US The Problem with a ‘Woke’ Military

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

The Problem with a ‘Woke’ Military​

Robert M. Berg 13 hrs ago

1623044427168.png

I used to belong to a war-fighting organization, where we were taught a shared set of Army values. We were taught mission accomplishment before all else, enforced by “mission first and people always.” Within the Department of Defense (DoD) Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan we are told that “diversity is a strategic imperative — critical to mission readiness and accomplishment.” We are also told, by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, that it must be a priority for the military “to look like America and not only in the ranks, but our leadership should look like America.” On the surface, this sounds okay. But it flips what had long been a soldier’s commitment to the Army and mission: The new priority turns the Army into a social experiment at the cost of mission readiness. The new push within the DoD for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) goes well beyond measures to ensure equal opportunity and instead looks to create preferences that have nothing to do with merit. Our military will suffer if it does not change course.

a person that is standing in the grass: U.S. Army paratroopers with the 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade, 82nd Airborne Division, participate in a pass-and-review during a change of command ceremony at Fort Bragg, N.C., June 26, 2019.
© Specialist Hubert D. Delany III/US Army U.S. Army paratroopers with the 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade, 82nd Airborne Division, participate in a pass-and-review during a change of command ceremony at Fort Bragg, N.C., June 26, 2019.

Believing that the Army should be and has been the best example of a meritocracy in the history of the world has become a forbidden position. The only acceptable position now is full acceptance of all elements of DEI. Examples abound, from the more benign recent recruiting messages depicting cartoon stories — one of an “activist” soldier — all the way to creating a new permanent DEI infrastructure to push policies in line with critical race theory. That I am not allowed to openly hold the position that war-fighting and combat readiness should be the Army’s top priority, while being force-fed a radical DEI agenda, demonstrates the open erosion of mission-first principles within the military.

This is a real and serious change, and politician veterans such as Senator Tom Cotton and Representative Dan Crenshaw are right to be worried about it. The Army used to be a values-based organization focused on mission accomplishment above all else. These values were drilled into every soldier during initial entry training and reinforced at unit level. This was done through two long-standing Army traditions, an inability to spell and the overwhelming need to make everything an acronym. So we settled on LDRSHIP (pronounced “leadership”): loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage. These values were all pitched toward the idea of leaving your past behind, as you had become part of an organization with a larger purpose. Diversity is not our strength; our shared values and singularity of purpose toward mission accomplishment is our strength. In fact, to “fight and win our nation’s wars,” we need conformity toward the mission-first mindset. We were taught that what came before the Army did not matter. All that matters was how you form a team to accomplish a wide range of demanding mission sets.

The Army does not exist to care for soldiers. Soldiers should not join the Army to be cared for by the Army. It is called “service” for a reason, and military members are still the most respected profession in the country because of the acknowledgment of the sacrifices required for service. Soldiers enter the Army fully understanding the individual sacrifices required for service. While individual welfare is important, it is secondary to mission accomplishment.

By definition, the Army is not inclusive. You can be excluded from service for a wide range of reasons, many (though not all) of which are out of the control of the potential recruit. We have all heard that over 70 percent of our youth are not qualified for military service, because we are exclusively looking for people who can meet the physical and physiological demands of service. If Austin really wanted a military that “look[ed] like America,” he would have to abandon such requirements entirely. Now of course, military exclusivity should be directly related to one’s ability or inability to perform the role one is potentially being recruited for. But to say that DEI policies are always strategic imperatives, without offering any evidence as to why, is simply fantasy.

It is true that recruiting from a broad breadth of society will strengthen the military, by ensuring the whole of the country is vested in defense of the nation. However, the idea that celebrating and promoting “diversity and inclusion” — emphasizing things such as race, religion, gender, or other non-merit-based traits instead of focusing on common culture and combat readiness — enhances the Army lacks evidence. In fact, DEI should not be used in any decisions within military manning or policy after initial recruitment. Attempting to highlight these external “traits” as bearing weight in making decisions for assignments, policy, or training ignores what the real strength of the military is. Unity of purpose and a shared set of core military values of individual merit is what binds us, not lumping people into “diversity” buckets.

Instead of focusing on war-fighting principles and shared values, the Army has decided to engage in a constant bombardment in the name of equity, from rolling out ill-conceived training on everything from unconscious bias to critical race theory and standing up DEI offices at every level. The Special Operations Command Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan 2021 outlines what the rest of the force can expect: “Establish corporate diversity and inclusion infrastructure throughout the enterprise . . . to build a permanent framework for sustained, meaningful efforts.” The idea is to create a new permanent bureaucracy to enforce “equity” regardless of merit. The document even boasts, under best practices, that they have added “unconscious bias [training and] . . . diversity and inclusion modules to its Executive Training with the goal of advancing and messaging diversity and inclusion.”

The Army People Strategy from September 2020 has an entire annex dedicated to “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” This document calls for the creation of permanent organizations with the following as an ultimate goal: “Army resources all DEI agencies and staff to levels that allow continuous monitoring, assessing, and updating of DEI policies, programs, and procedures which seek to prevent biases against any Soldier or Civilian.” In other words, you will comply or else, and diversity is a strategic imperative because we say so. “The Army . . . must also understand how to communicate why DEI is critical to the success of the Army profession and how to appreciate, leverage, and integrate principles of DEI into all aspects of its operations.” (Emphasis added.)

I fully expect to see DEI officers at every level — who will operate outside of the command they are there to “support” — to ensure that quotas are met and that radicalized, race-based training is conducted. The strategy states that it is imperative to “ensure DEI principles and policies are integrated into the Army Campaign Plan, Army People Strategy, and Army talent-management processes for all military and civilian personnel.” In other words, goals and targets will be met regardless of the effect on the fighting force, and the new DEI bureaucracy will be there to ensure your compliance. It goes on to say that the Army will “establish and implement procedures for achieving desired Army diversity outcomes through diversity policy and talent management principles and practices.” (Emphasis added.) Let there be no doubt, this is well beyond equal opportunity: This is race- and sex-based preferences.

Military skills are unique, so your past experiences lend you little aid. The military truly is a humbling experience to all. It forces people to either rise to the occasion or fall by the wayside, neither of which has anything to do with race, sex, or other immutable (but superfluous) traits. The only way to succeed is to conform to the military team mindset and judge those around you by how they contribute to the team and mission, while rejecting those who refuse to honor the military values and individual merit. To remain the fighting force this country needs, military leaders should discard this nonsense that the military is systemically oppressive and requires DEI-based correction. They should instead highlight the military as the example where your past does not matter, but only your willingness to work toward a common mission does. Show the military for what it is: an organization in which our unity and our values are our strength.

These DEI efforts are not designed to unite us but instead look to create a permanent structure to ensure that “woke” policies are enforced throughout the Army, with little or no thought given to mission priorities. I have yet to see a single document about DEI that makes a creditable case that DEI efforts are designed foremost with mission accomplishment in mind. These new DEI policies and offices are not designed to unite us. Indeed, they go well beyond a simple distraction from mission priorities. They are being pushed as the priority. Bring back war-fighting and mission-first mindset as our priorities. After all, it is only the defense of the free world at stake.



 
Why the fuck would patriots fight? I'm not Ameircan but I can say for certain that the current situation with the west will ensure only the most retarded nationalists/patriots fight for their country. What the fuck are you fighting for? Literally no one is going to look at all the bullshit going on at the moment and think "Yeah, I want to protect the country that hates me for being white, but will 100% protect grooming gangs and people who hate my way of life. I will happily risk losing my life or limbs like many guys who fought in Iraq/Afghanistan, just for my son to be taken away from me after I tell him he isnt a little girl".

Society is made for the libs and the leftists, they can defend it all on their own. But they also hate the West so have fun with that.
Young guys see the military as a legal way to get into trouble and be a part of something or they did not too long ago and I imagine still do, at least in the US. They don't have the perspective most people here have and aren't jaded so only see the "fun" stuff in the military.
 
Victory disease is a real thing and the US will need to get its shit pushed in a couple of time before it rediscovers seriousness
Unless it is the U.S. Govt itself getting its shit push in it will not learn. The U.S. military getting fucked over is a net positive to the U.S. Govt as it sees the military and "armed citizens" as a direct threat.
 
I fully expect to see DEI officers at every level — who will operate outside of the command they are there to “support” — to ensure that quotas are met and that radicalized, race-based training is conducted.
Communist nations' political commissars were more useful than this.
 
In a way, it's inevitable since every* study shows diversity improves a business so naturally if you run the military like a business you need the three magic letters D-E-I (they might be a little out of order, hmm, why not Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity?)

*mysteriously all of these studies saying otherwise are always rejected for peer review
I think the planners in Washington could be out of touch
They absolutely are, and the National Guard occupation of DC earlier this year proves it. Had there actually been a few thousand "Trump Blackshirts" exercising their 2A rights and driving their pickup trucks and semis to DC, there is no doubt in my mind they would've routed the National Guard units there and occupied the capital. That entire NG mission was organized and led by political appointees and those troops had zero morale.
 
Cohesion-wise, America would lose. Manpower-wise, America would lose. Tech-wise, America would win but not for much longer. Both nations have nukes so America can't bully China like they do to Germany, Japan, and other occupied nations. Oh, and China has all the factories, which I'm sure already have contingencies for conversion into weapon and ammunition plants should a war break out. Meanwhile in the dying American salad bowl the warring tribes brought in since LBJ's reign have just about reached their boiling points. Dieversity is death, and a Billion+ population of common-goal, same race tribesmen will Easily steamroll the divided and dying Banana Republic - along with its dying Pedophile President, if he is still shambling by then. If he's not around then China gets to help rid the world of another baboon.
 
They absolutely are, and the National Guard occupation of DC earlier this year proves it. Had there actually been a few thousand "Trump Blackshirts" exercising their 2A rights and driving their pickup trucks and semis to DC, there is no doubt in my mind they would've routed the National Guard units there and occupied the capital. That entire NG mission was organized and led by political appointees and those troops had zero morale.
Now that would have been a happening. Sometimes you need a massive failure to show the problems of an organization. People and institutions are usually hesitant to question their own processes and habit.
 
In my country the army is best described as a "uniformed welfare service" essentially a means of job creation, since we're not planning to fight any wars. Not sure how that's going to work out... but at least we don't have any enemies.
It seems America has become so comfortable with the idea that they'll forever be fighting idiots in caves armed with AKs that they can just drone strike, that the US government decided to repurpose the military into a propaganda tool, to try and advertise to the world at how open and progressive they are... Not sure how that's going to work out... since there's a lot of people who don't like America...
 
Oh God can you imagine it? The soys having to actually go to war? Antifa members getting drafted?

I imagine it being more like they get the REMF jobs while the actual men who were smart enough/employed enough not to join the military get sent to the front lines.

Of course, they'll still be fat as fuck so it's not like it will improve our military might in anyway.
 
I imagine it being more like they get the REMF jobs while the actual men who were smart enough/employed enough not to join the military get sent to the front lines.

Of course, they'll still be fat as fuck so it's not like it will improve our military might in anyway.
Vietnam Draft: McNmara's Morons
Modern Draft: Lloyd's Lardasses
 
God damn am I happy that I separated when I did. I could see elements of this starting to pop up but I can't imagine how bad it's gotten now.
 
Diversity is not our strength; our shared values and singularity of purpose toward mission accomplishment is our strength.
This, so much fucking this.
Multiculti faggots will endlessly repeat the ‘diversity is our strength‘ mantra but none of them will ever be able to concisely explain how diversity strengthens anything.
There’s nothing stronger than a bunch of people who see similarities and shared experiences in each other.
Woke politics, SJWism and all the other soct manifestations is smoothbrain Marxist bullshit focus solely on what makes cohort A different from cohort B. All the while chanting that stupid fucking slogan like it can somehow magically ward off the many ills of the diverse society.
 
I like to troll some of the military group pages on Facebook to see what the normies think; it's not good, many are for it. Despite even my retarded ass can prove that this shit is not good. The military does studies about the total populace to see how well they can retain numbers. IIRC they said ~70% of the total population isn't suitable for service. Now have the military reflect the population where 70% are unfit. I'm sure you see where I'm going with this.

Not American, but I heard that there are no black Special Forces in the UK because "Niggers can't swim"
It's the same here in the states, Special Forces are largely white because swim qual drops a lot of blacks.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo