Please login to continue
Forgot your password?
Recover it here.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up Now!

You are now logged into your account.

Sign Up for Free

Name
Email
Choose Password
Confirm Password

Menu
Posted on Jun 30, 2021 Print this Article

Issue 65: June 2021

This edition of CMR E-Notes highlights news about major issues of concern to CMR for many years, and latest developments in the hottest issue going: critical race theory instructions and indoctrination in the military. CRT programs divide and demoralize participants with unresolvable accusations of “systemic racism” and “white supremacy,” forcing everyone to judge others solely by the color of their skin. 

A. CMR Amicus Brief On Winning Side

On June 7, the U.S. Supreme Court properly deferred to the constitutional authority of Congress to decide whether young women should be subject to Selective Service obligations:

We did not know what the Biden Department of Justice would do, but the DoJ filed a brief making a constitutional argument similar to that presented by CMR. The DoJ brief, however, omitted any mention of the physical differences between men and women, which are relevant when considering the composition of the draft pool in a future catastrophic national emergency. 

As argued only in the CMR brief, the fact that some women have proved themselves capable of meeting the high standards that combat demands does not mean that all women should be subject to a future draft. Previous policies regarding women in combat billets have been repealed, but the physiological differences between men and women have not been repealed. 

B. CMR Files Statement with Senate Armed Services Committee Opposing Push to "Draft Our Daughters”

Anticipating that the debate about the women in Selective Service issue would shift to Congress, CMR filed a statement on the issue with the Senate and House Armed Services Committees.

CMR’s statement was included in the record of the March 11 Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) hearing on recommendations of the three-year National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, which produced its final report last year. As CMR observed, the $45 million Commission’s recommendations were disappointing, misguided, and less than thorough on issues related to Selective Service. 

Unlike the National Commission’s report, CMR’s statement cited specific data derived from three years of U.S. Marine Corps research comparing single-sex and mixed-sex units performing physical tasks comparable to requirements in combat arms units such as the infantry. 

This data and many other factors indicate that co-ed conscription, involving large numbers of men and women, would seriously complicate and slow mobilization in a time of catastrophic national emergency:

This “elephant in the room” issue includes disproportionately high failure rates for women taking the new “gender-neutral” Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT). The Army has not found a way to achieve the promised “gender neutral” standards on the ACFT, so officials are now considering a return to “gender specific” standards and a “percentile” system that would compare women’s scores to those of other women and men’s scores to those of other men. 

This “solution” would not solve the basic conundrum: women and men have different capabilities, and they cannot be considered interchangeable in combat arms units such as the infantry and other units that would be most in need of “combat replacements” should it ever become necessary to reinstate the draft.

During the March 11 Senate hearing, Co-Chairs of the Commission made several questionable comments that CMR challenged in a letter to SASC Ranking Member Sen. James Inhofe:

In particular, the letter to Sen. Inhofe objected to the Commission’s recommendation that the purpose of Selective Service should be changed to include non-combat requirements (a step toward mandatory national service) and its reference to Project 100,000 – a disastrous Vietnam-era social experiment – to justify registration of women for a possible future draft.

In addition, CMR disputed the notion that co-ed conscription is necessary to increase respect for women in the military, or to be “fair” to men. Women have always volunteered to serve during a national emergency and surely will do so again. 

CMR filed a similar Statement for the Record with the House Armed Services Committee, which held a hearing on May 19, but members of the National Commission did not repeat points that CMR objected to previously.   

The process of writing the annual NDAA often is difficult to follow, since many decisions are made behind closed doors and the process will be delayed this year. CMR has provided information on several issues, however, and staff members have expressed thanks for the information.

C. “Diversity & Inclusion” Mandates Target Special Operations Forces

Potential adversaries of America must be pleased that America’s elite Special Operations Forces are being ordered to impose percentage-based demographic goals in recruitment and promotions of all personnel. CMR has analyzed the SOCOM Diversity & Inclusive Strategic Plan 2021, which hammers an unsupported mantra, “Diversity is an operational imperative,” 12 times on 20 pages:

There is no evidence that SOCOM’s Strategic Plan – resulting from President Biden’s Executive Orders regarding “diversity & inclusion” – will strengthen highly skilled fighting teams such as the Army Delta Force and Navy SEALS.  These elite units are trained to seek out and destroy the enemy, often in covert missions that are complex, extremely difficult, and physically demanding.  Assigning priority to “diversity, inclusion, and equity,” at the expense of meritocracy, could compromise qualification standards and weaken Special Operations Forces under conditions that allow no room for error.

Any doubt that SOCOM has shifted priorities in the wrong direction was dispelled after woke activist Richard Torres-Estrada was reinstated as USSOCOM’s Chief of Diversity & Inclusion.  Torres-Estrada was suspended from that position pending an investigation of a meme comparing President Donald Trump to Adolph Hitler, which Torres-Estrada posted on Facebook in June 2020. He is back in office, however, in a position to impose his agenda in ways that will impede operational imperatives. 

D. Critical Race Theory Programs Eroding Military Cohesion

Few of the issues of concern to CMR have captured the awareness of America like “critical race theory” (CRT) programs, which divide and demoralize military people instead of inspiring trust and unit cohesion. 

Last August, CMR explained why it was important to Keep Woke Ideology Out of the Department of Defense. After the 2021 Inauguration, CMR reported how the Biden Presidency began with Injuries and Insults to the Troops.

CMR also asked serious questions about actions of Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, who seems obsessed with only one type of extremism in the ranks, usually called “white supremacy” or “systemic racism:” As CMR asked last February, Will Defense Department “Stand-Downs” Push Extremism in Pursuit of Extremists? 

Many analysts have examined the history of critical race theory, which is an ideology derived from cultural Marxism. Several times since the beginning of the 20th century, followers of Karl Marx instigated conflict between classes of people to generate social unrest – often employing violence or threats of violence to deny individual rights and to consolidate totalitarian power. 

The planned Marxist class struggle between the “oppressors” (bourgeoisie) and the “oppressed” (proletariat) did not take hold in America, (except in academia) – largely because our capitalist system creates opportunities for everyone to succeed, even from humble beginnings.

Cultural Marxism has gained new life, however, by dividing people not by class, but by race. The universally supported phrase “Black lives matter,” – first used after Michael Brown was killed by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri – took the nation by storm in the aftermath of the May 2020 death of George Floyd in Minneapolis

Patrisse Khan-Cullors and two other women identifying themselves as Marxist-trained activists founded the Black Lives Matter Global Foundation, which has received millions in contributions from corporations and individuals misled by the organization’s name.

In what became a “Summer of Rage” in 2020, some local BLM-affiliated groups and “Antifa” went beyond the limits of peaceful protests by inciting riots, looting, partial occupation of cities like Portland, and millions in damage and destruction of private properties. 

At the same time, critical race theory ideologues moved in to implement mandates for “diversity, inclusion, and equity.” Almost overnight, CRT programs took hold in civilian school programs and in military schools, colleges, and academies nationwide. 

CRT programs and recommended books turn groups of people against each other by labelling them as “oppressors” or the “oppressed.” Constructive change or forgiveness for real or imagined racial affronts cannot occur because “white supremacy” is considered “systemic” and not determined by individual actions. Disregarding the wisdom of Martin Luther King, Jr., all participants are required to judge others by “the color of their skin, not the content of their character.”

Under CRT programs, it is not enough for a white person to be “not racist.” Woke “anti-racism” demands affirmative steps to dismantle all institutions that produce “inequity,” which means “unequal outcomes.” Accusations of “white supremacy” cannot be resolved because denials of racism are considered proof of racism.

These radical ideas reflect the ideology of books by controversial “woke” authors like Ibram X. Kendi (How to be an Anti-Racist), Robin DeAngelo (White Fragility), and the New York Times’ controversial “1619 Project,” which re-defined American History as beginning with the arrival of slaves on the American continent in 1619, not Independence Day in 1776

Both Marxist theory and critical race theory demand the destruction of America’s free-market capitalist system, which results in some people achieving better outcomes than others. The goal is to achieve “equity,” which is not the same as “equality” or “equal treatment” under the law.

It is difficult to imagine a more divisive and demoralizing course of instruction for personnel who must trust and depend on each other for mission accomplishment and survival in battle.

Adm. Michael Gilday, the Chief of Naval Operations, nevertheless defended his inclusion of Kendi’s book on a professional Navy reading list. On June 15, Rep. James Banks (R-IN) asked Gilday whether he agreed with a variety of extremist beliefs expressed by Kendi. These included Kendi’s advocating for the destruction of American capitalism and his labelling of the Navy as “fundamentally racist.” Gilday displayed his wokeness by defending Kendi’s book while refusing to explain how or why such reading would improve recruiting, morale, or professional skills in the already-diverse Navy. 

That disturbing performance was topped on June 23, when Joint Chiefs Chairman Army Gen. Mark Milley and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin testified before the House Armed Services Committee. Gen. Milley seemed upset because someone had accused him of reading Karl Marx and other Communist authors. Speaking with emotion, Milley also wondered what was behind the “white rage” that led “thousands” to storm the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

The issue is not whether Milley or other military people have read Marx’s Communist Manifesto, Hitler’s Mein Kampf, or Mao Tse Tung’s Little Red Book. They should, along with other works that expose the murderous legacy of Marxism and compare its goals to the noble values embodied in America’s Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution

The issue is whether cultural Marxism should be taught and endorsed under the guise of “diversity, inclusion, and equity” (DIE) instructions that attack merit and antagonize participants with broad-brush accusations.

Examples abound, but either Gen. Milley and Secretary Austindo not know what CRT instructions are, or pretended not to know, or made a conscious decision to misrepresent the nature of training that inspires division and hatred by portraying America as a thoroughly racist nation. 

It was disturbing to see the two top leaders of America’s military showing how quickly they have become full-throated supporters of critical race theory, even though both claimed to know nothing about it. 

E. Groundswell Grows in Opposition to Critical Race Theory

The CRT wave has swept through military and civilian institutions like a tsunami tidal wave without warning. Pushback, however, is gaining strength in the military as well as in the civilian world.

Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier raised awareness of CRT by writing a concise book analyzing its Marxist roots and providing eye-witness accounts of its consequences in the military: 

As Lohmeier explains in his book, America’s exceptional form of government and culture should be understood and defended against “woke” ideology and critical race theory, which are outgrowths of cultural Marxism going back decades. 

Without revealing identities, Lohmeier’s book amplifies the voices of CRT indoctrination participants who were told that they should judge others by the color of their skin and prove their “anti-racism” by working to dismantle “systemically racist” institutions. 

After doing an interview about his book, Lohmeier’s commanders, who did not object before its publication, summarily removed Lohmeier from command of the 11th Space Force Warning Command at Buckley Air Force Base in Colorado, pending an Inspector General investigation. 

An article in the Colorado Gazette titled Fired for Speaking Out provides insight into Lohmeier’s motivations for writing his book, which has become a best-seller. A new group of military service academy alumni, organized under the name STARRS (Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services), has heard from scores of cadets and midshipmen who have been forced to endorse or participate in CRT indoctrination. 

At the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, recent graduates published a 40-page manifesto reflecting the tenets and agenda of critical race theory. In addition to demands for CRT indoctrination at West Point, the manifesto demands, “Release individual statements from prominent white leaders at the Academy (e.g., the Dean, Commandant, and Brigade Tactical Officer) acknowledging how their white privilege sustains systems of racism, explaining the role they will play as an ally in destroying the norm of white supremacy, and mandating their subordinates to have these conversations with their units.”

Similar support for CRT and the BLM organization have been expressed at the U.S. Naval Academy and the Air Force Academy. One-sided academic courses and affinity groups stirring up racial tension are not compatible with the missions of America’s premiere military educational institutions.

CMR is pleased to lend support to Lt. Col. Lohmeier and his book Irresistible Revolution, which should be read by every Pentagon official from the Secretary of Defense on down.  CMR also has been working with other organizations to encourage and support members of Congress who are fighting CRT in the military:

The CAP statement, which drew support from an unusually high number (112) major organizational leaders and military veterans has helped to sustain multiple efforts to counter CRT in Congress.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), for example, is sponsoring legislation, the Combatting Racist Training in the Military Act (S. 968) which would prohibit military education or training that promotes un-American and racist theories. As Sen. Cotton has explained, this legislation and a companion bill sponsored by Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC, H.R. 3134) specifically describe CRT concepts that have no place in military training, schools, colleges, and academies. They include: 

1) Any race is inherently superior or inferior to any other race.

2) The United States is a fundamentally racist country.

3) The Declaration of Independence or the United States Constitution are fundamentally racist documents.

4) An individual’s moral worth is determined by his or her race.

5) An individual, by virtue of his or her race, is inherently racist or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; and

6) An individual, because of his or her race, bears responsibility for the actions committed by members of his or her race.

Both Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) and Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), Ranking Members of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, respectively, have expressed support for addressing CRT in the military legislation, along with Senators Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Kevin Cramer (R-ND).

Others expressing concern about the issue include Representatives Vicki Hartzler (R-MO), Jim Banks (R-IN), and Doug Lamborn (R-CO) who led 23 others in signing a letter asking for reinstatement of Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier. Rep. Matthew Rosendale (R-MT) and 29 of his colleagues co-signed a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin expressing concern about several examples of a “growing trend of left-wing extremism and politicization in our armed forces.”

Former Army Green Beret Rep. Michael Waltz (R-FL) has been vigorously questioning officials at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, objecting to CRT instructions that cadets have told him are “very, very divisive, bad for morale, and horrible for cohesion.” Rep. Mark Green (R-TN) is sponsoring legislation to end CRT indoctrination at the military service academies.

Sen. Cotton teamed up with Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), a former Navy SEAL, to establish a confidential “whistleblower” website to gather first-hand information about the presence of “woke ideology” and CRT programs in the military.

Hundreds of military personnel have used the Cotton/Crenshaw website to share what they have experienced because they have no other option to report what happened during training sessions addressing “extremism” in the ranks. Sen Cotton’s office released 11 pages of comments and many more have come in since.

In some areas, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s stand-downs on “extremism” have elevated tensions instead of promoting understanding and mutual support. As one service member wrote, “[T]he entire slideshow talked about white supremacy and, in my opinion only, talked about white people being racist.” (Comment #4 and several more)

Another servicemember described what was called the “privilege walk.” People of all ranks were told “‘If you are white take a step forward.’ ‘If you are male, take a step forward. Etc.’ The purpose of this trendy exercise is to physically separate participants based on the amount of ‘privilege’ they have. This message is damaging to the military organization, rank structure, and morale.” (Comment #15)

It is good to see so many members of Congress and the Senate listening to military people who have no other way to communicate and taking action to restore sound priorities.

F. Biden Administration Goes All-Out for LGBT “Pride” Month

Several years ago, when the U.S. Navy was defying Trump Administration policies regarding transgenders in the military, CMR predicted drag queen performances would occur on military bases and USO shows.  As Navy Times reported, such a performance took place on the carrier Ronald Reagan in August 2018.

Now the Air Force is defending the “educational value” and “morale-building” effect of allowing a drag queen show to take place at Nellis Air Force Base, sponsored by a supposedly “private” group. Given these examples of outlandish sexual-oriented shows on a military base, why shouldn’t military women be allowed to express their sexuality and boost their morale by hosting pole-dancing strip-tease performances on warships and military bases?

Once the military decides to put social goals above the needs of the military, demoralizing policies pushing social ideology become inevitable.  If the military tolerates expressions of sexuality to boost morale, any sort of self-expression becomes acceptable.

This is only one of many issues related to the transgender issue that CMR will be reporting in future analyses.

Articles of Interest:

 * * * * * *

Posted on Jun 30, 2021 Print this Article