Posted by: theoptimisticconservative | November 11, 2013

Pentagon EO trainers learn of “White Male Club”

Your tax dollars at work for you.  Had to investigate this one for myself, as it seemed too surreal to be, well, real.  But the documentation is preserved online.  Behold, the Soviet-style reeducation project of the United States military, complete with mantras, slogans, and invidious allegations with which to berate and ostracize the enemies of the people.

Fox News’s Todd Starnes broke the story on 31 October.  The training manual used by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI), dated April 2012, contains an extensive chapter on “white male privilege,” which makes, among others, the following points:

Privilege is rooted in the history of American institutions. … Even though many … abuses of authority occurred long ago, the consequences are still seen today in:

  • ·         All levels of government, including both elected officials and political appointees.

  • ·         All branches of the military.

  • ·         The justice system, including the police and the courts.

  • ·         Financial institutions, including banks, investment firms, and real estate concerns.

  • ·         Educational institutions, including public and private institutions at the elementary, high school, and college levels.

  • ·         Religious institutions.

  • ·         Employers, both public and private.

Along with this (boldface emphasis in original):

Privilege and Social Identity

– Race/Ethnicity – Whites are the empowered group.

– Socio-Economic Status – Rich people are the empowered group.

– Gender – Men are the empowered group.

– Sexual Orientation – Heterosexuals are the empowered group.

– Religion – Judeo-Christians, or perhaps only Christians, are the empowered group [sic to the nth power].

– Health – Able-bodied people and those with good mental health are the empowered group.

And this:

Simply put, a healthy, White, heterosexual, Christian male receives many unearned advantages of social privilege, whereas a Black, homosexual, atheist female in poor health receives many unearned disadvantages of social privilege.

The definition of “white privilege” (italics in original):

White privilege is defined as the package of unearned advantages granted to those members of a diverse society with white skin. [I know, I know.  The syntax is absurd here.  Stay with me, people.]  Moreover, it’s an expression of institutional racism that is largely unacknowledged by White individuals.

The White Male Club, outed:

2.  White Male Club (Terry, 1976 [Yes: the framework for this section comes from a 1976 article in the Journal of Intergroup Relations, which seems to explain a lot])

Concepts of the White male club:

a.  An organization that arbitrarily selects members and bestows appropriate and psychological benefits on them. [Technically, in the Terry framework, the organization does not select members arbitrarily, but according to clear-cut criteria.]

b.  Distributes influence and power among its members and uses power to dominate groups like self (consciously or unconsciously).

c.  Anyone considered White and not a member of another group is included.

d.  A right, advantage, or immunity granted to or enjoyed by White persons (males) beyond the common advantage of all others; an exemption in many particular cases from certain burdens and liabilities that persons of another group may face because of the White male club.

e.  Members police each other White/White, male/male, which allows that group to keep its power.

If this framework seems kind of irrational to you, and reliant on an emotive, elliptical use of language, you probably have the Value Orientation of the White male club:

Value Orientation:  Not all White males accept them [sic].  Nor do all White women and minority people deny them.  The White male, Western, highly technological society rewards individual initiative; encourages competition; supports dispassionate, objective, and analytic thinking; and provides for creativity and personal advancement within the system.

Which doesn’t sound so bad, actually.  But getting back to emotion and logical ellipsis, there’s a whole section on Rationalizations for Retaining Privilege and Avoiding Responsibilities, containing gems like these (boldface in original):

5.  It was unintentional.  The group or individual with more power, who has clearly done something that resulted in some kind of devastation, might claim that the damage was unintentional, therefore, their responsibility was minimal.  Today, some White people may continue to claim that racism and sexism is [sic] unintentional…

6.  It’s all over now.  Another way to defuse responsibility [you know, you just can’t “sic” everything] is by claiming that all the devastation occurring to minorities and females happened in the past.  Some White people may often be oblivious to the fact that many of the same discriminatory policies of a hundred years ago are still in effect today.  Today some White people may claim racism and sexism are all over by saying, The days of land grabbing are long gone.  That was before the Civil Rights era, before women’s equality.”

7.  It’s only a few people.  If White people are unable to maintain that the atrocities are all in the past, they may switch to tactics to make a current situation seem isolated.  Some White people might say that it’s really only a few people who are like that; it is not systemic or institutionalized.  Today, some White people may continue to use this tactic…

Fascist collectivism always resorts to the same material.  Accusative formulations like these mirror quite exactly the accusations used by local Party leaders against the “enemies of the people” in Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, and Mao’s China, among other collectivist dictatorships of the past century.  The “enemies” might have been landowners, small shopkeepers, “intellectuals,” or Jews; the brief against them, propagated through the Party mechanisms of propaganda, enforcement brigades, and local collectives, always contained the same elements.

A Soviet-era parade under the banners "We will liquidate the kulaks as a class" and "All to the struggle against the wreckers of agriculture." (Image from "Annals of Communism" at yale.edu)

A Soviet-era parade under the banners “We will liquidate the kulaks as a class” and “All to the struggle against the wreckers of agriculture.” (Image from “Annals of Communism” at yale.edu)

 

There is no safe, benign use for this kind of vilification program.  The DEOMI manual doesn’t disappoint; it calls for action.  The equal-opportunity trainers and other officers receiving training under its auspices are urged to become “Strong White Allies” (or at least, apparently, to train “White people” to be Strong White Allies – that is, allies of those fighting racism and injustice).  The manual makes the following, admittedly garbled appeal (boldface in original):

With privilege comes responsibility.  So, in order to reduce and eliminate discrimination and institutionalized racism, social, political, and economic power must be gained by racial minorities.  Many representatives of racial minorities are consistent in describing the kinds of support they need from White allies if they are to increase their social, political, and economic power and overcome the effects of racism and discrimination.

The following are some strategies on how to acknowledge that responsibility and become a strong White ally.

a.  Assume racism is everywhere, everyday.

b.  Notice who is the center of attention and who is the center of power.

c.  Notice how racism is denied, minimized, and justified.

d.  Understand and learn from the history of Whiteness and racism.

Notice how racism has changed over time and how it has subverted or resisted challenges. [This claim is a classic in collectivist propaganda: the claim that the inimical patterns of the people’s enemies change their stripes over time, to cleverly avoid being defeated or wiped out by the righteous.] …

h.  Don’t confuse a battle with the war.

Behind particular incidents and interactions are larger patterns.  Racism is flexible and adaptable.  [Again, the “adaptation” theme: racism never goes away, but remains everywhere, everyday.]  There will be gains and losses in the struggle for justice and equality. …

…and so forth.  Read, as they say, the whole thing.  I join Allen West in stating unequivocally that this postulated environment of racism and “White male privilege” is not a description of the military I served in for 20 years, from 1983 to 2004.  Starnes quotes West:

“This is the Obama administration’s outreach of social justice into the United States military,” he told me. “Equal Opportunity in the Army that I grew up in did not have anything to do with white privilege.”

West said he is very concerned about the training guide.

“When the president talked about fundamentally transforming the United States of America, I believe he also had a dedicated agenda of going after the United States military,” he said. “The priorities of this administration are totally whacked.”

And frankly, he’s right about that.

J.E. Dyer’s articles have appeared at Hot Air, Commentary’s “contentions,Patheos, The Daily Caller, The Jewish Press, and The Weekly Standard online. She also writes for the new blog Liberty Unyielding.

Note for new commenters: Welcome! There is a one-time “approval” process that keeps down the spam. There may be a delay in the posting if your first comment, but once you’re “approved,” you can join the fray at will.


Responses

  1. Well, black is now officially white. The Secretariat of Revolutionary Re-Education could have said that there is a racial or ethnic group that has to score higher on standardized tests, get better grades, and show better objective and empirical aptitudes than other applicants in order to get admitted to college or hired for many government and private sector jobs. They could have said that your racial or ethnic origin may determine the amount of government subsidy or payment for which you are eligible. Those assertions would be demonstrably correct. But correct information is the last thing that the Secretariat wants to convey.

    Today in America, it is the white male who has to score higher and show better background to get a competitive admission to jobs and higher education. Our Supreme Court seems committed to interpreting the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause in the evasive manner of the majority in Plessy v Ferguson, only now a different race has its turn in the barrel of de jure racial discrimination.

    • Too true.

      But someday the white males will revolt, by leaving the military and/or not joining.

      And the military won’t be worth a damn, or, equivalently, an Obama promise.

      • They’ve been leaving since 2009. The military doesn’t have to be worth a damn, militarily, to ignore the left’s ‘brownshirts’. Obama’s goal is to emasculate the military, so that they cannot act as a last resort in defending the Constitution.

  2. The left is using racist themes to emasculate the white majority in America. They are promoting the acquisition of power by minorities steeped in racist themes, in order to emasculate the white majority in America.

    Not of course to actually distribute power but to eliminate the major obstacle (the current conservative white majority), to the assumption of totalitarian power by the left.

    In order to do so, the US military must be ‘fundamentally transformed’ into an entity that, when the time comes, will not interfere with the left’s abrogation of the US Constitution and the assumption of totalitarian power by the left.

    Everything Obama is doing has been and is toward these domestic and foreign policy goals; a manufactured crisis of either a US Sovereign Bankruptcy resulting in fiscal collapse or a nuclear terrorist attack upon major US cities. The result of Iran gaining the bomb will be a nuclear arms race in the M.E. That shall consequentially result in Islamic jihadist terrorist groups getting their hands on nukes. They will use them, most probably placed on commercial container ships bound for US ports.

    Either eventuality will result in physical and economic chaos with a resultant demand for nationwide martial law. There is precedent for the suspension of provisions of the US Constitution during periods of ‘national emergency’ when martial law has been declared.

    The key constitutional provisions suspended will undoubtedly include the right of Habeas Corpus, the 2nd amendment’s right to bear arms and the 22nd amendment’s limitation on Presidential limits. It matters not whether Obama actually wants to be a dictator, President in name only because the left wants permanent power with dissent outlawed.

    The unprecedented arming of the DHS and a myriad of other Federal departments must have a purpose and that purpose can only reasonably be preparation for the repression of future civil unrest. In order for that repression to be sustainable, the US military must be amenable to supporting violations of the Constitution. That is what the fundamental transformation of the US military is about. It’s all preparation…

    • Amen, brother.

  3. If you like your metrosexual/pc military, you can keep it. Period.

    Barry said that. So you can take it to the bank.

    Pardon my heresy, but I suspect that the new metrosexual/pc military may not do all that well on the battlefield.

    But not to worry: we’ll just call in the Amazons. And all will be well.

    • I wouldn’t get too complacent.

      In all of history, no totalitarian movement has ever had much difficulty finding enough ‘brownshirts’ to impose its will. There are always enough sadistic goons and homicidally inclined, who invariably are placed in various positions of power.

      Under martial law, anyone resisting ‘lawful orders’ will be considered a criminal, and anyone armed will be considered dangerous. Between local law enforcement, the DHS and other federal agencies, the National Guard and, with the suspension of Posse Comitatus the US military, the left will have all they need to enforce ‘compliance’.

      The US Army already has manuals detailing the operation of domestic political prisoner re-education camps;

      Internment and Resettlement Operations

      Field Manual
      No. 3-39.40
      Headquarters
      Department of the Army
      Washington, D.C., 12 February 2010

      “SUPPORT TO CIVIL SUPPORT OPERATIONS
      2-39. Civil support is the DOD support to U.S. civil authorities for domestic emergencies, and for designated law enforcement and other activities. (JP 3-28) Civil support includes operations that address the consequences of natural or man-made disasters, accidents, terrorist attacks and incidents in the U.S. and its territories.
      2-40. The I/R tasks performed in support of civil support operations are similar to those during combat operations, but the techniques and procedures are modified based on the special OE associated with
      operating within U.S. territory

      The left is composed of ideological fanatics, who will justify any action judged necessary to achieve the ideological ends sought.

      If they can (and they do) justify and defend infanticide, there is nothing that they will not stoop to, once they have the power.

  4. Do the military services need “EO trainers”? Have they/we lost all sense of benign neglect? DEOMI began life as DRRI (Defense Race Relations Institute) and expanded its scope as the original scope became moot – proving again Reagan’s dictum that the closest thing on earth to eternal life is a government program.

  5. Is it really a left-right thing? Does this indicate that the military is being taken over by blacks or Hispanics or women or gimps? The emasculation of the American male has been going on for 50 years everywhere in US society, why should the military be any different?

  6. cm — It’s definitely a left-right thing. I served with people of all races and backgrounds in the military, and with both men and women, and virtually everyone I served with would abhor the divisive, destructive, personal-is-political nature of the Obama-era “equal opportunity” training manual.

    Black and Hispanic men are just as proud of (and humbled by!) the essentially male character of military service as white men are. So are Asian men of all ethnicities. The citizen-warrior ethos exists throughout American society. It’s not unique to white men.

    There were occasionally women in my experience with bizarre, kind of “anti-military” personalities, mostly in the 1980s. By anti-military I mean resentful, not team players, and really political in outlook. But there were really very few of them, and by the 1990s, it was quite unusual to run into them anymore. They weeded themselves out, after coming in in a little wave in the mid-late 1970s.

    Most military women I ever served with were determined to make the grade, be team players, win respect. If they stayed past their first enlistment (or past their first officer commitment), it was because they bought into the mission and the life, and were proud of what they got to do. They didn’t see men as a privileged enemy class, but as shipmates (what we call it in the Navy and Marine Corps; the same concept of brothers or sisters in arms applies across the services).

    The idea of military service as honorable, a citizen’s high calling and sacrifice in which everyone had an equal share of responsibility and respect, was a preexisting attitude shared by most in the military. It’s not like women or Hispanics or whoever came into the military counting the days until they could file a lawsuit against someone, just because they were women or Hispanics. The vast majority of servicemembers had the attitude and ethos that the race-mongers would associate with the “White Male Club.” It’s the race-mongers who’ve had it wrong, painting a false description of a supposed reality.

    That said, I began to see a lot more general ignorance in the incoming sailors and soldiers in my last 5-6 years in the service. Most kids didn’t come in spouting heated political theory, but they did come in kind of intellectually passive, and noticeably lacking in cultural and historical knowledge. We’re talking kids out of high school here, in the range of 18 to 21 years old. The product of the public schools was really starting to show a change.

    This was also when I began seeing a few young women officers who’d enter the service vaguely alarmed about what it was going to be like to work for senior male officers. It was like they’d never known any adult males before, and imagined them as fang-toothed bogeymen. I’d have to tell these young gals that it was going to be OK: they could expect fair treatment, they should give the guys a chance, etc. I never personally encountered a situation in which this prior prejudice or preemptive alarm turned into a workplace problem or complaint. But I can see how it might. It was as if the young women’s minds had been poisoned unreasonably against a whole segment of the population: men whom I knew to be good fellows, who might have their quirks but who were highly honorable, in the main, worthy of respect, and always doing the best they knew how.

    I’d say the ignorant and preemptively poisoned young folks were still a minority, as they started filtering into the service. But they were noticeable. As an aside, the ones who had done a lot with either sports or music were a lot better adjusted in terms of things like teamwork, discipline, hard work, and not being afraid of the ideas of leadership, obedience, and development from the latter to the former. Kids who’d never been involved in endeavors that required coaching, exertion, or “outcome-oriented” performance had a more difficult time adjusting.

    The bottom line is that it took the intervention of leftist political programs to turn “minorities” in the military into a divisive political cause. EO programs always kind of struggled to hit the right note, but during my years in the service, the point was to unify us, not to spend our days and nights writing down and obsessing over things that MIGHT divide us, IF we let them. No one wanted to be the EO advocate just because he was black, or had a Hispanic name, or because she was female. The personal was NOT political; in fact, everyone would have laughed, for the same reason, at the old joke that if the military wanted you to have a personal life, it would have issued you one.

  7. Can anyone learn about all this and think that we don’t have an ill society?

  8. There are plenty of societal issues that don’t originate in any particular place on the left-right spectrum but then are advanced or opposed by segments of it, with appropriate modifications. Usually the attitude of the left or right toward an issue can be predicted very early in its development. Nevertheless, both left and right are pro state, the conflict is what group of officials gets to send emails to the bureaucrats that actually determine events. This is not always the case, however. Ethanol in motor fuel, for instance. The concept may well have originated in the environmental movement, which seems to have at least a leftist slant, but it’s now exploited and defended by large business interests that the left supposedly abhors. The conundrum of abortion doesn’t appear to fit neatly into any left-right division but the pro and anti groups are divided along obvious political lines.

    Most Americans, and people in general, are in favor of equal opportunity, there is no political group that openly, or even surreptitiously opposes it. The question then becomes if it is currently a problem and if so, how to address it. The left has a history of never acknowledging success in its pet causes, minority rights and poverty leading the list. They have people that are financially dependent on carrying on the struggle. The right, in the same vein, is willing to fight the “war on drugs” forever, regardless of the negatives this has created for society at large, as long as the law enforcement/prison industry juggernaut keeps rolling along.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: