info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Diversity and inclusion won’t fix an army unprepared for war
12 views
Skip to first unread message
Julian
Feb 13, 2024, 5:15:50 PMFeb 13
to
This week, a deeply uncomfortable truth has come to light, which many of
us have known about for a while – that the Civil Service has become
replete with senior mandarins intent on pushing fringe ideologies within
their departments.
The latest examples of this worrying trend are happening within our
military. Thanks to recent reporting from The Daily Telegraph and
whistleblowers from within the Ministry of Defence, we now know that
several million pounds a year is being spent on senior ‘diversity and
inclusion officers’ within all three branches of the Armed Forces, with
an aim to have one of these officers for every 100 military personnel.
Those of us who have served in the Armed Forces know that this is beyond
lunacy – for two reasons.
The first is that the public couldn’t care less about the military’s
diversity – at least when defined according to the absurd doctrines of
critical race theory. In general, the public care rather more about the
cost of living, food inflation, poor roads and insufficient housing than
whether the British Army has enough diversity officers and is meeting
its diversity, equity and inclusion quotas.
But what makes these policies even more absurd is how unnecessary they
are. The junior ranks of the British Army are made up from almost 20%
non-white backgrounds, compared with 17% for the British population as a
whole.
Speaking as a former infantry junior commander, and a currently serving
reservist, I can confirm that the military is the best equaliser one can
ever hope to find. You are placed within a system where physical and
moral courage are placed above all other values. Regardless of
background, the cream will rise to the top. Privileging gender and
ethnicity above genuine merit would cause destruction in our ranks.
The public, of course, completely get this. When it comes to the Armed
Forces, what they really care about is whether military personnel are
physically up to the job, and whether they have the resources to meet
the demands placed upon by them by the government of the day, in their
name.
And it is here – not on diversity, equality and inclusion – that our
military is really failing the test, despite repeated warnings from the
Defence Select Committee, defence experts and retired senior officers.
The most startling figure is that, in our ever-shrinking Army, around
one third of the 75,000 soldiers are non-deployable. That means they’re
permanently downgraded; undergoing rehabilitation, suffering from mental
health issues, entering their final months of service when they cannot
deploy.
The Army is also haemorrhaging talent. For every five new soldiers
joining, eight are leaving. This is thanks partly to chronic
mismanagement by recruiting firm Capita, and the lack of systems put in
place to incentivise soldiers to extend their service. And it will get
worse. The Government is still committed to reducing the size of the
army to 73,000. To put that number into perspective, in 2012 the Army
was 102,000 strong, and were fielding two brigades in Afghanistan,
having fielded almost a division’s worth during the height of the war in
Iraq a few years earlier.
With the paltry number left including the thousands unable to deploy,
the Army can no longer field a war-fighting armoured division to Europe
– historically the cornerstone of British conventional deterrence. There
are now serious concerns as to whether the Army could even sustain a
solitary brigade in theatre these days, and I for one would welcome
Labour’s ‘NATO test’ for all major defense projects to make sure they
meet the obligations of the alliance, should they form a government this
year. Because I know the findings would shock the British people – if
not the civil servants running the department behind closed doors.
On diversity, equality and inclusion, the crackpot schemes being peddled
by the Civil Service appear to be coming under scrutiny by both the
Defence Secretary Grant Shapps, and Security Minister Tom Tugendhat, a
former soldier. Indeed, both are reported to be furious with the most
recent revelations. They are quite right, particularly at a time when we
are bracing for further global turmoil as war continues to ravage
Europe, the Middle East, and potential instability looms on both the
Korean peninsula and in the South China Sea.
The time has come to stop dithering around with defence. The millions of
pounds each year that go to funding career-ladder diversity and
inclusion policies need to be reappropriated to make our Armed Forces
more lethal. That is, of course, the essence of what we do. In such
fiscally restraining and geopolitically uncertain times as these,
anything else is simply irrelevant. At best, these policies are largely
pointless. At their worst, they are detrimental to our nation’s defences.
us have known about for a while – that the Civil Service has become
replete with senior mandarins intent on pushing fringe ideologies within
their departments.
The latest examples of this worrying trend are happening within our
military. Thanks to recent reporting from The Daily Telegraph and
whistleblowers from within the Ministry of Defence, we now know that
several million pounds a year is being spent on senior ‘diversity and
inclusion officers’ within all three branches of the Armed Forces, with
an aim to have one of these officers for every 100 military personnel.
Those of us who have served in the Armed Forces know that this is beyond
lunacy – for two reasons.
The first is that the public couldn’t care less about the military’s
diversity – at least when defined according to the absurd doctrines of
critical race theory. In general, the public care rather more about the
cost of living, food inflation, poor roads and insufficient housing than
whether the British Army has enough diversity officers and is meeting
its diversity, equity and inclusion quotas.
But what makes these policies even more absurd is how unnecessary they
are. The junior ranks of the British Army are made up from almost 20%
non-white backgrounds, compared with 17% for the British population as a
whole.
Speaking as a former infantry junior commander, and a currently serving
reservist, I can confirm that the military is the best equaliser one can
ever hope to find. You are placed within a system where physical and
moral courage are placed above all other values. Regardless of
background, the cream will rise to the top. Privileging gender and
ethnicity above genuine merit would cause destruction in our ranks.
The public, of course, completely get this. When it comes to the Armed
Forces, what they really care about is whether military personnel are
physically up to the job, and whether they have the resources to meet
the demands placed upon by them by the government of the day, in their
name.
And it is here – not on diversity, equality and inclusion – that our
military is really failing the test, despite repeated warnings from the
Defence Select Committee, defence experts and retired senior officers.
The most startling figure is that, in our ever-shrinking Army, around
one third of the 75,000 soldiers are non-deployable. That means they’re
permanently downgraded; undergoing rehabilitation, suffering from mental
health issues, entering their final months of service when they cannot
deploy.
The Army is also haemorrhaging talent. For every five new soldiers
joining, eight are leaving. This is thanks partly to chronic
mismanagement by recruiting firm Capita, and the lack of systems put in
place to incentivise soldiers to extend their service. And it will get
worse. The Government is still committed to reducing the size of the
army to 73,000. To put that number into perspective, in 2012 the Army
was 102,000 strong, and were fielding two brigades in Afghanistan,
having fielded almost a division’s worth during the height of the war in
Iraq a few years earlier.
With the paltry number left including the thousands unable to deploy,
the Army can no longer field a war-fighting armoured division to Europe
– historically the cornerstone of British conventional deterrence. There
are now serious concerns as to whether the Army could even sustain a
solitary brigade in theatre these days, and I for one would welcome
Labour’s ‘NATO test’ for all major defense projects to make sure they
meet the obligations of the alliance, should they form a government this
year. Because I know the findings would shock the British people – if
not the civil servants running the department behind closed doors.
On diversity, equality and inclusion, the crackpot schemes being peddled
by the Civil Service appear to be coming under scrutiny by both the
Defence Secretary Grant Shapps, and Security Minister Tom Tugendhat, a
former soldier. Indeed, both are reported to be furious with the most
recent revelations. They are quite right, particularly at a time when we
are bracing for further global turmoil as war continues to ravage
Europe, the Middle East, and potential instability looms on both the
Korean peninsula and in the South China Sea.
The time has come to stop dithering around with defence. The millions of
pounds each year that go to funding career-ladder diversity and
inclusion policies need to be reappropriated to make our Armed Forces
more lethal. That is, of course, the essence of what we do. In such
fiscally restraining and geopolitically uncertain times as these,
anything else is simply irrelevant. At best, these policies are largely
pointless. At their worst, they are detrimental to our nation’s defences.
Wilson
Feb 14, 2024, 9:56:37 AMFeb 14
to
understand reality or survival in a world where nature will absolutely
kill you if you give it a chance. Our civilization is supported by men
and women who do difficult and dangerous things and without them it
would quickly end. Anyone who understands the nature of our position
would never place DEI above competence.
Noah Sombrero
Feb 14, 2024, 10:49:42 AMFeb 14
to
superiority of our tribe is unsupported. Nature doesn't care where
good ideas come from. The reason diverse groups are more inventive is
that they are less likely to devolve into goodoleboybunches with
mutually congratulative thought that couldn't come up with a new idea
ever. Regardless of supposed qualifications that suggest otherwise.
--
Noah Sombrero
Wilson
Feb 14, 2024, 11:17:46 AMFeb 14
to
sort of diversity of consciousness you're talking about.
Noah Sombrero
Feb 14, 2024, 11:40:59 AMFeb 14
to
--
Noah Sombrero
Wilson
Feb 15, 2024, 9:19:50 AMFeb 15
to
Noah Sombrero
Feb 15, 2024, 9:50:56 AMFeb 15
to
social proclivities", and lets not have any others.
--
Noah Sombrero
Wilson
Feb 15, 2024, 10:18:57 AMFeb 15
to
You are absolutely correct when you say that nature doesn't care where
good ideas come from.
What is actually being promoted by DEI are the genetic traits and social
proclivities of certain protected classes.
That's not the same thing as a diversity of consciousness which might
bring real innovation and the advancement of civilization.
If you have a genetically diverse group of people who all think that
certain social structures are the only way to be, they're not actually
diverse in their thinking and do not come up with more inventive ways to
deal with challenges. That's what we find today in the overwhelming
consensus within academia and that is reflected in most people in the
managerial class who've graduated from it.
Because of that, what's happening in the real world today is that actual
diversity of opinion is being stifled.
Noah Sombrero
Feb 15, 2024, 10:41:30 AMFeb 15
to
behavior. DEI being an attempt to at least start to move away from
that.
>If you have a genetically diverse group of people who all think that
>certain social structures are the only way to be,
away from such patterns more often than the other kind.
>they're not actually
>diverse in their thinking and do not come up with more inventive ways to
>deal with challenges. That's what we find today in the overwhelming
>consensus within academia and that is reflected in most people in the
>managerial class who've graduated from it.
is fostered, rather than a place where people learn employment skills.
I think. That does not mean that university is the only place where
DEI might be encouraged.
>Because of that, what's happening in the real world today is that actual
>diversity of opinion is being stifled.
>
tribe patterns. Or abandonment of DEI efforts without replacing them
with anything better.
--
Noah Sombrero
Noah Sombrero
Feb 15, 2024, 10:49:17 AMFeb 15
to
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 10:41:09 -0500, Noah Sombrero <fed...@fea.st>
Forgotten old time frontier wilderness: if you are lost on horseback,
the best thing is to drop the reigns and let the horse go where it
wants. The horse knows the way home even if you don't.
--
Noah Sombrero
the best thing is to drop the reigns and let the horse go where it
wants. The horse knows the way home even if you don't.
--
Noah Sombrero
Noah Sombrero
Feb 15, 2024, 10:51:20 AMFeb 15
to
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 10:48:57 -0500, Noah Sombrero <fed...@fea.st>
Heh, the disadvantage of usenet. If you reply to the wrong thread, it
is too late. You can't move your message or edit it.
--
Noah Sombrero
is too late. You can't move your message or edit it.
--
Noah Sombrero
Tara
Feb 15, 2024, 11:42:48 AMFeb 15
to
Wilson
Feb 16, 2024, 8:04:39 AMFeb 16
to
But hey, you better go ahead and sort the world by skin color and sexual
preference just to be sure eh? Just as long as they're all collectivists!
Noah Sombrero
Feb 16, 2024, 1:48:41 PMFeb 16
to
>But hey, you better go ahead and sort the world by skin color and sexual
>preference just to be sure eh? Just as long as they're all collectivists!
--
Noah Sombrero
Noah Sombrero
Feb 16, 2024, 2:06:29 PMFeb 16
to
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 13:48:39 -0500, Noah Sombrero <fed...@fea.st>
wrote:
Oh cripe, predilections.
--
Noah Sombrero
wrote:
--
Noah Sombrero
Noah Sombrero
Feb 17, 2024, 10:19:41 AMFeb 17
to
"European leaders from Emmanuel Macron to Giorgia Meloni are worried
about falling birth rates, and demographers and economists say they
should get used to it. There are lots of people who would be happy to
bolster the workforce. They’re just not from the right ethnic group"
This is the universal everywhere, not only in the us, pattern that DEI
attempts to do something about, and which effort you so predictably
try to thwart.
--
Noah Sombrero
0 new messages