• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Documents Reveal US Army Indoctrinated Soldiers on Dangers of ‘White Privilege’

Beaudreaux

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
WTF??? Just read it: The article is here.

MARCH 09, 2016

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it obtained documents from the United States Department of the Army revealing that in April 2015, 400 soldiers in the 67th Signal Battalion at Fort Gordon, Georgia, were subjected to a “white privilege” briefing, including a PowerPoint presentation instructing the attendees: “Our society attaches privilege to being white and male and heterosexual …”

The slideshow also informed the soldiers: “Race privilege gives whites little reason to pay a lot of attention to African Americans.” It alleged that there are unspecified “powerful forces everywhere” keeping different kinds of people from being valued, accepted, and appreciated, but “we act as if it doesn’t exist.” This alleged privilege creates a “yawning divide” in income, wealth, and dignity. The material described a mythical African woman who isn’t aware that she’s black until she comes to America, encounters “white racism” and discovers the U.S. is “organized according to race.”

[...]
Click to expand...

The FOIA documents are a PDF at this link.
 
If this is true it is appalling... I will read more about this if I can.



Page 15 pissed me off... well, the whole thing does but that one is utter BS.
 
Bodhisattva said:
If this is true it is appalling... I will read more about this if I can.



Page 15 pissed me off... well, the whole thing does but that one is utter BS.
Click to expand...

Is that the slide with the description of "white, male, heterosexual" privilege?
 
Beaudreaux said:
Is that the slide with the description of "white, male, heterosexual" privilege?
Click to expand...

It was about privilege in general. About how privilege for one automatically meant hardship for others...
 
Beaudreaux said:
The whole thing is full of outrageous assumptions and unfounded psychoBS.
Click to expand...

100% and I hope that it is not actually being taught to the military...
 
To be honest, who cares?

So a battalion had to take some kind of class, so what? We get stupid classes all the time, and most are forgotten by the end of the day. I remember having to take a "Personal Finance" course adfter I joined the Army, aimed at things like being careful with credit and how to balance a checkbook and make a budget. Of course, it was mandatory because everybody "E-4 and below" had to take it. And yea, it was aimed at those from 18-24.

But being 43, I found it rather stupid and silly but I took it anyways. Thankfully the next year they added "under 30" to the requirements.

I find the hysteria about this almost a year later to be rather funny, to be honest. Last onth I had to take a "Black History Month" class with the rest of my unit. Every month there is some similar kind of class, from Women's History and Hispanic History to almost everything else you can think of. And by and large, nobody takes them seriously and gives a damn.
 
Oozlefinch said:
To be honest, who cares?

So a battalion had to take some kind of class, so what? We get stupid classes all the time, and most are forgotten by the end of the day. I remember having to take a "Personal Finance" course adfter I joined the Army, aimed at things like being careful with credit and how to balance a checkbook and make a budget. Of course, it was mandatory because everybody "E-4 and below" had to take it. And yea, it was aimed at those from 18-24.

But being 43, I found it rather stupid and silly but I took it anyways. Thankfully the next year they added "under 30" to the requirements.

I find the hysteria about this almost a year later to be rather funny, to be honest. Last onth I had to take a "Black History Month" class with the rest of my unit. Every month there is some similar kind of class, from Women's History and Hispanic History to almost everything else you can think of. And by and large, nobody takes them seriously and gives a damn.
Click to expand...

Who cares? Not you, obviously, which is fine. I don't care as much as Judicial Watch would probably like me to, but I do care. Training new recruits how to not get sideways with the UCMJ or losing their security clearance for financial trouble makes sense. Having classes about Black History is also a good thing, as is Hispanic History, and so on - the military should understand what they may be asked to fight for. I was required to take numerous courses through the years, many of which were non-military in nature but helped make me a more well rounded mission oriented member of the armed services. However, the subject matter of the course in the OP has no military bearing whatsoever. I don't want to imply a reason for why the DoD would have such a course that made such statements as this one. I'll leave that to others to do in this thread.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Who cares? Not you, obviously, which is fine. I don't care as much as Judicial Watch would probably like me to, but I do care. Training new recruits how to not get sideways with the UCMJ or losing their security clearance for financial trouble makes sense. Having classes about Black History is also a good thing, as is Hispanic History, and so on - the military should understand what they may be asked to fight for. I was required to take numerous courses through the years, many of which were non-military in nature but helped make me a more well rounded mission oriented member of the armed services. However, the subject matter of the course in the OP has no military bearing whatsoever. I don't want to imply a reason for why the DoD would have such a course that made such statements as this one. I'll leave that to others to do in this thread.
Click to expand...

What good and relevance does black history have to military service?
 
Henrin said:
What good and relevance does black history have to military service?
Click to expand...

Very good question.

The history of the nation includes Black History, especially the military history of the nation. Understanding how each group of people have contributed to the country as a whole helps us to understand how and why we are like we are as a nation. Why our laws are like they are. Why and how our Constitution was amended to reflect our true national values as described in the Preamble to the U.S. Declaration of Independence in 1776 and why we as a nation even have a military: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

You see, a lot of kids today do not get the education they need in public school to understand why they may be asked to make to ultimate sacrifice for their country as a member of the US Military. Course like the one you asked about help to give them that understanding that they may not have been taught prior to joining the military.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Very good question.

The history of the nation includes Black History, especially the military history of the nation. Understanding how each group of people have contributed to the country as a whole helps us to understand how and why we are like we are as a nation.
Click to expand...

So when is "Ginger History Month"? "Short People History Month"? "Mormon History Month"? "People who drive Mustang History Month"?

Personally, I just don't understand all of this seperation to give a certain segment their "own month". I am one of those that sees us all as one, with no need to seperate out any one segment over another. After all, is the very idea to become inclusive, not exclusive?
 
The Army propaganda machine is superior.
 
Thoreau72 said:
The Army propaganda machine is superior.
Click to expand...

Not the one I was in....

Boring, hokey, and stilted, I can only guess some private sector consulting group got a nice payday with such contracts. ;)

Indoctrinating??? Guess the rabid right Judicial Watch is far easier to influence... soft heads I guess. The 400 troops were most likely bored to to a fine stupor.

But have to wonder why just one wienie Bn out of the million or so troops??? Has anyone but JW reported this, it would seem it would be news to many other news outlets... :peace
 
Bodhisattva said:
100% and I hope that it is not actually being taught to the military...
Click to expand...

The administration's continued use of the military in promoting their BS PC based social agenda rather than a military force, continues.

I can see all the soldier's eyes rolling. I can see their leaders doing the same as they fulfill their requirement in delivering this heaping pile os BS.
 
Oozlefinch said:
So when is "Ginger History Month"? "Short People History Month"? "Mormon History Month"? "People who drive Mustang History Month"?

Personally, I just don't understand all of this seperation to give a certain segment their "own month". I am one of those that sees us all as one, with no need to seperate out any one segment over another. After all, is the very idea to become inclusive, not exclusive?
Click to expand...

I don't disagree.
 
Oozlefinch said:
To be honest, who cares?

So a battalion had to take some kind of class, so what? We get stupid classes all the time, and most are forgotten by the end of the day. I remember having to take a "Personal Finance" course adfter I joined the Army, aimed at things like being careful with credit and how to balance a checkbook and make a budget. Of course, it was mandatory because everybody "E-4 and below" had to take it. And yea, it was aimed at those from 18-24.

But being 43, I found it rather stupid and silly but I took it anyways. Thankfully the next year they added "under 30" to the requirements.

I find the hysteria about this almost a year later to be rather funny, to be honest. Last onth I had to take a "Black History Month" class with the rest of my unit. Every month there is some similar kind of class, from Women's History and Hispanic History to almost everything else you can think of. And by and large, nobody takes them seriously and gives a damn.
Click to expand...

You're right, there tons of annual social classes, but that doesn't make this right especially since it was all subjective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom