Ultimately, the “post-modernization” of the U.S. armed forces affects not only aesthetics but who lives and who dies.
by Richard Spencer
One doesn’t become a general without being, at least in part, a “political general,” and being a “political general” means being ready to recite the religious dogmas of the ruling class. Gen. George Casey had it down pat. Immediately after last year’s jihad-motivated Ft. Hood shooting, he announced that having a homogeneous, Euro-American military would be worse than mass murder. Said Casey:
Our diversity, not only in our Army, but in our country, is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.
(I suspect that Gen. Stanley McChrystal couldn’t take the PC demands anymore and decided to go out swinging.)
There remains a mystical bond between conservative Americans and the U.S. Armed Forces, as the Tea Partiers see them as the last bastions of honor and manhood. This certainly represents a healthy instinct on their part. But it’s hard for me not to see the military institutions as infected by PC just as thoroughly as the Department of Education — if not more so. The dirigiste natural of the military has, in fact, put it on the vanguard of social engineering: the armed forces were desegregated by executive order four years before Brown vs. Board of Education, and 14 before the Civil Rights Act.