Pentagon training manual attacks white men
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Pentagon training manual attacks white men
In 2013, I received a controversial 600-plus page manual used by the military to train its equal-opportunity officers. It teaches that "healthy, white, heterosexual, Christian" men hold an unfair advantage over other races, and warns in great detail about a so-called "White Male Club."
"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," reads a statement in the manual created by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI).
The manual also instructs troops to "support the leadership of people of color. Do this consistently, but not uncritically," the manual states.
The "Equal Opportunity Advisor Student Guide" is the textbook used during a three month DEOMI course taught at Patrick Air Force Base in Florida. Individuals who attend the training lead equal-opportunity briefings on military installations around the nation.
The 637-page manual covers a wide range of issues from racism and religious diversity to cultural awareness, extremism and white privilege.
I obtained a copy of the manual from an equal-opportunity officer who was disturbed by the course content and furious over the DEOMI's reliance on the Southern Poverty Law Center for information on "extremist" groups.
"I'm participating in teaching things that are not true," the instructor told me. He asked not to be identified because he feared reprisals.
"I should not be in a position to do that," he said. "It violates constitutional principles, but it also violates my conscience. And I'm not going to do it – not going to do it."
DEOMI instructors were also responsible for briefings at bases around the country that falsely labeled evangelical Christians, Catholics and a number of high-profile Christian ministries as domestic hate groups.
I contacted the Pentagon as well as the DEOMI multiple times for comment on this story, but so far they have not responded to my requests.
DEOMI opened in 1971 in response to the civil rights movement. It's responsible for Equal Opportunity/Equal Employment Opportunity education and training for military active duty and reservists, according to its website.
The subject of white privilege emerged in a 20-page section titled, "Power and Privilege."
"Whites are the empowered group," the manual declares. "White males represent the haves as compared to the have-nots."
The military document advises personnel to "notice code words for race." They are also instructed to "understand and learn from the history of whiteness and racism."
"Assume racism is everywhere, everyday," read a statement in a section titled, 'How to be a strong 'white ally.'"
"One of the privileges of being white is not having to see or deal with racism all the time," the manual states. "We have to learn to see the effect that racism has."
On page 181 of the manual, the military points out that status and wealth are typically passed from generation to generation and "represent classic examples of the unearned advantages of social privilege."
"As such, the unfair economic advantages and disadvantages created long ago by institutions for whites, males, Christians, etc. still affect socioeconomic privilege today," the manual states.
The guide also points out that whites are over-represented and blacks are under-represented in positive news stories, that middle class blacks live in poorer neighborhoods than middle class whites and that even though there are more white criminals than any other race, the news coverage of black criminals is about equal to the news coverage of white criminals.
The military manual goes into great detail about a so-called "White Male Club."
"In spite of slave insurrections, civil war, the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments, the women's suffrage movement leading to the 19th amendment, the civil rights movement, urban rebellions and the contemporary feminist movement, the club persists," the document states.
DEOMI states that "full access to the resources of the club still escape the vision of equitable distribution."
The military also implies that white Americans may be in denial about racism.
In a section titled, "Rationalizations for Retaining Privilege and Avoiding Responsibilities," the military lays out excuses white people use.
"Today some white people may use the tactic of denial when they say, 'It's a level playing field; this is a land of equal opportunity,'" the manual reads. "Some white people may be counterattacking today by saying political correctness rules the universities or they want special status."
DEOMI points out that 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."
They said some of the ways whites may claim to be victims include saying things like, "I have it just as bad as anyone else," "They're taking away our jobs," or "White people are under attack."
The military concludes the section by urging students to "understand and learn from the history of whiteness and racism" and "support the leadership of people of color."
I truly wish the Pentagon and the DEOMI would return my telephone calls. I'd like to know how teaching soldiers, airmen and sailors about white privilege and fomenting racial division helps them protect our nation from the enemy.
The post Pentagon training manual attacks white men appeared first on WND.
Tags
Who is online
471 visitors
The military has since WWII been trying to drag the rest of our..... call it what it is...... racist country...... into being what the US Constitution says we are suppose to be. Is it perfect? Not by a long shot. But something about being in the same uniform, and having to rely upon one another for survival and accomplishing the mission tends to put all the racial, religious, sex and sexual orientations lies in the back seat at least some of the time. I'd say that's an improvement over what we see in the rest of our society which never has to face it's bigotry and racism.
I always accepted people of color in leadership roles. It's the right and moral thing to do.
Color, sex..... it doesn't matter. You accept them because they have the job, our you're no good.
And....it's all about good order and discipline
In my 20 years in the military, I never saw or heard of this manual. I was trained, starting as a junior Petty Officer/NCO to accept and follow senior personnel based on their rank and leadership abilities, not their skin color, and I never deviated from that. Based on what I am seeing and reading lately, I am immensely thankful I retired in the early 90's.
I never did, either, but apparently this manual is for EEO training officers, so of course I wouldn't have seen or heard of it.
And...I believe this is an opinion piece by a piece of trash named Todd Starnes. He's on at 11 AM here in Little Rock (they dumped Rush for him). He tells mountainous lies and half truths. I would take all of this with a very large grain of salt
I put his radio show on streaming once or twice just to get a feel for what Fox Nation thinks. It is ridiculous. One whining complaint about liberals after another for two or three hours without a moments let up. .
I had this one Captain who I could not stand. It was not because he was black. It was because he was a total asshole who could not lead a starving man to a sandwich.
I've had OICs like that. But they were all white
Also, anyone who argues that there is no such thing as a black racist never met this guy.
I did too.
Likewise...
We should trade stories (you, Paula, and me) on the officers that drove us to drink over a drink
I would enjoy that. They were legion. Funny part was I always outlasted them..
Do you get the Navy magazine Proceedings?
Supposedly there is an article this month addressing this issue along with a picture of Esper and the top 200 or so officers from the Pentagon on page 28 ( ? or 14? )
All
White
Men ...
You saw that too eh? Yes.... I subscribe to Proceedings. And no, not a person of color in all of the top officers in the Pentagon.
It all starts with those that become "ring knockers" at Annapolis.... and dwindles from there in the Navy as people try to advance in their careers. The Army may have a slightly better enrollment with people of color at West Point.
It tells you something about how incredible Grace Hopper had to be or Colin Powell is to advance to the levels they did and when they did it.
This article was written by a guy named Todd Starnes. Starnes used to write for the Fox News website and he had a weekends ( I believe) show on Fox News cable channel. Then he became too offensive for even Fox to stomach and they dropped him. Now he works for the right wing conspiracy site World Net Daily.
The point being that the material in the Pentagon training manual doesnt appear to have brainwashed him or hampered his ability to whine over how bad racial sensitivity training is (to him). In fact in the 7 years he has had this manual in his possession he has only become more of a jerk, so I guess the techniques in the book have little effect.
The reason that these programs exist is because they address a need, the need to openly acknowledge that there is such a thing as white privilege. In our society, historically, what whites think say and do have been perceived consciously and unconsciously as the norm. Ask yourself a question ,in general, has what Native Americans think say and do been presented as the norm in American culture? Has what hispanics and latinos think , say, and do been presented as the norm in American culture? The same for Asians and blacks, and middle easterners. Racism will end when all these groups are considered to be just as good as the average white person, and although there has been a good amount of progress we are far from being there and this era has the added challenge of being a time when some whites have the so called fear of a black planet which refers to people of color becoming the majority, particularly here in the US.
This training manual and course harms no one. It harms no one to learn they have white privilege. It doesnt bother me one bit probably because I dont dwell on the idea because I am not a racist. I don't fear losing "power" as a white man because I dont want any power as a white man.
I dont complain about white privilege articles or training manuals because there is nothing to complain about. Todd Starnes is clueless.
So what?
The article should be an opinion seed from Fox news from 2013.
Maybe. It was in Townhall yesterday, which will do.
Todd Starnes is a fool and an asshole. His opinions are worth the paper I wipe my butt with
No. Not identical. No author listed but we can assume it was Todd...
When he first got the manual I think he wrote about it Fox or somewhere
he wrote about it again in the last couple days because of current events
100% agree. I would not trust Starnes to walk my dog!
Although it has gotten little mention thus far, in Woodward's book and audio there is a passage where he asks Trump if he thinks there is systemic racism in America. It will probably surprise most people to learn that Trump answers "yes" he does think there is systemic racism in America, although he goes on to add that he thinks it is less than in other countries.
Currently, over 40% of the U.S. Military are minorities.
That fits US demographics almost exactly as minorities make up about 40% of our population today.
As long as the majority of Americans aren't able imagine America ever having a minority as President, i.e. can't imagine themselves or others voting for a woman, black, Latino, lgtbq, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish etc. candidate, then we still have white male Christian privilege in America.
The ones whining about diversity and wanting safe spaces for their white Christian's only ideology are the true weak cowardly snowflakes. The ones complaining about others being proactive in combating such prejudice are almost always the ones who simply can't wrap their tiny minds and small world view around equality and feel that if others are given a hand up to enjoy the same rights as they've enjoyed since our founding that somehow that means their rights have been eroded. Their white grievance is total bullshit of course, but that doesn't stop self-centered bigots from stomping around and whining like little babies as they do frequently on FOX and other right wing media.
They don't really have to imagine it. The majority of Americans (well, American voters, at any rate) actually chose a minority to be president. Twice.
Granted, there are still plenty of people who have a problem with it, but I don't think we can say it's a majority anymore.
The point, which you apparently missed, is that if you, in your heart of hearts, can't imagine America voting for a gay Latina or or any non-Christian American, then we still have white male Christian privilege in America. Just because after 240 years we finally elected one light skinned black male Christian, that does not mean the status quo of preference toward white male Christians has ended.
I believe the majority have a mix of phobias, some are hyper-homophobic, some hyper-Islamophobic, some hyper-xenophobic while others may just be mildly xenophobic and misogynistic but not be homophobic at all. This mix of prejudices tends to weed out candidates that are even perceived as being anything other than white male Christian wonder bread as it had for 240 years before Obama put a slight dent in the status quo. We need to move away from these phobias if we want to be a more perfect union. And it doesn't mean we need to be white male Christian-phobic either, it just means putting aside our prejudices when electing secular legislators and those who we expect to defend the constitution which should have nothing to do with race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, faith or lack thereof, it should be based on who is most skilled to get the job done right and with integrity and loyalty to the rule of law and the US constitution.
I think that about half of white people harbor some level of racial prejudice. Since whites are 60% of the population or so , a third of the country is prejudiced white people. There are levels of this prejudice though and certainly all of it is not open racism.
I think all humans harbor some level of racial prejudice. It's how we act on that prejudice that makes the difference. If we acknowledge it and work to overcome it, then even though we may have hesitated for that half a second before getting in an UBER with a person of color or a female or a flamboyantly gay driver, if we get in and treat that person with respect and maybe even try to get to know them better as a human being and not a category, then you're working towards a more perfect union.
I believe there are about a quarter of Americans who have doubled down on their prejudice and act as if being prejudiced is something to be proud of. They flaunt their racism and act as if it's nothing to be ashamed of and that if you're not being tolerant of their intolerance then you're the bad guy. And I don't think all Trump supporters are openly racist, but virtually every openly racist person I've heard from supports Donald Trump and it's no mystery as to why.
Which is really more ironic, those who refuse to tolerate intolerance? Or the intolerant trying to use others lack of tolerance for their intolerance as a defense?
"All are welcome to the party".
"Really? Well we'd like to come, but if we come we can't allow those guys we hate to come".
"But everyone is welcome, even the people you hate. If you don't like that they're here then you don't have to attend".
"What? This is an outrage! You said 'ALL' are welcome to the party, why can't we come and bring our prejudice with us?"
"You're welcome, but you can't deny entrance to anyone else."
"But it is my religious RIGHT to refuse those people my religion finds icky! They should not be allowed to have more rights than us!"
"But they don't have 'more' rights, they have the same right to attend the party and be treated as any other attendee."
"Preposterous! My religious rights should Trump their right to attend and they definitely shouldn't be allowed to have any cake! By allowing them in then you're denying me of my right to be prejudiced!"
"Then you don't have to attend..."
"Ridiculous! Of course I must be here, my family has been attending these parties for centuries! They're the ones who should leave!"...
"There's the exit door, don't let it hit ya where the good lord split ya..."
"Reverse prejudice! Reverse prejudice! Reverse racism! They played the prejudiced card against us! They should not be in charge of who is allowed in, we should be in charge of that so we can be more discriminating… but we meant that in the good way! You know, not allowing in any of the things that scare white Christians like "thugs", "welfare queens", "invaders" and any other euphemisms and code words for minorities we can think of..."
"Good bye bad egg...".
You've got to be taught
To hate a nd fear
You've got to be taught
From year t o year
Its got to b e drummed in your dear little ear
You've got to b e carefully t aught
You've got to be taught
To be a fraid
Of people w ho's eyes are oddly made
And people who's skin is a different shade
You've got to b e carefully t aught
You've got to be taught
Before it's too late
Before you are six
Or seven
Or eight
To hate all the people
Your relatives hate
You've got to b e carefully taught
You've got to b e carefully taught
- Oscar Hammerstein Ii / Richard Rodgers
No, I get that. I just don’t think that describes “the majority of Americans.”
I'd agree, and the kids coming up today have even less prejudices than us baby boomers. That has to be a good thing.
I don't know, it mostly seems fine to me. There's nothing wrong with helping people understand our history or be sensitive to the issues other people go through.
I guess if I were to take issue with some part of it, it would be stuff like this:
First of all, why assume that it's a tactic? Not everybody is thinking tactically. Most people are just trying to get through the day dealing with their own problems.
This seems to presume that any white person trying to see the bright side is actively trying to oppress minorities. I doubt that's the case. There's nothing wrong with being a person of hope and acknowledging that things are much better than they used to be.
or
Maybe some white person actually is having things as bad as anyone else. I have a pretty broad section of my family that has always been fairly poor. They live in little houses or apartments in the middle of nowhere. Their lack of money and education has impacts from one generation to the next just as they do for families of color. I'm pretty sure they don't feel too privileged.
And maybe somebody is losing their job. We shouldn't ignore that possibility just because the person is white, or assume they are racist because they're mad that they lost their job.
Exactly what DODI, DODM, MFR, Training Circular, Regulation is this supposed to be? Don't see it actually referenced anywhere. Could that be this whole thing being fiction?