Ending Systemic Racism in DoD
and how Matthew Lohmeier can lead the way
Though I’ve written about the adverse performance implications of DEI, I’ve produced nothing as extensive as Matthew Lohmeier’s Irresistible Revolution or Amber Smith’s Unfit to Fight. If you want to quickly understand the threat progressive ideology imposes upon our nation’s military institutions, these books are essential reading.1 This article isn’t to convince you that progressivism and DEI is a problem, it is to initiate strategic planning to contest its malign influence on DoD. Astute readers familiar with this issue already understand a deliberate effort to confront these domestic enemies of the Constitution is essential for military readiness and, perhaps more importantly, add friction to any future attempts to weaponize the US military against the American people. It is also critical to the mutually supportive goal of realigning institutional priorities with Constitutional imperatives across DoD. That said, I’ll provide a brief overview of current conditions in order to provide context and contrast with desired conditions to facilitate the planning process.
Current Conditions
Racism against whites, sexism against men, religious discrimination against Christians, and bias against psychologically normal heterosexuals is ubiquitous throughout DoD driven by both policy and personnel. The mechanisms by which this bias and prejudice is weaponized against these classes2 is fairly straightforward and often understood, but rarely openly discussed. To make a wide generalization that is nevertheless true, Christian men who are white, heterosexual, and psychologically normal (CMWHPNs) don’t leverage bureaucratic processes in pursuit of self-advancement or as a means to shirk their duty. Any exceptions that make this rule are reflexively met with incredulity. Meanwhile, thorough indoctrination across educational institutions has culturally embedded the assumption among “educated” Americans that discrimination against these classes is not only acceptable, but an essential to social justice.3 This combination of factors ensures that these bureaucratic processes can be weaponized to inflict disparate impact4 upon CMWHPNs.
Consider the following:
CMWHPNs are much less likely to submit complaints, even when appropriate when experiencing unlawful discrimination or sexual harassment/abuse.
If a CMWHPN submits a complaint, it is not taken seriously, and recourse is often constrained even in extreme and obvious instances of discrimination.
The threat of complaint dissuades leaders from holding subordinates accountable for misconduct or inadequate performance.5
Leaders assume risk where threat of complaint is low (adverse discrimination against CMWHPNs) and avoid risk where it is high (holding non-CMWHPNs accountable).
Though misguided recruiting focus is blamed by some insiders for the 50% reduction in white recruitment, the pervasive discriminatory environment outlined above almost certainly constitutes the lion’s share of this development. When GEN CQ Brown decried white representation as too high as the CSAF prior to his appointment as the CJCS, he made it clear a reduction in white males is the desired result of policy vs. an unintended consequence of incompetent recruiting focus. If that doesn’t persuade you then perhaps consider this leaked powerpoint slide:
Desired Conditions
Contrast current conditions with conditions desired by those interested in a more capable, lethal, and ready US military. Key attributes of such a military include:
Discrimination on the basis of classes as defined by MEO policy is not tolerated.
Accountability for abuse of necessary complaint processes is swift and efficient.
Discrimination on the basis of capability and performance is culturally embedded at echelon and accepted as necessary regardless of disparate impact.6
Center of Gravity (COG)
The COG of opposition to achieving desired conditions is the Office of Force Resiliency (OFR) falling under the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. OFR not only contains all of the DEI programs (under ODEI), it also houses prevention programs that have come to incorporate DEI framing into their initiatives in a sophisticated maneuver designed to entrench this ideology throughout DoD at echelon. Those who implemented this agenda are continuously engaged in their own planning and have long recognized the potential for DEI to be dismantled by the American people directly via the President and/or Congressional representatives. Put another way, the unpopularity of DEI is a critical vulnerability that has been mitigated by nesting it with popular health promotion and prevention programs that are more resistant to criticism.
Targeting the COG
President Trump recently told Mathew Lohmeier he would hire him onto a task force to address the issue of DEI in the DoD. I would highly recommend that instead of pursuing a task force which would add complexity and leave legions of adversarial bureaucrats in place adjacent to ODEI, Lohmeier should seek appointment as the Executive Director of OFR. In this position, resiliency and prevention programs can be used to actively extricate critical Marxism from the entire enterprise from its source using the performance and readiness predicate they’ve sought use as a human shield.
OFR and the Army
OFR has a strong relationship with all service components7, but I’ll focus on the Army to illustrate the concept. OFR provides guidance to the Army’s Directorate of Prevention, Resiliency, and Readiness (DPRR) which falls under HQDA G1. The thousands of employees that form this enterprise are tasked with preventing harmful behaviors and enhancing readiness and resilience. One of the programs that falls under DPRR is Ready and Resilient (R2). I’ve written about R2 extensively on this blog. It is a great program that can serve as a powerful antidote to race Marxism given the right leadership. On the prevention side there are countless programs, but the new Integrated Prevention Advisory Group (IPAG) holds the most promise. Consisting of 1,200 personnel, this new initiative can be staffed with professionals who understand the dangers of race Marxism and are motivated to synchronize existing resources to confront and neutralize the threat.8 The way this can be accomplished is transitioning the focus of IPAG from initiating unproven and counterproductive recommendations informed by progressive ideology to reinforcing proven programs consistent with the Army Values such as H2F.9
Conclusion
The DoD currently promotes an environment hostile to CMWHPNs adversely impacting US Military capabilities and readiness. By aligning OFR with relevant service specific stakeholders under a leader of character such as Matthew Lohmeier, institutional opposition to race Marxism can be rapidly operationalized under the predicate of resilience, force health protection, and human performance optimization to achieve a more ready and capable force.10
As is this Congressional testimony:
Referencing protected classes under Military Equal Opportunity Policy nested with federal law and the Civil Rights Act (in this example Race, Color, Sex, Gender).
And that social justice is universally preferred to actual justice.
Generally this term is used to describe unintentional discrimination against protected classes. I briefly argue that the constructive discrimination against CMWHPNs is intentional at the end of the section.
Even complaints that are ultimately adjudicated as “unsubstantiated” regularly end careers depriving impacted leaders millions of dollars in benefits.
There will almost certainly be disparate impact on protected classes if discrimination based on capability and performance becomes normative. This is both legally permissible in the military and absolutely essential for optimal performance of any large organization.
OFR has a parent relationship to the USAF program that empowered an incompetent and corrupt GS11 civilian to destroy the culture of an entire Special Operations Wing (and the career of an outstanding leader) as previously discussed.
The current intent of the program seems to be to install critical Marxists into positions of influence throughout DoD. The tell is that one of the recommended degrees for IPAG directors is in “Health Equity”, which is basically how to apply race Marxism in a health promotion context.
H2F is the only Army program to demonstrate reductions in harmful behaviors. I believe it is ignored by senior leaders as a vector to promote People First/Prevention initiatives because it is not aligned with DEI/race Marxism.
This transition is not only required in the interests of a functional imperative, but also to restore 14th Amendment equal protection for Americans who wish to serve their country.
We used to mock or ignore this poisonous filth.
That might work better than confronting them on their own terms.
Or confront them on Longshoremen terms; you do it.
You can’t fight for people you don’t trust.
This DEI inefficiency is desired.
An army composed of resentful minorities will be easy to direct against a society they view as “White controlled/dominated”: America itself.
The Israel conflict is spiraling out of control by Israel’s design- they want America to jump in. They need a competent military to assist them, hence the refocus on recruiting White
Males, who have suffered the disproportionate number of casualties in every American war.