Posted on Jun 7, 2021
The Problem with a ‘Woke’ Military | National Review
3.04K
24
4
4
4
0
Meritocracy works best. We pick the best long-rifle shooter to be a sniper, and we pick the best pilots to be F-22 pilots. There is no room for failure...our mission is too important to make skin tone a strategic priority. America deserves the best defense possible. We must continue to select based on competitive, objective merit.
The Problem with a ‘Woke’ Military | National Review
Posted from nationalreview.com
Policy
Training
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
5
5
0
I fully support the writers position. Devaluing meritocracy in favor of diversity will get people killed.
(5)
(0)
4
4
0
I can almost see the author ranting in his truck, wearing his hat, Oakleys and Grunt Style shirt. Screaming at his phone, making a YouTube video for his audience of 17 people, bemoaning a military that no longer centers around white Christian males...
(4)
(0)
1
1
0
I agree, if....
If we are using truly objective criteria. However, the overwhelming majority of NCOERs and OERs are subjective. Yes, things like "best long range shooter" or "most physically fit" can be objectively determined through things like rifle quals and PT scores (and even those have a certain level of questionable validity). But who is the "most professional?" Who is the "best driver" or the "best pilot?" What metrics are we using? How do we define "best accomplishment of the mission" amongst a group of 5 PLs who *all* accomplished the mission? How do we define the "most difficult" or "most complex" mission when discussing who took on the "tough" tasks?
Yes, we ABSOLUTELY must be a meritocracy. But we need to ensure that we are actually assessing merit. And, as much as we hate to admit it, personal biases DO affect how we see others and evaluate them. Yes, sometimes race is part of that bias. Not all of the time, and not with all leaders. I would even go so far as to say not MOST of the time and not with MOST leaders - at least in my experience. But it happens. And it isn't just race (and within race, it isn't just white people with biases). It is gender, sex, sexual orientation, age, - you name it. Even common interests like what music someone does or does not listen to, can all work to obscure objectivity and cause someone to value the contributions of another more or less than they should.
Meritocracy. As long as we are actually judging merit.
If we are using truly objective criteria. However, the overwhelming majority of NCOERs and OERs are subjective. Yes, things like "best long range shooter" or "most physically fit" can be objectively determined through things like rifle quals and PT scores (and even those have a certain level of questionable validity). But who is the "most professional?" Who is the "best driver" or the "best pilot?" What metrics are we using? How do we define "best accomplishment of the mission" amongst a group of 5 PLs who *all* accomplished the mission? How do we define the "most difficult" or "most complex" mission when discussing who took on the "tough" tasks?
Yes, we ABSOLUTELY must be a meritocracy. But we need to ensure that we are actually assessing merit. And, as much as we hate to admit it, personal biases DO affect how we see others and evaluate them. Yes, sometimes race is part of that bias. Not all of the time, and not with all leaders. I would even go so far as to say not MOST of the time and not with MOST leaders - at least in my experience. But it happens. And it isn't just race (and within race, it isn't just white people with biases). It is gender, sex, sexual orientation, age, - you name it. Even common interests like what music someone does or does not listen to, can all work to obscure objectivity and cause someone to value the contributions of another more or less than they should.
Meritocracy. As long as we are actually judging merit.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google