings. Đồng Phục Đông Đô specializes in crafting uniforms that not only meet the functional requirements of various industries but also contribute to the overall sense of unity and professionalism. Their commitment to quality and design reflects the broader impact that well-designed uniforms can have on individuals and organizations.

Promoting Equality

One of the primary reasons for wearing uniforms is to promote equality. In educational institutions and workplaces, uniforms eliminate visible markers of socioeconomic status, reducing the impact of financial disparities among individuals. When everyone is dressed in the same attire, the focus shifts from outward appearances to individual capabilities and achievements. This fosters an environment where everyone feels equal, creating a more inclusive and harmonious atmosphere.

Fostering Unity and Team Spirit

Uniforms play a crucial role in fostering a sense of unity and team spirit, particularly in settings such as sports teams, military units, and other organized groups. When individuals wear the same uniform, they become part of a collective identity, reinforcing a sense of belonging and shared purpose. This shared identity can enhance teamwork, collaboration, and cooperation, leading to improved group dynamics and performance.

Creating a Professional Image

In professional settings, uniforms contribute to the creation of a polished and cohesive image for an organization. Whether it’s a corporate office, a medical facility, or a hospitality establishment, uniforms help convey a sense of professionalism and competence. This not only instills confidence in clients and customers but also reinforces a sense of pride among employees who represent their organization through a standardized and professional appearance.

Enhancing Safety and Security

In certain industries, uniforms are designed with safety and security in mind. For example, high-visibility uniforms worn by construction workers or protective gear worn by healthcare professionals not only establish a professional appearance but also serve practical purposes. Uniforms in these contexts act as a visual identifier, ensuring that individuals are easily recognizable and can be quickly located in the event of an emergency.

Reducing Peer Pressure and Distractions

In educational institutions, uniforms can help reduce peer pressure related to clothing choices. By standardizing attire, schools create a level playing field, eliminating the need for students to compete based on their clothing brands or styles. This not only eases the financial burden on families but also minimizes distractions, allowing students to focus on their studies rather than their appearance.

Wearing uniforms goes beyond just a dress code; it is a powerful tool for promoting equality, fostering unity, creating a professional image, enhancing safety, and reducing distractions. In various sectors of society, uniforms play a vital role in shaping identity and building a sense of community. As we navigate the complexities of an ever-changing world, the importance of uniforms in creating a cohesive and inclusive environment remains as relevant as ever.

About the Author

Most popular.

The Meaning Behind: Triangle Symbols in Tattoos

A Primer on the Diarrhea Song: Origins, Lyrics, and Structure

What Would Be the Order of the Twilight Sequels If Midnight Sun Was Released?

This Is The Way to Watch the Lord of the Rings In Order

Stay up to date.

10 Strategically Important Businesses That Film Studios Rely On

10 Important Services Touring Musicians Should Invest In

Fun Ways You Can Entertain Your Guests at Home

Listen Up, Your Car’s Whispering: Signs it Needs TLC

Question and Answer forum for K12 Students

School Uniforms Essay | Short and Long Essays, Importance and Benefits of School Uniforms

School Uniforms Essay: School uniforms should be utilized in educational systems. Uniforms are both as useful for schools just as for the pupils. Wearing outfits will help construct a feeling of solidarity inside the school. Rather than everybody as a different group, everybody will be in a similar group. Wearing regalia will help free pupils of the pressure of what to wear in the first part of the day. Wearing school outfits will help improve understudy distinction and improve their confidence. To start with, wearing coordinating outfits can cause pupils to feel equivalent. Helpless pupils would at this point don’t feel rejected on the grounds that they are not wearing name-brand garments like the more extravagant children.

You can read more  Essay Writing  about articles, events, people, sports, technology many more.

What is a School Uniform?

In straightforward words, we comprehend that the Uniform or material which is recommended by the school for pupils to wear in school is called school uniform. Generally in all schools uniform is mandatory.The Uniform gives balance and comparability between the pupils, everything being equal. These days, all schools keep the principles of wearing a normalized uniform for all pupils.

How to Write a School Uniform Essay?

To write an essay students should know the proper format. Also, they should be well aware of the topic on which they have to write the essay. Writing an essay on school uniforms requires the knowledge of the merits and demerits of wearing a school uniform. Students should list down the advantages of uniforms in schools.

Remember these points while writing the essay on school uniform:

• Give introduction on school uniform in the first paragraph
• Explain the advantages and disadvantages of wearing a school uniform
• Explain how wearing a uniform brings changes in students
• Conclude the essay in the last paragraph

Short Essay on School Uniform 150 Words in English

School uniforms are the solitary most apparent fundamental components of any school. We can distinguish the understudy by assessing their regalia.

It is said that, in the sixteenth century, Christ’s Hospital School originally utilized the school uniform. There has been a discussion everywhere in the world on whether the subject of school uniforms is positive or negative. Common liberties activists say that school uniforms are removing their opportunity of wearing anything. In guard, the School Committee says they give a school uniform to instruct them in order and solidarity.

School uniforms can build the pay of a custom-fitted local area. And furthermore, a business organization can bring in cash by creating school regalia. School uniforms are a conventional clothing standard including a shirt and full gasp for young men and pullovers and creased skirts for young ladies. School dress can lessen fabric harassment.

Yet in addition, these days youngsters are more cognizant about their design sense and sexual direction, so they don’t prefer to wear a similar unisex clothing standard. However, after every one of those contentions and dubious speculations, we can say, school regalia are as a matter of fact pride for an understudy.

Long Essay on School Uniform 650 Words

Schools are instructive establishments where kids go not exclusively to learn course readings however to develop as a general person. Schools likewise have the assignment of showing youngsters the desire for garments and mention to them what is proper for what event. School outfits are a basic type of garments for pupils during their visit at school during school hours, and outside during true school exercises. A school uniform is normal in a large portion of the schools. They have direct requests to wear the school uniform as a matter of course.

The necessity of School Uniform

Initially, school is where we all progress at an extremely youthful age. In a single word, life starts at school. It’s schooling, as well as school, gives us the stage to sustain our confidence, feelings in the beginning phase of life. The significance of making companions, functioning as a group we get familiar with every one of these in school. What’s more, wearing a similar dress unquestionably brings a feeling of solidarity among pupils. In each school, there are pupils from various foundations yet with the school uniform everybody becomes one-the lone character rules at that point is every one of them is the delegate of a similar school. This is an incredible inclination of harmony. This likewise assists kids with defeating the inadequacy (or predominance) complex which here and their kids have due to the climate they have been raised in. School outfits streak out a large portion of the drops of social contentions.

As school makes our crucial nuts and bolts of the future it is critical to cause one to feel as a piece of the school. A youngster with a specific school uniform constantly feels that he has a place with the school. It makes the youngster more cognizant about his distinction which thus helps to build fearlessness. A kid would be more thoughtful to his kindred cohort who has a similar uniform as his. As referenced before there would be consistently a blended group in each school. Some of them are rich, some have a place with the upper working class and some lower than that-this distinction remains all over, aside from those 8 hours in school due to the school uniform. The supposed status cognizance doesn’t exist with this.

Benefits of School Uniform

Another admirable sentiment comes up while examining the benefits of school uniform is younger students go through two most significant progress times of life in school-they burn through 12 long a long time in school-from adolescence to teen, from adolescent to youth-the school observer the progressions ( both physical and mental) happen inside one. During these changes, somebody barely thinks often about the world. That time there is a propensity among us all to disrupt the norm which should be managed cautiously and strategically.

Now wearing school regalia assumes a quiet yet urgent part in our lives. It ingrains a profound established feeling of control in the psyche mind. Subsequently, typically even the riskiest formally dressed understudy wonders whether or not to do any underhandedness outside the school as the moment suspected plays to him that he will let down his school with his activity. School uniform assists an understudy with focusing on his necessities-where school and scholastics start things out.

Even after some elegantly composed diagrams of papers on school uniforms, the contention on whether a school uniform abuses the pupils’ privilege of articulation will stay a ceaseless conversation. Be that as it may, truly, wearing of regalia should all rely upon the conditions and the picture a given school is attempting to depict. In any case, the significance of school uniforms appears to win the day today even as I compose this end and surprisingly after so many school uniform articles have been composed. On the last note, we should attempt to discover perpetual methods of tackling the developing issues looked at by pupils. We ought not to depend on school regalia to swipe the issues away from view, this does the pupils nothing but bad.

Importance of School Uniform

The uniform is a necessary piece of our life. The dress is a character of somebody. Through the dress, we become acquainted with which school the understudy is. The educator has a crucial part in picking a dress. He chooses the school uniform by taking a gander at all the classes. Uniform symbols, alongside schooling, order, and decorum help in altering the state and course of society.

Wearing legitimate clothing expands our trust in the public arena since it positively affects our work and thinking. These days, our local area has gotten a matter of rivalry for our kids. It appears to be that their dress is influencing them every day.

The wearing of our kids has additionally become an essential factor somewhat for the criminal occurrences occurring in the public eye. In an understudy’s life, the educator and parent are the types of God. School dress is viewed as a recipe for equity.

Advantages of School Uniform

• School uniforms are a need in many schools to achieve consistency in pupils.
• School uniform binds together all pupils, paying little heed to their social, strict, and monetary foundation.
• It imparts a feeling of having a place in the pupils.
• It assists with restraining pupils and keeps everything under control since they are not occupied by their special garments.
• pupils don’t have to object about what to wear each day in the event that they have school regalia.
• It is hard for low-pay families to purchase school regalia each spending year, and it might make a strain in their financial plan.
• School outfits force consistency and consequently make pupils a mass of anonymous kids and with no singularity.
• It is hard for pupils to check their friend’s monetary condition in the event that they are wearing school dresses.
• pupils can be not kidding about their examinations and figure out how to endeavor to be deserving of the custom.
• School dress can make pupils unoriginal.

FAQ’s on Schools Uniforms Essay

Question 1. What students should wear uniforms in school?

Answer: Uniforms are both as useful for schools just as for the pupils. Wearing uniforms will help fabricate a feeling of loneliness inside the school. To start with, wearing coordinating uniforms can cause pupils to feel equivalent. Helpless pupils would presently don’t feel barred in light of the fact that they are not wearing name-brand garments like the more extravagant children.

Question 2. How to write an essay on a school uniform?

Answer: Start with an introduction, discuss the debate going on school uniforms by students, write the cons and pros of school uniforms. Explains the advantages and changes that wearing a school uniform can bring in students. End the essay with a conclusion.

Question 3. What is good about school uniforms?

Answer: School uniforms have been demonstrated to raise test scores, support confidence, diminish savagery and wrongdoing, and make a feeling of freshly discovered pride in pupils. They assist youngsters with zeroing in on learning and homework, not on the thing every other person is wearing or whether they fit in. Outfits are not the answer for the entirety of the issues that adolescents, instructors, and schools face today, however, examination and insights propose that they might be a positive development.

Question 4. Should students wear school uniforms?

Answer: Yes, all students should wear school uniforms since it represents discipline and equality among students in school.

Home — Essay Samples — Education — School Uniform — The Benefits of School Uniforms

The Benefits of School Uniforms

• Categories: Art History School Uniform

About this sample

Words: 585 |

Published: Mar 16, 2024

Words: 585 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Table of contents

Promoting equality, improving academic performance, enhancing school safety, instilling a sense of pride and belonging.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Arts & Culture Education

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 492 words

1 pages / 557 words

3 pages / 1514 words

3 pages / 1209 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on School Uniform

In recent times, the question of whether students should be mandated to wear uniforms in schools has sparked intense debates. While proponents argue for the benefits of uniforms, it's essential to critically examine why students [...]

One of the ongoing debates in the education system is whether students should be required to wear school uniforms. While some argue that uniforms promote equality and discipline, I believe that enforcing a dress code on students [...]

For years, schools have implemented dress codes with the intention of maintaining a sense of decorum and discipline among students. However, many argue that dress codes restrict students' freedom of expression and can perpetuate [...]

School uniforms have been a topic of debate in educational institutions for decades. While proponents argue that uniforms promote equality and discipline among students, opponents argue that they stifle individuality and impede [...]

Education is crucial for everyone as it provides people with the necessary knowledge and skills they need to thrive in the world. For students to obtain the education required for future investments, it is vital [...]

There has been a great deal of controversy in school districts around the world on whether or not school uniforms should be made mandatory. Though public schools started using uniforms back in the 1980s, the debate on whether [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

School uniforms are meant to foster a sense of belonging and raise achievement – but it’s not clear that they do

Senior Lecturer in Education, University of Aberdeen

Disclosure statement

Rachel Shanks does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

View all partners

In France, MPs have recently considered whether to reintroduce compulsory school uniform, with first lady Brigitte Macron adding her support to the idea. “It erases differences, it saves time,” she said. These perceptions of the benefits of uniform are widely held – but do they hold up?

French MPs voted against the idea, but uniform is the norm in the UK and has a long history – one which predates universal primary education. This tradition is reinforced in popular media representations of school in the UK, such as the St Trinian’s and Harry Potter films. Uniform requirements may cover what is worn to and from school as well as what is worn in the classroom, and also for physical education.

To understand whether school uniform works or is beneficial, we have to consider what uniforms are meant to achieve. Together with students at the University of Aberdeen, I carried out research on school uniform at all 357 publicly funded secondary schools in Scotland.

We found that 96% of these secondary schools had a compulsory uniform. In our analysis of the school uniform policies, we found a variety of reasons being given to justify compulsory uniforms, with an emphasis on it being in pupils’ own interest .

The most common reason given by schools for this stance was that uniform fosters an ethos, identity, pride and sense of belonging. Other reasons included increasing safety and security and reducing truancy, as well as reducing competition and discrimination between students and increasing employability. Schools also said that uniform was beneficial for the reputation of the school and would improve standards of work among pupils.

The Scottish government has recently stated that: “It is recognised that school uniform plays an important part in the engagement of pupils with school, in promoting a sense of identity, belonging and connectedness to school.”

However, it is not possible to identify whether uniform alone improves factors such as identity and belonging, as the introduction or revamping of a school uniform often coincides with other changes such as a new headteacher or senior leadership team within a school.

Looking the same

In a review of research studies, the Education Endowment Foundation did not find a link between wearing a uniform and an improvement in learning. Another review of research has also found no direct link between uniform and academic performance.

The safety and security reason given by Scottish schools is similar to the reason for introducing school uniform in the US in the 1990s: to reduce gang presence and violence in schools there. By making everyone wear the same clothes, people cannot tell which gang you belong to, or which football team you support.

Uniform may provide the perception that a school is safer or more secure, but there is no UK data to back this up. Research from the US found that teachers perceived schools to be more secure, but that it did not affect students’ perceptions of school security.

In more than 50 of the schools we studied, pupils were being told that wearing a uniform would be useful for their future working lives or employability, as it replicates the working environment . But there are fewer jobs that require uniforms and many workplaces now have more relaxed dress codes.

What’s more, research has found that uniform had a negative impact on girls, young people from an ethnic or religious minority, and gender-diverse young people. The uniform that these young people were required to wear did not match their needs. For example, girls wearing skirts are less likely to be physically active and can feel objectified.

The cost of uniform

There is also a general feeling that a school uniform provides a “level playing field” – that it makes everyone appear the same. The idea is to prevent competition and discrimination about clothing between pupils , as well as improving discipline in a more holistic way and potentially reducing bullying.

However, instead of creating a level playing field, some uniform policies do the opposite . School uniform can cost more than school clothing grants provided to help with the affordability of a uniform.

There is a national minimum clothing grant in Scotland of £150 per year for eligible pupils in secondary schools, but The Children’s Society estimated that uniform cost £337 a year in 2020. There can be stigma about wearing secondhand uniforms, which is why school uniform banks tend to provide new uniforms.

Many schools have exclusive arrangements with suppliers which can make uniform more expensive . Among the schools in our study, almost 20% had this kind of exclusive arrangement .

Schools may also have a list of items that must be worn in school or PE, as well as a list of items that must not be worn.

School uniform at state secondary schools in Scotland:

Banning everyday items makes uniform more expensive. It adds to the cost of the school day for families, and leads to the creation of school uniform banks.

The Cost of the School Day from charity the Child Poverty Action Group helps schools to create uniform policies that all families can afford. If uniforms are used, then enough financial support should be provided to cover the full cost for eligible families. However, there is no solid research base to rely on to support the requirement for uniforms in schools.

• School uniform

Research Fellow

Senior Research Fellow - Women's Health Services

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Learn And Play

The Case for Universal School Uniforms: Fostering Equity, Unity, and Focus on Learning

School uniforms have long been a topic of debate among educators, parents, and policymakers. While some argue that uniforms infringe upon students ‘ individuality and expression, others advocate for their implementation as a means of promoting discipline, equality, and a conducive learning environment. In this article, we explore the merits of adopting universal school uniform policies and how they can contribute to a more equitable, unified, and focused educational experience.

Promoting Equity and Inclusivity

1. leveling the playing field.

One of the primary benefits of universal school uniforms is their ability to mitigate socioeconomic disparities among students. By mandating a standard dress code, regardless of socioeconomic background, schools can create a more equitable learning environment where all students feel included and valued. Uniforms eliminate the pressure to wear expensive or fashionable clothing, reducing the stigma associated with economic disadvantage and promoting a sense of belonging among students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds.

2. Fostering Inclusivity and Diversity

Uniforms also promote inclusivity and diversity by minimizing visible markers of social status, fashion trends, or cultural differences. Regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, or personal preferences, all students are treated equally and judged based on their character, conduct, and academic achievements rather than their outward appearance. This fosters a sense of unity and acceptance, fostering positive relationships and reducing instances of bullying, discrimination, or peer pressure related to clothing choices.

Enhancing School Safety and Security

1. improving identification and accountability.

Uniforms enhance school safety and security by facilitating easier identification of students and staff on campus. With a standardized dress code, unauthorized individuals are more easily recognized, reducing the risk of intruders or outsiders gaining access to school premises unnoticed. Additionally, uniforms promote a sense of accountability among students, as they are easily identifiable both within the school and during off-campus activities, minimizing the likelihood of misconduct or unauthorized behavior.

2. Minimizing Gang Affiliation and Peer Pressure

Another advantage of school uniforms is their role in mitigating gang affiliation and peer pressure associated with gang-related attire or symbols. By prohibiting clothing that may be associated with gang culture, schools create a safer environment where students are less susceptible to gang recruitment or influence. Uniforms also alleviate peer pressure to conform to certain styles or brands, reducing the likelihood of conflict or tension related to clothing choices and promoting a focus on academic and extracurricular pursuits.

Fostering a Culture of Discipline and Academic Focus

1. instilling discipline and professionalism.

Uniforms instill a sense of discipline, responsibility, and professionalism among students, preparing them for future academic and professional endeavors. By adhering to a dress code, students learn the importance of following rules, respecting authority, and presenting themselves appropriately in various social settings. This fosters a culture of discipline and academic rigor, where students are focused on their studies and personal development rather than external appearances or social distractions.

2. Reducing Distractions and Peer Pressure

Uniforms minimize distractions in the classroom by eliminating discussions or comparisons related to clothing, fashion trends, or personal styles. Without the pressure to keep up with the latest fashion or conform to peer expectations, students can concentrate more fully on their studies, participate actively in class discussions, and engage in collaborative learning activities. This creates a more conducive learning environment where academic achievement takes precedence over superficial concerns about appearance or social status.

Conclusion: Embracing Uniformity for Educational Excellence

In conclusion, universal school uniforms offer numerous benefits that contribute to a more equitable, inclusive, and focused educational environment. By promoting equity, inclusivity, safety, and discipline, uniforms help create a school culture where all students feel valued, respected, and empowered to succeed. While debates about individual expression and freedom of choice will continue, the evidence suggests that the adoption of universal school uniform policies can lead to positive outcomes for students, schools, and communities alike. As educators and stakeholders strive to create nurturing and supportive learning environments, embracing uniformity may prove to be a step toward achieving educational excellence and fostering the holistic development of students.

Recent Posts

• Navigating the Role: A Closer Look at the Current Secretary of Education
• Unlocking the Potential: Education and Training in University
• How to Get Ahead in IT: Certificates You Need
• Unveiling the Importance of Continuing Education in the English Language
• Unraveling the Differences Between American and European Education
• February 2024
• January 2024
• December 2023
• November 2023
• October 2023
• September 2023
• August 2023
• February 2023
• January 2023
• December 2022
• November 2022
• October 2022
• September 2022
• August 2022
• February 2022
• January 2022
• December 2021
• November 2021
• October 2021
• September 2021
• August 2021
• February 2021
• January 2021
• December 2020
• November 2020
• October 2020
• September 2020
• August 2020
• February 2020
• January 2020
• December 2019
• November 2019
• October 2019
• September 2019
• August 2019
• January 2019
• December 2018
• November 2018
• October 2018
• September 2018
• August 2018
• February 2018
• January 2018
• December 2017
• November 2017
• October 2017
• September 2017
• August 2017
• February 2017
• January 2017
• December 2016
• November 2016
• October 2016
• September 2016
• August 2016
• Board Of Education
• Continuing Education
• Current Secretary Of Education
• Deep Learning
• Department Of Education
• Education And Training
• Education Article
• Education Quotes
• Education World
• Educational Games
• General Article
• Higher Education
• Online Education
• Public School
• Secondary Education
• Secretary Of Education
• Special Education
• State Department
• US Department Of Education
• Disclosure Policy

• Mar 13, 2020

School Uniforms Save Money for Parents and Enhance Safety, School Pride, and Unity for Students

At West Virginia Academy, we plan to join the age-old tradition of students wearing uniforms to school each day. Teachers will also be expected to dress professionally. We believe there are many advantages to uniforms in the public school:

1. Uniforms save time and money. Choosing what to wear to school every morning can be a time consuming event and it can also be very expensive to keep up with the latest fashion trends. Parents can save both time and money with the purchase of school uniforms. French Toast is a provider of school uniforms that estimates that a year supply of long-lasting school uniforms costs around $125 per student, but uniforms also allow for a family swap that can reduce this price. We would seek to provide as many options for parents as possible to reduce costs and there are frequently great deals on pants, polo shirts, sweaters, and other clothing items at stores such as Old Navy, Children’s Place, JC Penney , and Walmart . Lastly, uniforms open the door for exchange programs to drive costs down further and also provide better opportunities for discrete assistance to low income families who need school clothes.

2. Safety and Security. With security on everyone’s mind, uniforms in the public school are an excellent way to increase student safety. Not only do uniforms help identify our students when on field trips or other outside events; within the school, uniforms readily identify members of our school community, which can be helpful in situations where an unknown visitor may pose a threat to the safety our students and staff.

3. Uniforms give students a sense of school pride and belonging. Just as fans wear their team's colors to a sports event to show their support. Wearing school uniforms increases loyalty to the school and promotes a sense of belonging and school spirit.

4. Uniforms reduce bullying and discourage illegal activity within the school. Because students come from all different socio-economic backgrounds, clothing is a way to distinguish those that are more affluent from those that can’t afford the latest fashion trends. Uniforms eliminate this distraction and avoids several situations that can contribute to bullying. Uniforms also reduce opportunities for students to engage in illegal activity or sneak items into school that should not be there. Uniforms foster a spirit of oneness among the students making them unlikely to attack fellow students.

5. Lastly, uniforms reduce distraction and shifts the focus to learning. Questions on whether a student will fit in are diminished, no one will be concerned about their clothing, thus reducing distractions and increasing the focus on academics instead of fashion.

School uniforms required in the public schools are on the rise. The National Center for Education Statistics estimated that between the years 2000 and 2016 the percentage of public schools requiring uniforms increased from 12 to 21 percent. When looking at public schools that require uniforms, those that have more than 76% of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunches were a greater percentage than those schools with lower percentages. The advantages in leveling the playing field for students from affluent and low income families could be what's driving this trend.

At West Virginia Academy, we feel that uniforms will benefit all our students as well their families.

• Academic Excellence

Recent Posts

WVA’s 1st Golden Horseshoe Winner!

Teacher Spotlight: Jennifer Ireland

West Virginia Department of Education Praises WVA's Special Education Programs.

WVDE Special Education employees visited WVA - see what they had to say.

4 comentários

interesting... very interesting :3

Very informal, the unknown informer didn't bother me because the website name explains it.

Essay on Importance of School Uniform

Students are often asked to write an essay on Importance of School Uniform in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Importance of School Uniform

Uniforms: a symbol of equality.

Uniforms are crucial in schools as they represent equality. No student is richer or poorer when everyone dresses the same. It helps in reducing social gaps.

Boosting Discipline and Respect

Uniforms instill a sense of discipline and respect. They prepare students for future workplaces where formal attire is often required.

Enhancing School Spirit

Uniforms boost school spirit. When students wear the same attire, they feel a sense of unity and pride towards their institution.

Safety and Identification

Uniforms ensure safety, as they make students easily identifiable within the school premises.

250 Words Essay on Importance of School Uniform

The symbolism of uniformity.

School uniforms play a profound role in the educational landscape. They symbolize a sense of belonging, fostering unity and equality among students. This uniformity transcends socioeconomic barriers, creating an environment where everyone starts on the same footing, thereby promoting social harmony.

Discipline and Focus

Uniforms instill discipline, a crucial virtue for personal and academic growth. They also reduce distractions, enabling students to concentrate on their studies. By eliminating the need to decide what to wear each day, uniforms allow students to focus their mental energy on more important tasks.

Identity and Representation

A school uniform is more than just clothing; it’s an emblem of the institution’s values and ethos. It instills a sense of pride in students, inspiring them to uphold the school’s reputation. This sense of identity can motivate students to perform better acadically and behave responsibly.

Safety and Security

Uniforms enhance safety within the school premises. They make it easier to identify outsiders, thus preventing unauthorized access. In case of emergencies, students can be quickly recognized and accounted for due to their uniforms.

Economic Implications

Uniforms can help families save money. Instead of spending on fashionable and expensive clothes, parents can invest in a few sets of uniforms that last throughout the year.

In conclusion, school uniforms play a significant role in shaping a conducive learning environment. They foster unity, discipline, and focus, while also promoting safety and economic efficiency. Despite the occasional debates over their necessity, the importance of school uniforms in the educational sphere is undeniable.

500 Words Essay on Importance of School Uniform

Introduction.

School uniforms have been a part of the educational system for centuries, symbolizing unity, discipline, and equality among students. Despite the ongoing debates about their relevance in modern times, school uniforms continue to play a significant role in shaping a student’s school experience.

Uniforms as a Leveler

One of the primary roles of a school uniform is to promote equality. By wearing the same attire, students are less likely to judge each other based on clothing style, brand, or cost. In this way, uniforms help mitigate socio-economic disparities, reducing instances of bullying or peer pressure related to fashion trends or perceived wealth. This fosters an environment where students can focus more on their studies and less on their wardrobes.

Instilling Discipline and Responsibility

School uniforms are not just about maintaining a dress code; they also serve as a tool for instilling discipline and responsibility. Wearing a uniform is a daily reminder of the rules and standards that students are expected to uphold. It encourages students to take pride in their appearance, fostering personal responsibility and self-discipline.

Contributing to School Identity and Unity

Uniforms also contribute to a sense of identity and unity within a school. They create a sense of belonging among students, strengthening school spirit. This collective identity can enhance students’ loyalty and commitment to their school, fostering a more cohesive and supportive learning environment.

Reducing Distractions

Uniforms can also reduce distractions in the classroom. Rather than focusing on the latest fashion trends or comparing outfits, students can concentrate on their studies. This leads to a more productive and focused learning environment, which can ultimately contribute to improved academic performance.

Enhancing Safety

Finally, school uniforms can enhance safety. They make it easier to identify students, preventing unauthorized individuals from entering the school premises unnoticed. In the event of a school trip or an emergency, uniforms allow for easy identification and account of students.

While school uniforms may seem like a trivial aspect of education, their impact is far-reaching. They promote equality, instill discipline, enhance school identity, reduce distractions, and improve safety. As such, they remain an integral part of the educational system. Despite the evolving fashion trends and calls for individual expression, the importance of school uniforms in fostering an inclusive, focused, and safe learning environment cannot be overstated. The school uniform, in its simplicity and uniformity, carries a profound message of unity and equality, a lesson that extends beyond the classroom walls and into the broader world.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Importance of Extra Curricular Activities in School
• Essay on If I Ruled the School
• Essay on How to Start a High School

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Jun 2, 2023

The Importance of Uniforms: Fostering Unity, Professionalism, and Brand Identity

Uniforms play a crucial role in numerous industries, ranging from hospitality and healthcare to retail and corporate settings. As a leading uniform manufacturing company, we understand the significance of uniforms beyond simply providing attire for employees. In this blog, we will explore the importance of uniforms in the workplace, highlighting how they foster unity, enhance professionalism, and promote a strong brand identity.

Promoting a Professional Image

Uniforms are a powerful tool for projecting a professional image to clients, customers, and stakeholders. A well-designed uniform instantly creates a sense of credibility, reliability, and expertise. By wearing a uniform that represents your company's brand, employees become brand ambassadors, enhancing the overall perception of your business. Consistency in appearance helps build trust and confidence in the quality of your products or services.

Creating a Unified and Cohesive Workforce

Uniforms foster a sense of unity and belonging among employees. When individuals wear the same attire, it eliminates visual hierarchies and promotes equality within the workplace. Uniforms create a level playing field, emphasising teamwork and collaboration. This sense of unity not only enhances employee morale but also contributes to a positive work culture and improved productivity.

Enhancing Brand Identity and Recognition

Uniforms serve as a visual representation of your company's brand identity. By incorporating your logo, colours, and design elements into the uniform, you create a consistent and recognisable brand image. When employees consistently wear uniforms that reflect your brand, they become walking advertisements, increasing brand visibility and recognition. This visibility helps customers identify and remember your business, reinforcing your brand in their minds.

Improving Customer Experience

Uniforms play a vital role in improving the customer experience. When customers interact with employees wearing uniforms, it provides a clear visual indication of who can assist them. This streamlined identification process leads to efficient service delivery, improved communication, and increased customer satisfaction. Uniforms also convey professionalism and expertise, instilling confidence in customers that they are dealing with knowledgeable and reliable individuals.

Ensuring Safety and Security

In certain industries, uniforms serve a practical purpose by ensuring the safety and security of employees. Specially designed uniforms can include features such as reflective strips, protective gear, or specialised fabrics. These uniforms help mitigate workplace hazards, maintain cleanliness standards, or identify specific roles within the organisation. Uniforms play a critical role in maintaining a safe and secure work environment.

Uniforms are more than just a uniform manufacturing company's product. They serve as a powerful tool in the workplace, promoting professionalism, unity, and a strong brand identity. By creating a consistent and professional image, uniforms enhance customer perceptions, instill a sense of unity among employees, and contribute to a positive work culture. As a uniform manufacturer, we understand the importance of designing and manufacturing high-quality uniforms that align with your brand and fulfill your organisation's specific requirements. Invest in uniforms and experience the numerous benefits they bring to your business, including improved brand recognition, enhanced customer experiences, and a cohesive workforce.

Recent Posts

Customised Merchandise: The Perfect Gift for Brand Promotion & Recognition

Unique and Personalised Gift Ideas for Employees: Showcasing Appreciation and Boosting Morale

The Psychology of Uniforms: Boosting Team Morale with Cohesive Workwear

December 21, 2023

In the intricate tapestry of workplace dynamics, the role of uniforms extends beyond mere clothing; it becomes a powerful tool for shaping team morale. As organizations strive to create cohesive and productive teams, understanding the psychology behind uniforms becomes imperative. This article delves into the intricate connections between uniforms and team morale, exploring how a well-designed and thoughtfully implemented workwear strategy can positively influence the psychology of a team.

Definition of Uniforms in the Workplace

Before delving into the psychological aspects, it's crucial to define the concept of uniforms in the workplace context. Uniforms, in this context, go beyond a standardized dress code. They represent a visual manifestation of team unity and shared identity. Whether it's a sleek corporate suit or a branded polo shirt, uniforms serve as a symbol that unifies individuals into a collective working towards common goals.

Importance of Team Morale in a Work Environment

Team morale is the heartbeat of a successful workplace. It encompasses the collective emotional and psychological well-being of a team, influencing their motivation, collaboration, and overall productivity. A high level of morale can turn a group of individuals into a cohesive and high-performing team, while low morale can lead to disengagement and decreased productivity.

Overview of the Connection Between Uniforms and Psychology

The link between uniforms and psychology is multi-faceted. It involves the intricate interplay of identity, equality, and performance. Uniforms can significantly impact how team members perceive themselves and their colleagues, affecting their sense of belonging and motivation. By understanding and harnessing this psychological connection, organizations can leverage uniforms as a strategic tool to elevate team morale.

The Impact of Uniforms on Team Morale

Sense of identity and belonging.

One of the key psychological benefits of uniforms is the establishment of a shared identity among team members. When individuals wear the same uniform, it creates a visual representation of their belonging to a specific group. This shared identity fosters a sense of camaraderie and unity, making team members feel like they are part of something larger than themselves.

The psychological impact of a shared identity extends beyond the workplace. Studies have shown that individuals who feel a strong sense of belonging at work are more likely to be engaged, motivated, and loyal to their organization. Uniforms act as a tangible expression of this belonging, reinforcing the idea that each team member plays a crucial role in the collective success of the team.

Equality and Inclusivity

Uniforms play a crucial role in eliminating visual markers of hierarchy within a team. When everyone wears the same attire, whether they are entry-level employees or top executives, it levels the playing field and promotes a sense of equality. This can be particularly powerful in hierarchical organizations, where the removal of status-based clothing distinctions can lead to more open communication and collaboration.

In addition to promoting equality, uniforms contribute to inclusivity within the workplace. Employees from diverse backgrounds, experiences, and roles can feel a sense of unity when they share a common visual identity. This inclusivity is not only symbolic but also practical, as it helps break down barriers and encourages collaboration among team members who might not otherwise interact.

Psychological Impact on Performance

The psychological impact of uniforms extends to individual and team performance. When employees feel a strong sense of identity and equality, it positively influences their self-esteem and confidence. Studies have consistently shown that individuals who are comfortable with their appearance and feel a sense of belonging are more likely to perform at their best.

The boost in self-esteem translates into improved focus, efficiency, and overall job satisfaction. Moreover, a team that shares a cohesive visual identity is more likely to work seamlessly together, leveraging each member's strengths to achieve common objectives. The psychological synergy created by uniforms can lead to a more harmonious and productive work environment.

Designing Cohesive Workwear for Team Morale

Elements of effective uniform design.

The design of uniforms plays a pivotal role in their psychological impact on team morale. Colors, for instance, carry significant psychological weight and can influence mood and behavior. Organizations should carefully select colors that align with their brand identity and evoke the desired emotions among team members.

Moreover, the inclusion of logos and branding elements on uniforms serves not only as a visual identifier but also as a constant reminder of the organization's values and goals. Practical considerations such as comfort and functionality are equally crucial. Uncomfortable or impractical uniforms can lead to dissatisfaction among team members, negating the positive psychological effects.

Customization and Personalization

While the goal is to create a unified visual identity, incorporating elements of customization and personalization can enhance the psychological impact of uniforms. Allowing individuals to add personal touches or choose from a range of styles within the uniform framework strikes a balance between uniformity and individuality.

This customization fosters a sense of ownership and pride among team members, as they have the opportunity to express their individuality within the collective identity. It transforms uniforms from mere work attire into a personal statement, reinforcing the positive psychological connection between the individual and the team.

Involving Team Members in the Design Process

To maximize the psychological benefits of uniforms, organizations should involve team members in the design process. Seeking input and feedback from employees ensures that the final uniform design resonates with the team's collective identity and values. This collaborative approach not only enhances the effectiveness of the uniforms but also cultivates a sense of shared ownership among team members.

Creating a feedback loop throughout the design process allows for adjustments and refinements based on the preferences and comfort of the employees. This inclusive approach reinforces the idea that the uniforms are not imposed but rather co-created, strengthening the psychological bond between the team and their collective visual representation.

Case Studies: Successful Implementations

Corporate environments.

Several corporations have successfully harnessed the psychological impact of uniforms to enhance team morale and performance. Companies like Apple and Starbucks, for instance, have iconic uniforms that reflect their brand identity while promoting a sense of unity among employees.

In these corporate environments, the positive effects of uniforms go beyond the aesthetic. Employees wearing the same uniform feel a shared connection to the company's mission and values. This shared identity becomes a driving force for collaboration, innovation, and a strong commitment to achieving common goals.

Service Industries

In customer-facing roles, uniforms play a crucial role in shaping perceptions both internally and externally. Hotel staff, for example, often wear uniforms that convey professionalism and hospitality. The psychological impact on team morale in the service industry is twofold – employees feel a sense of pride in their roles, and customers perceive a cohesive and reliable team.

The positive psychological effects of well-designed uniforms in service industries can lead to increased customer satisfaction and loyalty. When customers see a team that is visually unified, it instills confidence in the organization's professionalism and commitment to delivering quality service.

Sports and Teams

The connection between uniforms and team morale is perhaps most evident in the world of sports. Sports teams leverage uniforms not only for practical reasons but also as a powerful psychological tool. The uniform becomes a symbol of team identity, creating a strong sense of camaraderie among players.

The psychology of sports uniforms extends to fans as well. Supporters wearing team jerseys feel a deep connection to the collective identity of the team, fostering a sense of community and shared enthusiasm. This psychological alignment between the team and its fans contributes to the overall success and reputation of the sports organization.

Overcoming Challenges in Implementing Uniforms

Resistance and opposition.

Despite the potential benefits, implementing uniforms in the workplace may face resistance and opposition. Some employees may perceive it as an infringement on their individuality or an unnecessary imposition. Addressing these concerns is crucial to ensure a smooth transition and to harness the positive psychological impact of uniforms.

Communication becomes a key element in overcoming resistance. Clearly articulating the reasons behind introducing uniforms and emphasizing the positive outcomes for team morale can help alleviate concerns. Additionally, providing avenues for feedback and involving employees in the decision-making process can make them feel heard and valued.

Practical Considerations

Budget constraints and practicality are common challenges when implementing uniforms. Organizations must strike a balance between creating visually appealing uniforms and adhering to financial constraints. Opting for cost-effective materials and designs without compromising on quality is essential.

Adapting uniforms to diverse roles and functions within an organization requires thoughtful planning. A one-size-fits-all approach may not be practical, especially in industries with varied job requirements. Customizing uniforms based on job functions while maintaining a cohesive visual identity is a challenge that requires careful consideration.

In the face of these challenges, organizations should view the implementation of uniforms as an investment in their team's psychological well-being and overall performance. By addressing concerns and practical considerations, they can unlock the full potential of uniforms as a tool for boosting team morale.

Measuring the Impact: Metrics and Feedback

Establishing key performance indicators (kpis).

Measuring the impact of uniforms on team morale requires the establishment of key performance indicators (KPIs). These metrics should align with the organizational goals and the specific objectives of implementing uniforms. Some relevant KPIs may include:

• Productivity Metrics: Assessing changes in individual and team productivity before and after the introduction of uniforms.
• Employee Satisfaction Surveys: Gathering feedback through regular surveys to gauge employees' satisfaction with the uniform program.

Gathering Feedback from Team Members

Feedback from team members is invaluable in understanding the real-time impact of uniforms on team morale. Conducting surveys, focus groups, and one-on-one interviews allows organizations to gather qualitative data on how employees perceive the psychological effects of uniforms.

Questions in these feedback sessions should explore aspects such as the comfort of the uniforms, the sense of identity they convey, and any observed changes in team dynamics. Analyzing this feedback provides organizations with actionable insights for continuous improvement and refinement of their uniform program.

The Future of Uniforms and Team Morale

Evolving trends in workwear psychology.

As workplaces evolve, so too will the role of uniforms in shaping team morale. Emerging trends in workwear psychology point towards the integration of technology and sustainability considerations.

• Technology Integration in Uniform Design: The future may see the incorporation of smart textiles and wearable technology into uniforms. This not only enhances functionality but also aligns with the modern, tech-savvy image of many organizations.
• Sustainability and Eco-Friendly Considerations: With an increasing focus on environmental consciousness, organizations may shift towards sustainable and eco-friendly uniform options. This not only reflects a commitment to social responsibility but also appeals to employees who value sustainability.

Adapting to Remote and Hybrid Work Environments

The rise of remote and hybrid work environments presents new challenges and opportunities in maintaining team identity. While physical uniforms may not be applicable in virtual settings, organizations can explore alternative ways to foster a sense of belonging.

• Virtual Uniforms and Branding: Implementing virtual backgrounds or branded avatars during virtual meetings can serve as a symbolic form of virtual uniforms, creating a visual connection among team members.
• Flexible Uniform Policies: Organizations may need to adapt uniform policies to accommodate the flexibility required in remote and hybrid work models. This could involve providing branded casual wear or establishing guidelines for virtual meetings.

In navigating the future of uniforms, organizations should remain agile and responsive to changing work dynamics. By staying attuned to evolving trends and incorporating innovative approaches, they can continue to leverage uniforms as a powerful tool for enhancing team morale.

Unveiling the Psychological Dynamics of Team Morale

In the intricate dance of workplace dynamics, uniforms emerge as a silent conductor, orchestrating the psychological symphony of team morale. From fostering a sense of identity and equality to influencing individual and team performance, the impact of uniforms on the psychology of a team is profound.

As organizations strive to create cohesive and high-performing teams, the design and implementation of uniforms should be approached with careful consideration. By understanding the psychological nuances at play and addressing challenges with empathy and innovation, organizations can unlock the full potential of uniforms as a strategic tool for boosting team morale.

In part two of this article, we will continue exploring real-world case studies, delving into metrics and feedback mechanisms, and envisioning the future landscape where uniforms seamlessly integrate with the evolving nature of work.

Dale Pelletier

GET FREE SHIPPING!

BY PLACING AN ORDER FOR ANY 2 OR MORE ITEMS!

Age verification

By clicking enter you are verifying that you are old enough to consume alcohol.

• Tech & Specs

Your cart is currently empty.

Pairs well with.

Several Common Benefits Of A Uniform

Uniforms can be advantageous in numerous ways. Here is the list of the few common pros of a uniform. Have a look:

• It is the best way to exhibit an institution’s culture and identity. With identical uniforms for everyone it actually becomes easier to identify from which school or office a person belongs.
• Students get time to emphasize more on their studies and important tasks rather than selecting a dress to wear every day.
• Other than this, it also helps in equalizing the students and quelling competitions. It actually eradicates the pressure off the students along with their parents to spend the profuse amount of money on clothes.
• Last, but by far the most important benefit of a uniform is that it brings about a sense of unity among the people.

How does uniform bring unity?

Even though, uniforms can be advantageous in several aspects. The question which usually pops up in our minds is; “how does uniform bring unity?”

Well, the answer is quite simple. Uniforms develop a feeling within the children that they belong to the same community. Despite the fact that you might not be acquainted with every student from your school, but you can easily recognize the student in the same uniform as yours easily.

Other than this, a bunch of people being identified with the uniforms they are wearing will develop a mutual unity which makes uniform really important. Besides, uniforms also exhibit social and cultural control which tends to unite people of an institution.

Directed towards a single goal

Apart from this, it also develops a feeling in the students that they are one whole group directed towards a single goal (which normally includes graduation and college). Isn’t it great?

Although, there might be tons of fights and riots among students and people from the same schools and offices, respectively, when it comes to someone from the other organization or school everyone unites to defend their own study or workplace. This power is mainly provided with the help of a uniform.

Pasco-Hernando State College

• Unity and Coherence in Essays
• The Writing Process
• Paragraphs and Essays
• Proving the Thesis/Critical Thinking
• Appropriate Language

Test Yourself

• Essay Organization Quiz
• Sample Essay - Fairies
• Sample Essay - Modern Technology

Related Pages

• Proving the Thesis

Unity is the idea that all parts of the writing work to achieve the same goal: proving the thesis. Just as the content of a paragraph should focus on a topic sentence, the content of an essay must focus on the thesis.  The introduction paragraph introduces the thesis, the body paragraphs each have a proof point (topic sentence) with content that proves the thesis, and the concluding paragraph sums up the proof and restates the thesis. Extraneous information in any part of the essay which is not related to the thesis is distracting and takes away from the strength of proving the thesis.

An essay must have coherence. The sentences must flow smoothly and logically from one to the next as they support the purpose of  each paragraph in proving the thesis. .

Just as the last sentence in a paragraph must connect back to the topic sentence of the paragraph, the last paragraph of the essay should connect back to the thesis by reviewing the proof and restating the thesis.

Example of Essay with Problems of Unity and Coherence

Here is an example of a brief essay that includes a paragraph that  does not  support the thesis “Many people are changing their diets to be healthier.”

     People are concerned about pesticides, steroids, and antibiotics in the food they eat.  Many now shop for organic foods since they don’t have the pesticides used in conventionally grown food.  Meat from chicken and cows that are not given steroids or antibiotics are gaining in popularity even though they are much more expensive. More and more, people are eliminating pesticides, steroids, and antibiotics from their diets.

    Eating healthier also is beneficial to the environment since there are less pesticides poisoning the earth. Pesticides getting into the waterways is creating a problem with drinking water.  Historically, safe drinking water has been a problem. It is believed the Ancient Egyptians drank beer since the water was not safe to drink.  Brewing beer killed the harmful organisms and bacteria in the water from the Nile.

     There is a growing concern about eating genetically modified foods, and people are opting for non-GMO diets.  Some people say there are more allergic reactions and other health problems resulting from these foods.  Others are concerned because there are no long-term studies which clearly show no adverse health effects such as cancers or other illnesses. Avoiding GMO food is another way people are eating healthier food.

See how just one paragraph  can take away from the effectiveness of the essay in showing how people are changing to healthier food since the unity and coherence are affected.  There is no longer unity among all the paragraphs.  The thought pattern is disjointed and the essay loses its coherence.

Transitions and Logical Flow of Ideas

Transitions are words, groups of words, or sentences that connect one sentence to another or one paragraph to another.

They promote a logical flow from one idea to the next and overall unity and coherence.

While transitions are not needed in every sentence or at the end of every paragraph, they are missed when they are omitted since the flow of thoughts becomes disjointed or even confusing.

There are different types of transitions:

Time – before, after, during, in the meantime, nowadays

Space – over, around, under

Examples – for instance, one example is

Comparison – on the other hand, the opposing view

Consequence – as a result, subsequently

These are just a few examples.  The idea is to paint a clear, logical connection between sentences and between paragraphs.

• Printer-friendly version

• Share full article

Uncovering the brutal career of a crucial American ally.

And the hidden truths of the war in Afghanistan.

America’s Monster Who was Abdul Raziq?

Supported by

Who Was Abdul Raziq?

Uncovering the brutal career of a crucial American ally — and the hidden truths of the war in Afghanistan.

By Matthieu Aikins

Photographs by Victor J. Blue

I first heard about Abdul Raziq in early 2009, when I was a young freelance journalist newly arrived in southern Afghanistan. By chance, I had befriended two drug smugglers who told me that a powerful police commander in the area was helping them ship two metric tons of opium to Iran each month. Raziq, I learned, had a fearsome reputation in his hometown, Spin Boldak, on the border with Pakistan. Everyone I spoke to knew about the Taliban suspects tortured and dumped in the desert. Just as they knew that Raziq was a close ally of the U.S. military. My smuggler friends had offered to introduce me to Raziq, and 10 days after my arrival in Spin Boldak, he returned to town for his grandmother’s funeral.

Listen to this article, read by Peter Ganim

When I arrived at Raziq’s compound, I saw him sitting cross-legged on a carpeted platform, receiving a long line of guests. He was not what I expected. Trim and cheerful, clean-shaven and barely 30, he wasn’t much older than I, yet he was leading several thousand men under arms. I reached the front of the line, and Raziq shook my hand to welcome me before turning to the next guest. We would never get the chance to meet again, but that was the beginning of my long quest to understand the paradox he represented.

As inexperienced as I was, I knew enough to be puzzled by Raziq’s success. Why was the U.S. military, which was supposed to be supporting democracy and human rights in Afghanistan, working closely with a drug trafficker and murderer? One of his commanders, his uncle Janan, even wore a U.S. Army uniform given to him by his advisers, complete with a First Infantry Division patch and the Stars and Stripes.

Thanks to American patronage, Raziq was promoted to police chief of Kandahar and would eventually rise to the rank of three-star general. Famous across Afghanistan, he became the country’s most polarizing figure. The Taliban hated him, of course, but so did the ordinary people his commanders and soldiers extorted and abused. Journalists and human rights groups assembled damning evidence against him and warned that his brutality would backfire.

But Raziq beat back the suicide bombers and brought stability to Kandahar. In doing so, he became an icon for many war-weary Afghans who sought security at all costs. In a nation divided by ethnic and regional loyalties, you could find Raziq’s photo in taxis and at checkpoints from north to south. And he never lost his American backing: When he was assassinated by the Taliban in 2018, he was walking next to the top U.S. commander, Gen. Austin S. Miller. That day, it seemed as if half the country was in mourning; Miller hailed him as a friend and patriot.

Three years later, the United States withdrew, and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan collapsed. I was working as a journalist in Kabul at the time, and as soon as the dust settled, I went south to Kandahar. With the fighting over, I was able to visit people and places nearly impossible to access before. Here was a chance to reckon with Raziq’s legacy. I met with survivors of torture inside his prisons and visited morgues where skeletons had been unearthed from desert graves. Like a great tree in a storm, the republic had toppled and exposed the hidden places among its roots. The American war was far more brutal than we had known.

Since then, over repeated trips to the war’s fiercest battlegrounds, I found that many of Raziq’s former police officers were willing to talk about the torture, execution and cover-ups they witnessed. I also spoke with a dozen American military officers and diplomats who worked with Raziq and obtained new documents through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit and other sources, which reveal just how much the American government knew about Raziq’s crimes. And with colleagues at The Times, I interviewed hundreds of witnesses and discovered a republican archive that exposed Afghanistan’s largest campaign of forced disappearances since the Communist coup in 1978. We documented 368 cases of people who were still missing after being abducted by Raziq’s men; the true toll was most likely in the thousands.

The scale of Raziq’s abuses, carried out with American support, was shocking. But the fact that they seem to have brought security to Kandahar has even more disturbing implications. Raziq’s story complicates the comforting belief that brutality always backfires and undermines the U.S. military’s claim to have fought according to international law. Raziq’s violence was effective because it had a logic particular to the kind of civil war that the United States found in Afghanistan, one where the people, and not the terrain, were the battlefield. The reasons for this are well documented by scholars of civil war and counterinsurgency but glossed over by our generals and politicians and obscured by the myths of American exceptionalism and our righteous war on terror.

But Raziq saw those reasons clearly. He murdered and tortured because he believed it was the only way to win against the Taliban. And America helped him do it.

Two harsh realities defined Raziq’s childhood: the war and the border.

The desert around Spin Boldak and its twinned Pakistani town, Chaman, stretches westward hundreds of miles to Iran, through vast wastes and dune seas crossed by nomads. The clans of two rival Pashtun tribes dominate the area, feuding like Hatfields and McCoys of the borderlands. Raziq was from the Achakzai, who competed with the Noorzai over land and smuggling routes.

Not long after Raziq was born in a mud-walled village, the Afghan Communists seized power in Kabul, and in response rebels rose up against the government, plunging the country into a conflict that lasted for more than four decades. Although both superpowers and neighbors like Pakistan and Iran intervened for their own ends, at heart this was a civil war fought by Afghans against Afghans for control of the state. Even at the peaks of the Soviet and American occupations, Afghans constituted a majority of casualties on each side.

In times of civil war, neighbors are often at one another’s throats because of local dynamics, even if they justify their actions through religion or nationalism. In Kandahar, many Noorzai joined with the mujahedeen rebels, who were supplied by the C.I.A. and the Pakistani military, while Raziq’s Achakzai relatives eventually sided with the Soviet-backed Communists. Raziq was still a boy when the war brought grief to his home: His father, who drove people and goods to the border, disappeared. His family was never able to find his body and blamed their tribal rivals. “The Noorzai did it,” said Ayub Kakai, Raziq’s uncle. “They threw him down a well.”

In 1991, after the Soviets cut off funding, the Communist government collapsed. Kandahar’s rival warlords carved up the province with a patchwork of checkpoints, where robbery and rape were common. Raziq’s uncle Mansoor took control on the road from Spin Boldak to the city, and Raziq, by then a teenager, joined him, attracted to the thrills of war. “Raziq loved cars and guns,” his younger cousin Arafat told me.

Three years later, an armed movement of religious students known as the Taliban rose in the farmlands west of Kandahar City and swept through the province, capturing Raziq and his uncle. They hung Mansoor from the barrel of a tank but spared young Raziq, who fled with his family across the border to Chaman. For seven years in exile, Raziq worked as a driver near the border, where he peddled used car parts.

Then came Sept. 11, 2001. For the Achakzai, the Americans’ decision to invade and depose the Taliban came as a miraculous reversal of fortune. That December, the C.I.A. and Special Forces assembled an army of exiles, with many Achakzai, including Raziq, among them. With the help of U.S. air power, they routed the Taliban and seized control of Kandahar, once again trading places with their Noorzai rivals, who escaped across the border to where the Pakistani military, playing a double game, gave them safe haven.

In the new republic, the Achakzai militia was transformed into the area’s Border Police. They partnered with American troops and were trained by contractors from Blackwater and DynCorp. Like the rest of the republican forces, their weapons, ammunition and salaries were paid for by the United States and its allies. But beneath the surface, the civil war still festered, even though the Americans saw it through stark binaries: the government versus the terrorists, the Afghans versus the Taliban.

“Our viewpoint was this was a war on terrorism or a war against a group trying to overthrow a democratic government,” said Carter Malkasian, a former State Department official who advised the U.S. military in Afghanistan for more than a decade. “We don’t want to view this as us getting involved in another country’s civil war.”

Thanks to his family connections, Raziq quickly rose through the ranks. He was a natural leader who fought fearlessly and earned the loyalty of his men. Although nearly illiterate, he had a capacious memory for places and faces and was a canny operator in the spy games and smuggling rings of the borderlands, using his illicit gains to fund a growing network of sources. Early on, Raziq learned that power would earn him money, which bought the intelligence that could attract U.S. patronage, giving him more power. American officers who worked in Spin Boldak remembered Raziq as an eager and valued partner in the hunt for the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

“My brother was very close to the Americans,” said Tadin Khan, Raziq’s younger brother. “They trusted him, and he never tried to deceive them.”

Tadin Khan, Raziq’s younger brother, in Dubai last year. “I didn’t believe it when I heard he was killed,” he said. “It was a hard day.”

Gul Seema, the first wife of Raziq, in 2023. “He was under a lot of pressure. Whenever I saw him, it seemed as if the shadow of death was looming over him,” says Seema.

Raziq was as generous with his friends and family as he was ruthless with his enemies. Not long after the Achakzai appointed him leader of their militia, Raziq’s older brother, Bacha, was gunned down in the bazaar in Chaman. “Bacha and Raziq were very close,” said Arafat, his cousin. “He was killed because of Raziq.”

Raziq blamed a tribal rival, a smuggler named Shin Noorzai. In March 2006, he kidnapped Shin and 15 people he was traveling with and shot them all in a dry riverbed near the border. The massacre led to a local outcry, and Raziq was summoned to Kabul. But President Hamid Karzai intervened to protect him, according to Western diplomats involved in the case, and he was never charged. (Through a spokesperson, Karzai declined to comment for this article.) The incident, however, made it into that year’s State Department report on human rights, the first public documentation of Raziq’s abuses.

Raziq’s role in the drug trade also attracted attention from American investigators. Although the Taliban had banned poppy cultivation, opium came roaring back under Karzai’s administration, and Spin Boldak sat on one of the main trafficking routes. Classified U.S. military and Drug Enforcement Administration reports, obtained through FOIA requests, described the involvement of Raziq and his men, detailing convoys in the desert, secret meetings and the use of green ink for letters of safe passage. One referred to Raziq as “the main drug smuggler in Spin Boldak.” (His brother Tadin denied that Raziq or anyone from his family was involved in drug trafficking, murder or other crimes. “All these accusations of corruption, smuggling and abuses are because of propaganda from the Taliban,” he said.)

As it turns out, by the time Raziq and I shook hands in 2009, the United States already knew he was accused of murder and smuggling but worked with him anyway. Yet Raziq’s position had become precarious, for the U.S. military’s concept of the war was changing. When I published an article about the accusations that fall, Raziq’s career had reached a dangerous point — one where his foreign patrons might have chosen to stop supporting him.

The U.S. war in Afghanistan was going badly. Faced with a growing insurgency that threatened the Afghan government’s survival, President Barack Obama ordered a surge of tens of thousands of troops. His generals had advised him that, fixated on the enemy, the United States had neglected the true battlefield: the hearts and minds of the Afghan people.

The surge would be guided by a military doctrine known as counterinsurgency theory, or COIN, which was held to have saved the day in Iraq. “Our strategy cannot be focused on seizing terrain or destroying insurgent forces; our objective must be the population,” Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal wrote upon taking command in 2009. The U.S.-led coalition “can no longer ignore or tacitly accept abuse of power, corruption or marginalization.”

According to “population-centric” COIN, the Afghan people had to be protected against the insurgency and motivated to support their own government. Criminal officials like Raziq threatened the legitimacy of the republic, and therefore the success of the war.

Given the hundreds of thousands of Afghans and Iraqis who died as result of the U.S. invasions, this emphasis on protecting civilians may seem hypocritical. But the laws of war, which forbid targeting noncombatants or harming prisoners, are essential to how the United States distinguishes its own use of force from that of rogue states and terrorists. “I believe the United States of America must remain a standard-bearer in the conduct of war,” Obama said as he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize the same year as the surge. “That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our strength.”

Since the decline of the antiwar movement after Vietnam, both the U.S. military and its liberal critics have become increasingly united in the conviction that war must be fought humanely by exempting civilians, as much as possible, from its violence — a shift, the historian Samuel Moyn has argued, that risks legitimizing endless war. Underpinning this is the assumption that there is no contradiction between waging war both lawfully and effectively. “The law of war is a part of our military heritage, and obeying it is the right thing to do,” states the U.S. military manual on the subject. “But we also know that the law of war poses no obstacle to fighting well and prevailing.”

In this vein, COIN reassured the American public that the surge would be just. Because the United States needed the support of the Afghan population, it could not just kill its way to victory. Brutality would backfire by producing more resistance. In a speech, McChrystal explained “COIN mathematics” : If a military operation killed two out of 10 insurgents, instead of eight remaining, that number was “more likely to be as many as 20, because each one you killed has a brother, father, son and friends.”

But while McChrystal took prompt steps to reduce civilian casualties from airstrikes, dealing with so-called bad actors like Raziq was not as simple. It turns out that the way the United States implemented its strategy provided a test of whether COIN really worked as promised.

The surge was focused on the two neighboring provinces in the south where Taliban activity was strongest. Both received roughly equivalent investments of troops and money. In Helmand, the Marines and the British pushed for the good governance prescribed by COIN, successfully pressuring Kabul to replace corrupt officials with technocrats.

“You didn’t have a power-broker-run government at the provincial level,” said Malkasian, who served as an adviser in Helmand. But the opposite proved true in Kandahar, where U.S. commanders prioritized security and encountered dogged pushback from Kabul on anticorruption efforts. “Kandahar was just more important for the Afghan political system, for Karzai, than Helmand was.”

As so often happened during the war, Washington’s grand strategy was interpreted by a multitude of American agencies and actors. In Kabul, specialized anticorruption and counternarcotics teams had Raziq in their sights. A D.E.A.-led republican unit seized an enormous stockpile of hashish in Spin Boldak and arrested a district police commander who ran narcotics shipments for Raziq. There were plans to go after him next.

But the Army officers working with Raziq saw things very differently. He and his men were a rare example of an effective, homegrown force that delivered security on a vital supply route. The U.S. commanders were in the middle of a high-stakes offensive against the Taliban, and their own troops’ lives were on the line. Karzai supported Raziq, and according to former military and intelligence officials, so did the C.I.A. With his cross-border networks, Raziq was a valuable source of intelligence on Taliban havens and bomb-making networks in Pakistan. And he could cross lines the United States couldn’t: A declassified military report from 2010 noted that Raziq was giving shelter to Baloch rebels fighting the Pakistani government and that he used “these tribesmen to carry out assassinations and killings in Pakistan.”

And so when, in February 2010, senior U.S. officials met to discuss action against corrupt Afghan officials, no one could agree on what to do about Raziq. “There was a lack of consensus,” according to Earl Anthony, who as deputy U.S. ambassador was a co-chair of the meeting. “Some highly valued his work on the security front against the Taliban.”

In the end, McChrystal, who declined to comment for this article, sided with his commanders on the ground. Raziq, they reasoned, could be mentored to change his ways. According to a leaked cable, the senior U.S. diplomat in Kandahar even offered to craft a media plan for him, including radio spots, billboards and “the longer-term encouragement of stories in the international media on the ‘reform’” of Raziq.

In March, McChrystal visited Raziq in Spin Boldak and posed beside him for television cameras. “I am very optimistic that with the plans that I’ve heard,” he said, as Raziq looked on smiling, “we can increase efficiency and decrease corruption.”

From that point on, the U.S. military would openly promote Raziq and make him an integral part of the surge. A series of personal advisers were brought in to coach and protect the young commander; the first was Jamie Hayes, who as a Special Forces lieutenant colonel led a team assigned to Raziq in July 2010. Shortly after he arrived, Hayes was ordered to help Raziq plan a major operation to clear Malajat, an outlying neighborhood of Kandahar City where the Taliban were entrenched.

At first, Hayes was puzzled about why Raziq and his Border Police were given the job, rather than the republican army or commandos. His superiors explained that it was a political decision by Karzai and the U.S. command. “This is a guy that we want to make successful,” Hayes recalled being told. “He’s an aggressive, strong leader that we want to make sure gets the chance to shine.”

Mazloom, a 33-year-old Taliban commander, in Panjwai District last year. He said he was tortured and blinded by a U.S.-backed militia commander from his village, who recognized him as an insurgent. “Because I wouldn’t confess,” Mazloom said, “he did this.”

John R. Allen, a retired four-star Marine general, at his home in Virginia in March. As the commander of American and allied forces in Afghanistan in 2011, Allen was confronted with evidence that Raziq’s forces were committing murder and torture. “That wasn’t why we were there fighting the war,” he said, “to keep a really bad criminal because he was helpful in fighting worse criminals.”

Raziq’s charisma undoubtedly played a role in why U.S. officers were so willing to support him. Like most of the Americans I spoke to who worked with Raziq, Hayes quickly took a shine to him. Raziq was full of enthusiasm and energy, and Hayes was especially impressed by how he seemed to genuinely care for the welfare of his men, unlike many other republican commanders.

For his part, Raziq was a careful student of his foreign patrons. “He liked to learn about what made Americans tick,” recalled Hayes, who said he was never shown evidence of Raziq’s massacres or drug smuggling. Raziq understood what American officers appreciated: hard work, aggression and loyalty. To show his gratitude, he even insisted on taking part in a medal ceremony for Hayes’s troops. “He knew them by name,” Hayes recalled.

Soon after a successful operation to clear Malajat, Hayes and his team were reassigned to train the police in the provincial capital. During the spring of 2011, the situation in Kandahar City was dire. The Taliban hammered the government with gunmen and suicide attacks and, in April, freed nearly 500 inmates after tunneling into the main prison. Police morale was abysmal. “Drug use was rampant,” Hayes said. “Discipline was poor.” In the same month as the prison break, a suicide bomber got inside police headquarters and killed the provincial commander. Hayes, who narrowly missed the bombing, helped put the chief in a body bag. He was the second in two years to be killed.

Cleaning up Kandahar might have been the toughest job in Afghanistan, and both Karzai and the U.S. command wanted Raziq to do it. He agreed to become police chief on one condition: He wanted to keep his position with the Border Police. He would wear both hats, so to speak, in order to maintain his power base in Spin Boldak and would bring his own men into the city. If Raziq was going to be sheriff in Kandahar, he was going to do it his way.

The battle Raziq faced in the provincial capital, a city of nearly 400,000, was very different from the rangy desert warfare in the borderlands: Here, a tribally and ethnically mixed population lived and worked in closely packed homes and narrow alleys, industrial zones and trucking warehouses. Hiding amid them, Taliban guerrillas, the cheriki , terrorized government supporters, leaving menacing “night letters,” assassinating civil servants and imams and deploying suicide bombers whose blasts tore apart crowded streets.

The first phase of the American COIN strategy in Kandahar had called for securing the capital. To that end, the U.S. military poured in resources, building a network of checkpoints and bases for republican forces and expanding the number of police districts from 10 to 16, each with its own substation chief. Trained and equipped by American troops and contractors, the Kandahar police more than doubled in size. Raziq was the fulcrum of it all: A team of American mentors lived next to his headquarters, and he met often with U.S. brass to coordinate operations.

Raziq’s underground enemies, the cheriki , relied on an extensive network of local supporters, many of whom cooperated out of religious and nationalist fervor. Rooting them out required accurate intelligence. And because Karzai had resisted creating a system of wartime detention, those who were caught had to be criminally prosecuted, convicted and sentenced.

But for Raziq, the republican courts, corrupt and easily intimidated, were a central reason the insurgency was thriving. Too often, Taliban suspects were freed and returned to the battlefield. In Spin Boldak, he had solved this problem by becoming judge, jury and executioner. For all their rhetoric about human rights and the laws of war, the foreigners had chosen him to pacify Kandahar. Actions spoke louder than words.

Raziq brought his Achakzai militia, in their distinct spotted uniforms, into the city and placed trusted lieutenants in key posts like the substations. Raziq didn’t seem to relish cruelty — I never heard stories of him personally torturing people, for instance — but he cultivated men who did. Some were his own cousins, like Jajo, who became notorious for the atrocities he committed as commander of District 8, a predominantly Noorzai area. (Jajo was assassinated in 2014.) According to police officers and internal United Nations documents, another relative from Spin Boldak ran death squads out of a special battalion at headquarters. “They had detective badges and guns,” one substation deputy told me. “They threw the bodies in the desert.”

These plainclothes teams roamed in cars with tinted windows, snatching suspects and taking them for da reg mela , “a sand picnic.” The desert wells and dunes hid countless corpses; others were dumped in the streets. Many bore signs of horrific torture. “I saw things which made me wonder whether a wild beast or man had done them,” Dr. Musa Gharibnawaz, who oversaw the city morgue as the director of forensic medicine, told me.

Those who survived to see formal detention were also tortured for confessions, which the courts relied on almost entirely for convictions. The police didn’t have the education or capacity to collect basic technical evidence, nor did most judges understand it. This problem was much broader than just Kandahar. The same year Raziq became police chief, investigators from the United Nations interviewed more than 300 detainees across Afghanistan and found that torture was widespread in republican detention. Their report documented beatings, electric shocks and the “twisting and wrenching” of genitals. The most severe abuses by the police were in Kandahar, where a follow-up report also noted a large number of bodies found with gunshot wounds to the chest and the head after Raziq took power; by contrast, the investigators found significantly less torture in Helmand, where the Marines had stuck to the COIN playbook.

The persistence of torture in the republic — which the U.N. continued to document until 2021 — illustrates how, in wartime, certain useful but prohibited acts can be implicitly authorized as regular practices. As the U.N. reporting makes clear, those accused of torture rarely faced punishment. Their work, which ceased after confession, was instrumental, unlike the gratuitous abuse meted out by poorly supervised American soldiers at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

In Kandahar, torture was exacerbated by the surge, which overloaded the court system with detainees captured by U.S. forces; one internal military report worried that it would most likely “produce more — perhaps far more — prisoners” than the main prison could handle. During the summer of 2011, as the U.N. prepared to publish its findings, intelligence reports from the south filtered up to Western diplomats and military leaders in Kabul. The torture of detainees had already led to scandals in Britain and Canada; now the U.S. command would be forced to take notice. For the third time in Raziq’s career, his job would hang in the balance as a result of his crimes.

On July 18, 2011, two months after Raziq became police chief, John R. Allen, then a four-star Marine general, took command of U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan. He was shaking hands with his guests during the ceremony in Kabul when a trio of Western officials, led by a senior British diplomat, told him that they needed to speak immediately. It was about Raziq.

Alarmed by what he heard, Allen had his staff pull up the raw intelligence reporting, which described executions and torture by Raziq’s forces in Kandahar. “I wanted a sense of the frequency,” he told me. “The reporting was pretty standard and pretty awful. It had been going on for some time.”

Allen went to the presidential palace to see Karzai. “I said that he needed to be aware that he had a senior police commander who was a serial human rights violator, and he should remove him,” Allen told me.

But at that moment, Karzai needed Raziq more than ever. In the week before Allen arrived, two of the president’s most important allies in the south were killed, including his own brother. For years, Karzai had seen the United States waffle on corruption and human rights abuses, even as they partnered with warlords, and as he often had, he called the Americans’ bluff. At a follow-up meeting, Karzai told Allen that he had checked his own sources and hadn’t heard similar allegations.

Frustrated, Allen ordered the United States and its allies to stop transferring captives in the south. “Karzai wasn’t going to do anything about Raziq, and I couldn’t permit us to continue to feed detainees into his hands,” he told me. From then on, when he traveled to Kandahar, Allen made a point to dodge the young police chief, who was eager for a photo op. “I wasn’t going to play into Raziq’s hands and appear to be an ally of his under any circumstances.”

The State Department’s diplomats also avoided meeting Raziq. But that was as far as it went. “I don’t recall there was ever a serious push to remove Abdul Raziq,” said Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador at the time. When Crocker later raised the issue with Karzai, the president responded that Raziq was working closely with the U.S. military. “He was basically saying, ‘Look, I’m told that he’s your guy,’” Crocker told me. “Which turned out to be true.”

Allen’s subordinates in Kandahar continued to fight side by side with Raziq and his officers. “The military guys, for the most part, had a different view of him on the ground, working with him day in and day out,” said Martin Schweitzer, who as a brigadier general served as the deputy U.S. commander in Kandahar.

Despite Leahy laws in the United States, which prohibit support to foreign military units credibly accused of human rights violations, Raziq continued to be ferried around in American aircraft, and his advisers ensured that he and his forces had the air support, fuel and ammunition they needed. “If I asked and it was for Raziq, mostly I was going to get it,” said David Webb, who as a colonel advised him on two separate tours in 2012 and 2017. Upon Webb’s arrival, he was given his orders in no uncertain terms by his superior, a two-star general. “He put his finger in my chest and said: ‘Don’t let Raziq die. That’s your mission,’” said Webb, whose predecessor was wounded while fighting off an attack on Raziq’s headquarters.

Both Webb and Schweitzer stressed that they never saw evidence of Raziq committing war crimes under their watch. “I was with him almost every single day from morning until night,” Webb told me. “I never saw anything bad.”

As an outsider, I often wondered how American officers, bound to uphold the laws of war, rationalized working with Raziq. His tactics in Kandahar — every mutilated corpse or disappeared person — were intended to send a message, to terrorize his enemies and those who might support them. And they were effective. When I visited Kandahar in those years, I found that most people on the streets knew exactly what was happening, even if they were too afraid to speak about it openly.

But Raziq also calibrated his actions so that they were deniable. According to former colleagues, he and his men took steps to conceal them from their American allies, like dumping corpses when dust storms obscured aerial surveillance or using veiled language over the phone. Sending someone to “Dubai” meant killing them in the desert. “His commanders would call and say: ‘We caught someone. What should we do?’ He’d say, ‘God forgive them.’ That was his code,” said a senior republican police general who worked with Raziq. “I heard it with my own ears on an operation.”

The farther you got from the streets and villages, the easier it was to ignore what was happening there. According to an interpreter who spent years translating Raziq’s meetings with his American advisers, the subject was generally avoided at headquarters. “The advisers didn’t care about Raziq’s bad activities,” he said. “We weren’t telling Raziq: ‘Hey, do you have private prisons? Do you still have people in there?’”

“I’m not saying they didn’t occur; I’m not saying they did occur,” Schweitzer said about the kinds of accusations that led Allen to halt detainee transfers. “I just know I read all the intel reports.” And whatever American officers chose to believe, they could see that Raziq was delivering where it counted: Within a year and half of his taking over, enemy-initiated attacks were down by almost two-thirds in Kandahar. “I thought he was an incredibly important figure,” Schweitzer said, “and was critical to keeping the security in the south.”

The COIN strategy was tested in the summer of 2014, when the Taliban began a bold offensive targeting the two southern provinces that had been the focus of American efforts. The surge had come to an end, and republican forces were supposed to take the lead in combat.

In Helmand, where the Marines tried to keep out abusive strongmen, the government’s defense was disastrously weak and uncoordinated. In many rural areas, the republican army stayed in their forts and allowed the police to be overrun. Despite the presence of a major American air base in the province, large sections of the northern districts fell into insurgent hands.

But when the Taliban pushed into western Kandahar, Raziq took charge and rallied republican forces. Backed by his advisers and American airstrikes, he inflicted heavy casualties. The following summer, insurgents again attacked and reached the outskirts of Helmand’s capital; Raziq led counteroffensives to lift sieges there and, the next year, in the neighboring Uruzgan province. “The Taliban have fled the area and escaped,” he boasted to a TV crew while touring the embattled district of Now Zad.

By 2017, Helmand was among the top three provinces most controlled by insurgents, according to U.S. military figures. And while the situation was deteriorating across the country, Kandahar City and its surroundings remained relatively secure under Raziq. Journalists and human rights groups had warned that supporting men like him would backfire and inspire resistance to the government. Yet here he was, holding the line against the Taliban.

A Taliban supporter whose husband was killed in battle. She used to aid the movement by smuggling weapons. “We tied pistols around our waists to get them through checkpoints,” she said.

Retired Special Forces Colonel Jamie Hayes was an advisor to General Abdul Raziq early in his rise to becoming one of the most powerful figures in southern Afghanistan.

Raziq was far from the only example: Again and again, the U.S. military felt compelled to partner with Afghan allies who were accused of human rights abuses, despite its doctrine of winning the war by winning hearts and minds. Call it the COIN paradox; for years it puzzled me, until I came across the work of the political scientist Stathis Kalyvas, who offered a convincing explanation of its logic.

In his comparative study of conflicts ranging from the Napoleonic occupation of Spain to the Tamil Tigers’ insurgency in Sri Lanka, Kalyvas asks why civil wars are so often marked by violence against civilians. Discarding explanations like cultural backwardness or ideology, Kalyvas argues that the incentive for this violence is created by the military characteristics of civil war, where the population is the battlefield.

To understand how Kalyvas’s theory applies to Afghanistan, you had to look at the rural areas where most of the fighting took place. Consider the Taliban’s stronghold in Kandahar, the Panjwai valley. A verdant delta of pomegranate and grape orchards west of the provincial capital, Panjwai was the birthplace of the movement. Mullah Muhammad Omar, the Taliban’s leader, preached in his mosque there.

The site of major offensives by allied forces since 2006, Panjwai was arguably the longest and most grueling fight anywhere in Kandahar. During the surge, American troops fought their way in and, by the end of 2010, had built up a string of bases and strong points, many jointly manned with the republican army and the police. The Taliban ordered its fighters to melt back into the villages, where, aided by the area’s dense vegetation and mud-walled orchards, they switched to hit-and-run ambushes, assassinations and improvised explosive devices.

This kind of guerrilla struggle was an example of what Kalyvas calls irregular warfare, in which territorial control is fragmented and mixed between both sides. The Taliban hid their weapons and picked up shovels, taking advantage of American rules of engagement, which allowed soldiers to fire only on those who were armed or posing an active threat. “We basically did not see a difference between the locals and the Taliban,” said Curtis Grace, who patrolled there as an infantryman in 2012.

The Army’s COIN manual stresses the difficulty in irregular warfare of telling civilians and insurgents apart. Kalyvas’s argument is different: The distinction itself can blur. In a conflict with no clear front lines, violence is jointly produced by combatants and civilians, who have the information the troops need to fight their enemies: the location of I.E.D.s and army patrols, the identities of insurgents and government supporters. Moreover, because civil war involves rival state-building, civilians help or hinder combatants by providing logistical and political support. In Panjwai, the Taliban needed local help to operate: They tried to win it by announcing safe routes through minefields, but they were also ruthless with those suspected of being spies and government supporters.

In civil war, while indiscriminate violence, like collateral damage from airstrikes, can backfire, “selective” violence against individuals works in a straightforward way: Do this, or I’ll kill you . Winning hearts and minds can still matter, but it’s only half the story. And in wartime, sticks are often much cheaper and more effective than carrots. In this life-or-death struggle, the competitor willing to use both will have the advantage.

Kalyvas’s work is part of a larger body of scholarship on civil war and counterinsurgency that demonstrates how central the use of coercive violence against civilians has been in such conflicts, whether waged by dictatorships like Syria or democracies like France. “ ‘The bad guys win’ is not the answer that U.S. forces, policymakers or civilians want to hear about counterinsurgency success, but the historical record is clear,” writes the scholar Jacqueline L. Hazelton. In this light, COIN doctrine can be seen as a form of American exceptionalism: the idea that the United States could fight a civil war differently from anyone else — humanely.

If Kalyvas is right, then what the U.S. military faced in Afghanistan was not so much a paradox as an impossible choice. To take back places like Panjwai, there was a compelling incentive to use unlawful violence against the population, which the U.S. military could not allow itself to do. The solution to this dilemma was a division of labor, where the United States provided firepower and money to allies like Raziq, who did the dirty work.

In 2010, the United States introduced the Afghan Local Police program, or ALP. Drawing on their experience with militias in Vietnam and El Salvador, the Special Forces trained and armed villagers around the country. In the military’s hearts-and-minds framework, they were empowering communities to protect themselves against violent outsiders. But four decades of a multisided conflict meant that fault lines ran through communities, villages and even families. Most areas were tribally mixed; finding militias meant exploiting those divisions just as the Taliban had been doing. It meant arming Afghans against one another in a civil war.

As police chief, Raziq was in charge of the ALP program in Kandahar. Panjwai District was the most resistant; by 2011, its horn, as the western end was known, was the only place that the militias had failed to take root, despite the presence of several Special Forces teams. The next year, Raziq appointed one of his key lieutenants as the district police chief. Panjwai was predominantly Noorzai; Sultan Mohammad was an Achakzai like Raziq, but he was from the district. Such local knowledge, the ability to make rural Afghan society legible to outsiders, was precisely what made militias effective. They could go after the Taliban and their supporters in their own homes. The Taliban had gained sway over the villages by targeting the families of those who collaborated with the republic, and the militias, protected by American and regular government forces, could turn the tables.

Most of Panjwai was too dangerous to visit during the war, but when the republic fell in 2021, I was able to travel there, interviewing dozens of witnesses who described torture and extrajudicial killings carried out by members of the police and the ALP, targeting both active insurgents and sympathizers. In the village of Pashmul, several witnesses told me they saw Sultan Mohammad shoot an unarmed old man, Hajji Badr, whose sons had served in the Taliban. Sultan Mohammad told me he had no involvement in murder or torture, but several other people said they witnessed him personally execute prisoners. “All the people from the area knew,” said Hasti Mohammad, a republican district governor in Panjwai. “It wasn’t something secret.”

I was also shown several videos of police abuse, including one in which a group of men, identified by locals as ALP members in Panjwai, tortured a captive bound hand and foot. They strike him with sticks, twist his testicles with their hands, pour water over his mouth and sodomize him with a stick, all while demanding he confess. “I don’t have anything,” he blubbers, growing incoherent.

This brutality was no impediment to American and republican success. Under Sultan Mohammad, the ALP program was established throughout the district. I.E.D. attacks plummeted, while the proportion of bombs that went off without being discovered dropped by half, which one study attributed to increased cooperation from locals.

The U.S. military was aware of the abuses by police officers and militia members in Panjwai. On multiple occasions, American surveillance captured them committing war crimes. One video showing executions by the police was shown to senior U.S. officials in 2012; Colonel Webb said he asked Raziq to arrest the perpetrators, but police investigators told me that some ordinary militiamen were punished instead. Sultan Mohammad was eventually promoted to brigadier general and oversaw several districts in the west of the province. When I spoke with him, he showed me a collection of certificates of appreciation from more than a dozen U.S. military units. “The Special Forces helped us a lot,” he said.

Fazli Ahmad, a Taliban fighter, was arrested by the police, who filmed a video of themselves dragging him behind a pickup truck. He said Sultan Mohammad ordered him to be executed, but he was released after his father paid a bribe.

Sultan Mohammad, a former police chief in Panjwai District and one of Raziq’s key lieutenants. He worked closely with the U.S. military to establish a militia program in Panjwai. “The Special Forces helped us a lot,” he said.

Thanks to his success in Kandahar, Raziq became famous. Not since the late northern commander Ahmad Shah Massoud, whom he greatly admired, had any one figure united anti-Taliban sentiment across the country. He was interviewed on national television, and his picture was pasted on street billboards. Songs were dedicated to him:

He’s the servant of security, the servant of our government.

He’s truly the servant of Afghans.

There were many reasons for his popularity. He was young and dynamic, a village boy who never lost the common touch. He was free with his largess, sometimes handing out cash on the street. He spoke fearlessly against Pakistan’s support for the insurgency. For Afghans disenchanted by the corruption and duplicity of their politicians, Raziq seemed authentic.

“There were other politicians who would talk against the Taliban and Pakistan,” said Nader Nadery, a senior fellow at the Wilson Center who as head of the country’s human rights commission had criticized Raziq’s abuses. “With Raziq, people saw it was not just words.” Even Nadery had come to see the trade-off that Raziq represented, as a bulwark against the looming collapse of the republic. “It’s a difficult judgment to make,” he said. “We can lose everything, or we can keep some parts of it.”

Although Raziq publicly denied accusations of human rights abuses, when an Afghan journalist asked him about them in 2017, he offered something close to a justification. “Showing mercy to such people is a betrayal to our nation,” he replied. “When our soldiers are martyred, isn’t that a violation of human rights? When our schools are burned, isn’t that a violation?”

The truth was that many Afghans saw Raziq’s brutality as a positive quality. They wanted a champion who could protect them from the Taliban’s violence. When Raziq went out on the streets, he was mobbed by crowds of well-wishers. “It was like being an adviser to Elvis Presley,” Webb recalled.

As Raziq grew in stature, he was rehabilitated. Western generals and diplomats sought him out on trips to Kandahar. Over the years, Raziq was a constant there, a fixed point around which contradictory policies and goals swirled: counterterrorism, nation-building, COIN and, finally, negotiations with the Taliban. “We needed him more than he needed us,” said John W. Lathrop, who as a brigadier general commanded American forces in Kandahar in 2017. “Keeping Raziq happy was pretty important.”

For the Taliban, Raziq was one of their top targets. By his own count, Raziq had survived at least 25 suicide attacks. Yet he remained committed to the fight. In one of his last interviews, Raziq criticized republican elites who already had one foot out the door with visas and houses overseas. “We shouldn’t hope or plan to seek asylum in America or move to London,” he said. “We were born here, and we’ll die here.”

On Oct. 18, 2018, General Miller, the top U.S. commander, called a meeting at the governor’s compound in Kandahar to discuss the upcoming parliamentary elections. That day, Raziq put on Western-style clothes: a dress shirt and slacks. The young soldier from the borderlands had become a statesman, a role that came less easily to him. He had seemed worn down to people who had met him lately; he was preoccupied with political dramas in Kabul. He had also been sick for days with a bad stomach bug, but he wanted to see Miller, whom he had known since the early days of the war. During the meeting, Raziq appeared flushed and uneasy, but afterward he insisted on walking to the helicopter pad to see off Miller and the other Americans.

A group of police officers arrived, carrying crates of pomegranates, gifts for the Americans. Among them was a bodyguard for the governor, a young man the Taliban had code-named Abu Dujana. He dropped his crate and fired his assault rifle, killing Raziq and the provincial intelligence chief and wounding several others, including an American general, before he was shot dead.

As one part of the country celebrated, the other mourned. The republic had lost its hero.

What does Raziq’s story tell us about why the United States failed in Afghanistan? Although the immediate cause of the republic’s collapse might have been the precipitous U.S. withdrawal in 2021, the real question is why the Afghan government could not stand on its own despite the hundreds of billions of dollars invested over 20 years by America and its allies. How did hundreds of thousands of soldiers and police officers, armed with modern equipment, lose to insurgents who rode their motorcycles in sandals?

Many corrupt and unpopular governments survive insurgencies. And it’s clear that the Taliban’s violence against civilians did not prevent their ultimate success. More than hearts and minds lost to brutality, internal rot and infighting — fed by the West’s profligate spending and inconsistent strategy — explain the republic’s collapse. Criminal behavior by republican officials escalated to the point that it threatened the system itself, bringing about repeated crises like the near collapse of the banking sector. Wage and supply theft were catastrophic to the morale of soldiers and police officers, while nonexistent “ghost soldiers” inflated their ranks. As the Americans pulled back from rural areas, the ALP militias became increasingly predatory, shaking down locals for bribes; their selective violence became indiscriminate, to use Kalyvas’s terms. “That’s how it started,” a senior Panjwai officer explained. “The district chief stole their salaries and said, ‘Go get your meals from the people.’”

When it came to corruption, Raziq played an ambiguous role: What he stole from the system with one hand he gave back with the other. With their control of the border, he and his cronies siphoned huge amounts of government revenue : The shortfall added up to around $55 million per year, according to satellite imagery and customs data analyzed by the researcher David Mansfield.

But Raziq also spent much of what he earned on his network of sources, on bonuses for his men, on bribes to protect himself from rapacious politicians in Kabul. In a corrupt system, money was synonymous with power, and Raziq needed it to fight. Yet while he tried to curb overly predatory commanders, there was a limit to how far he could go to keep order. He was a prisoner of his own methods. Enforced disappearances, torture and executions, the tools that Raziq believed were necessary to defeat the Taliban, had to be kept hidden, often through intimidation and bribery. Impunity for human rights abuses could lead to general lawlessness; in this way, repressive counterinsurgencies had mutated into mafia states in countries like Guatemala. The men that Raziq handpicked to carry out these acts were of necessity criminals. The darkness they worked within allowed corruption to flourish. By contrast, instead of democracy or human rights, the Taliban professed a fundamentalist vision of Islamic law. Their scholars justified killing captives and civilians as necessary and legitimate in the jihad against foreign occupation. Where the republic’s hypocrisy fed its fatal weakness, corruption, the Taliban’s unabashed brutality was consonant with the movement’s strength, its unity.

Today we live in an age of irregular warfare, of asymmetric clashes with militant groups and battles to control populations. A vast majority of conflicts over the past century have been within states, not between them. The comforting myth that brutality is always counterproductive — that war can therefore be humane — obscures how violence functions in such conflicts; it hides how and to whom men like Raziq are useful. In retrospect, this myth, sold to the public as COIN, is part of a larger pattern of dishonesty that runs through America’s longest war, 20 years of wishful thinking and willful ignorance that culminated in tragedy on Aug. 15, 2021, when Raziq’s mortal enemies entered Kabul in triumph.

Read by Peter Ganim

Narration produced by Anna Diamond and Krish Seenivasan

Engineered by Steven Szczesniak

Victor J. Blue is a photographer who has been working in Afghanistan since 2009, when President Barack Obama escalated the war effort. He was there during the fall of Kabul, when the Taliban came back into power in 2021, and has returned three times since then.

Matthieu Aikins is a contributing writer for The New York Times Magazine and a fellow at Type Media Center who, since 2008, has been covering conflicts in Afghanistan and the Middle East, the U.S. military's operations overseas, forced migration and human rights.  More about Matthieu Aikins

Advertisement