top of page

RED ALERT: The Dangers of DEI Indoctrination Happening at the US Service Academies

The United States Service Academies are the premier institutions of higher learning that play a critical role in preparing the next generation of military officer leaders, as Harvard is to the next generation of civilian leaders.


~ by Col Rob Maness


Considering Harvard President Claudine Gay’s resignation, and her attempt to paint the cause due to racism, a typical Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) strategy, it is important for us to expose the effort to indoctrinate America’s future military leaders in the same Marxist ideology just as civilian leaders like Bill Ackman and Chris Rufo are doing in our civilian education institutions.


The United States Service Academies are the premier institutions of higher learning that play a critical role in preparing the next generation of military officer leaders, as Harvard is to the next generation of civilian leaders. These institutions have traditionally been known for their commitment to academic excellence, leadership development, and a strong sense of ethics, honor, and duty. However, in recent years, there has been a growing push to implement DEI initiatives at these academies, with the goal of creating a more inclusive and diverse learning environment. The intentions behind these initiatives are not noble and the reality is that they are doing harm to America’s future military officers. Exposing the dangers of DEI indoctrination at the US Service Academies and why these institutions must focus on meritocracy, not identity politics, is essential to America’s ability to defend itself in a dangerous world.


One of the most significant dangers of DEI indoctrination at the US Service Academies is the erosion of meritocracy. These institutions have historically been merit-based, with students being selected based on their academic and leadership potential. However, the introduction of DEI initiatives has led to a shift towards a more identity-based approach, where students are selected based on their race, gender, or other identity markers. This undermines the principle of meritocracy and is leading to a decline in the quality of education and leadership at these institutions. Scot Sturman, the 1972 US Air Force Academy Class President, highlighted this example in his Real Clear Defense article Bring Us Warriors, Not Warfighters, To Match My Mountain: “United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) Superintendent Richard Clark's recent congressional testimony epitomized a senior military officer defending blatant sexual and racial discrimination. Under the superintendent's leadership the academy encouraged cadets to apply for the Brooke Owens Fellowship Program that prohibited white male applicants. All other racial and sexual groups, including straight women, were eligible for the 9 weeks paid fellowship at a leading aerospace company.”


DEI initiatives are divisive, creating an environment where students are divided into different groups based on their identity. This is leading to a breakdown of the camaraderie and unity that is essential for success in the military. Instead of working together towards a common goal, students become more focused on their own identity group, leading to the destruction of unit cohesion and a weakened military incapable of winning the nation’s wars or deterring her adversaries effectively.


Another danger of DEI indoctrination is the introduction of political bias into the curriculum. DEI initiatives are based on the ideology of critical race theory, which views society through the lens of race and power dynamics. This leads to a one-sided and biased education, where students are not exposed to a wide range of viewpoints and ideas. This is particularly dangerous in the military, where a diversity of ideas and perspectives is essential for effective decision-making.


DEI initiatives are leading to a lack of freedom of expression at the US Service Academies. Students feel pressured to conform to a certain set of beliefs and values and are afraid to express their own opinions for fear of being labeled as racist or sexist. This is stifling critical thinking and the exchange of ideas, which is essential for a healthy educational environment.


Finally, there are a number of unintended consequences that arise from the implementation of DEI initiatives. For example, the focus on identity leads to a lack of attention to other important factors, such as academic achievement and leadership potential. This results in students being admitted to the US Service Academies who are not fully prepared for the rigors of military training and education, which has a negative impact on the overall quality of the institution. Another example is the negative impact on recruiting and retention. While there is a concerted public relations effort to ascribe the military’s recruiting and retention crisis to anything other than DEI policies, the organization Stand Together Against Racism And Radicalism in the Services has documented over a thousand comments from military members, veterans, family members and prospective recruits that confirm how recruiting and retention are in crisis due to these policies.


The US Service Academies must return to a focus on meritocracy, not identity politics. The implementation of DEI initiatives has severe negative consequences happening right now, including the erosion of meritocracy, divisiveness, political bias, a lack of freedom of expression, and the recruiting crisis. These institutions must be committed to providing a world-class education and leadership development, and this can only be achieved by selecting and educating students based on their potential, not their identity.


This article has been reposted with permission. Thank you, Colonel Rob


BIO

Col Rob is a 32-Year USAF Combat Vet, enlisted EOD; B-1 Sq Cdr; Wing Cdr; Nuclear Ops; 9/11 Pentagon Survivor; former US Senate Candidate; He Hosts The Rob Maness Show where he discusses important issues of the day. Rob can be found on X @Col. Rob Maness ret. Facebook @Col Rob Maness ret. And his substack account


19 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page