Had no idea the USMC had gone this far down the DEI---? rabbit hole. So well meaning folks, or grifters earning a paycheck pushing DEI are two categories, how about those quietly funding the private firms who then gain contracts to push this into business and government? It all started somewhere, and has now reached critical mass and is self sustaining. That original funding source should be of interest to "important officials", would it not? Or not, I guess, if they don't really care to know the who and why they did it.
The consequences for pushing individuals beyond their competence in order to meet a quota in Naval Aviation range from merely(?) lost opportunities for actually qualified individuals, to fatal or near fatal incidents. Example of the latter? Auburn Calloway. DON shares responsibility for what would have been another Oklahoma City but for the sheer guts of the crew members of FEDEX 705. As to the former, their name is legion.
Excellent column. I take issue only with the words "well meaning." DEI is about payback. Pure and simple. Those advocating DEI are not well meaning and do not have good intentions. They are not naive idealists but very vicious people who know exactly what they are doing and do not care about the harm they are inflicting.
The Air Force recently removed the additional points awarded to pilot applicants who already hold a pilots license, on the argument that this disadvantaged low-income minorities who did not have the opportunity to seek a pilots license outside the military.
So now, we will be ignoring a specific hard truth (a candidate has already proven they can pass the FAA flight exam, and is therefore MUCH more likely to be successful in military flight school) in favor of more racial division and animosity.
A quick anecdote. I've worked in my industry (pharma R&D) for a little over a decade, and I've worked with more Kenyans than African Americans.
Meanwhile, Hollywood made Will Smith a movie star in the mid 90's as a marine fighter pilot, and that still hasn't inspired this particular demographic.
When monuments to Lee and Jackson and their troops were erased I saw that diversity does not included their descendents. DEI are just a bunch of words to mask a very sinister program. Old communist trick. Sort of like People's Democratic Republic.
Was living in Clear Lake Tx with numerous NASA acquaintances when Bolden dismantled US manned spaceflight under the guise of, "NASA's New Era of Innovation and Discovery"...
They all regarded him as a destructive fonctionnaire, who liked to regale the troops with really stupid analogies while conducting his wrecking campaign.
Nothing particularly positive will come out of this.
One important add to your analysis is in this quote:
"One takeaway from the Boldens’ study was that Black Marines often take themselves out of the running for these positions at the start of their military careers by pursuing fields such as logistics or administration that transfer more readily to future civilian employment."
It's self selection in part.
Another quote that caught my eye:
"The Boldens’ study noted only a few reported incidents of racial hostility within the Marines’ aviation units, and none from recent years, but it described a culture of “silence” in which Black and White Marines are unwilling to engage in conversations about race and representation. Often, the study says, as the only minorities in their unit, non-White Marines deem it necessary to “adapt to the cultural circumstances in which they find themselves if they want to be accepted by peers.”
Ever wonder why "White Marines are unwilling to engage in conversations about race and representation."?
My observation: Agency on the part of the recruit/officer candidate explains much of the variance. My observations come from company, battalion, and brigade command in combat arms and teaching at a Service Academy.
Minority officer candidates seemed to buy into the incentive that a military background or career is a leg up and they are much more attuned to "what can I do with this experience afterwards." I observed many more minority officers gravitating toward the combat support branches (signal, field and air defense artillery, engineer, etc.) and the service support/tech branches (transportation, quartermaster/logistics, finance, etc.) than combat arms. This frequently tracked with their bachelor's degree major.
Trying to force an arbitrarily "equitable" outcome in branch or operational assignments will only result in a lot of resentment within the ranks from both majority and minority officers.
Recently VP-45 flew a (the squadron operates the P-8) mission with a all "female crew" and all "female maintence support." The MPRA has had female officer and enlisted aircrew since the mid 1970s. VP-50 deployed with female maintenance support in the early 1980s. I spent 24 years in the MPRA community and I was taught "one team, one fight." Guess today's MPRA prefers to segregate their people by sex. Just the rambling thoughts of an old hermit.
Often overlooked in these studies is self-selection, especially as regards advancement. There are way more advancement opportunities in the Army if you are in the combat arms but some ethnicities eschew the opportunity, opting instead to less rigorous specialties.
1. Maybe the civilian STEM fields offer a better lifestyle and pay for minority candidates who are hunted down like unicorns by hungry HR departments.
2. Several major airlines are actively recruiting minority candidates for ab initio training which directly bypasses the traditional route military pilot training used by people who ultimately wanted to be airline pilots.
Couple that with a smaller pool of qualified candidates?
Not a single one of these clowns will acknowledge that it just ain't raaycist issues.
Depressing. Still: Has anyone bothered to try and understand why it is that the service with the least problems with attaining recruiting goals(That would be the USMC) is, coincidentally the service with the least DEI/politically correct culture (Also USMC)?
DEI is morphing into DEIA and now into DEIAB. The B is "belonging."
Had no idea the USMC had gone this far down the DEI---? rabbit hole. So well meaning folks, or grifters earning a paycheck pushing DEI are two categories, how about those quietly funding the private firms who then gain contracts to push this into business and government? It all started somewhere, and has now reached critical mass and is self sustaining. That original funding source should be of interest to "important officials", would it not? Or not, I guess, if they don't really care to know the who and why they did it.
The consequences for pushing individuals beyond their competence in order to meet a quota in Naval Aviation range from merely(?) lost opportunities for actually qualified individuals, to fatal or near fatal incidents. Example of the latter? Auburn Calloway. DON shares responsibility for what would have been another Oklahoma City but for the sheer guts of the crew members of FEDEX 705. As to the former, their name is legion.
Excellent column. I take issue only with the words "well meaning." DEI is about payback. Pure and simple. Those advocating DEI are not well meaning and do not have good intentions. They are not naive idealists but very vicious people who know exactly what they are doing and do not care about the harm they are inflicting.
I really think it should be written "Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity".
DIE Commissars is so much more entertaining to say, as well as accurate.
The Air Force recently removed the additional points awarded to pilot applicants who already hold a pilots license, on the argument that this disadvantaged low-income minorities who did not have the opportunity to seek a pilots license outside the military.
So now, we will be ignoring a specific hard truth (a candidate has already proven they can pass the FAA flight exam, and is therefore MUCH more likely to be successful in military flight school) in favor of more racial division and animosity.
A quick anecdote. I've worked in my industry (pharma R&D) for a little over a decade, and I've worked with more Kenyans than African Americans.
Meanwhile, Hollywood made Will Smith a movie star in the mid 90's as a marine fighter pilot, and that still hasn't inspired this particular demographic.
When monuments to Lee and Jackson and their troops were erased I saw that diversity does not included their descendents. DEI are just a bunch of words to mask a very sinister program. Old communist trick. Sort of like People's Democratic Republic.
Was living in Clear Lake Tx with numerous NASA acquaintances when Bolden dismantled US manned spaceflight under the guise of, "NASA's New Era of Innovation and Discovery"...
They all regarded him as a destructive fonctionnaire, who liked to regale the troops with really stupid analogies while conducting his wrecking campaign.
Nothing particularly positive will come out of this.
We don't want to win wars. We want to lose them.
Sal,
One important add to your analysis is in this quote:
"One takeaway from the Boldens’ study was that Black Marines often take themselves out of the running for these positions at the start of their military careers by pursuing fields such as logistics or administration that transfer more readily to future civilian employment."
It's self selection in part.
Another quote that caught my eye:
"The Boldens’ study noted only a few reported incidents of racial hostility within the Marines’ aviation units, and none from recent years, but it described a culture of “silence” in which Black and White Marines are unwilling to engage in conversations about race and representation. Often, the study says, as the only minorities in their unit, non-White Marines deem it necessary to “adapt to the cultural circumstances in which they find themselves if they want to be accepted by peers.”
Ever wonder why "White Marines are unwilling to engage in conversations about race and representation."?
cause of you DIE Commissars.
My observation: Agency on the part of the recruit/officer candidate explains much of the variance. My observations come from company, battalion, and brigade command in combat arms and teaching at a Service Academy.
Minority officer candidates seemed to buy into the incentive that a military background or career is a leg up and they are much more attuned to "what can I do with this experience afterwards." I observed many more minority officers gravitating toward the combat support branches (signal, field and air defense artillery, engineer, etc.) and the service support/tech branches (transportation, quartermaster/logistics, finance, etc.) than combat arms. This frequently tracked with their bachelor's degree major.
Trying to force an arbitrarily "equitable" outcome in branch or operational assignments will only result in a lot of resentment within the ranks from both majority and minority officers.
Recently VP-45 flew a (the squadron operates the P-8) mission with a all "female crew" and all "female maintence support." The MPRA has had female officer and enlisted aircrew since the mid 1970s. VP-50 deployed with female maintenance support in the early 1980s. I spent 24 years in the MPRA community and I was taught "one team, one fight." Guess today's MPRA prefers to segregate their people by sex. Just the rambling thoughts of an old hermit.
Often overlooked in these studies is self-selection, especially as regards advancement. There are way more advancement opportunities in the Army if you are in the combat arms but some ethnicities eschew the opportunity, opting instead to less rigorous specialties.
1. Maybe the civilian STEM fields offer a better lifestyle and pay for minority candidates who are hunted down like unicorns by hungry HR departments.
2. Several major airlines are actively recruiting minority candidates for ab initio training which directly bypasses the traditional route military pilot training used by people who ultimately wanted to be airline pilots.
Couple that with a smaller pool of qualified candidates?
Not a single one of these clowns will acknowledge that it just ain't raaycist issues.
Depressing. Still: Has anyone bothered to try and understand why it is that the service with the least problems with attaining recruiting goals(That would be the USMC) is, coincidentally the service with the least DEI/politically correct culture (Also USMC)?