Sociologist: Military officers too white

[5.56NATO]

The director of sociology at West Point claims the Army officer corps needs to be racially “representative” of the American public, and diversity makes the officer corps more effective.

In a recent report in USA Today, Col. Irving Smith, an African-American infantry officer who has served in Afghanistan, said, “It certainly is a problem for several reasons.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/11/sociologi...PdhdirGmf87.99


Lol really.

[Dan Morris]

Guess progressive and pc will rule the world.
Dan

[l921428x]

I would like to know the break down ( in race ) of those that volunteer. anyone have those numbers?

[LAGC]

You should have seen my Sociology 101 professor I took over 15 years ago. HARD-CORE Marxist, made Trotsky look like a piker. Spent every single lecture bad-mouthing America, our history, and our foreign policy. I loved listening to some of the more conservative gals during break talking about how far out there he was.



Nah, in this case, it just sounds like the Pentagon needs a little Affirmative Action lest the white male generals start thinking about trying to stage a military coup against a non-white, non-male president or something.

Kind of like General Pinochet did to President Allende in Chile back in the early 70's...

[5.56NATO]

You mean like the cia did to Allede.





http://www.statisticbrain.com/demogr...-u-s-military/


"It’s a fundamental challenge in a democracy with an all-volunteer force: recruits may be drawn from all segments of society, but elite military units – and none is more elite these days than the SEALs, following their dispatch of Osama bin Laden last May – tend to draw from small pools of talent. For the SEALs, that includes athletic young men who are smart and good in the water. For whatever reason, that has led to an overwhelmingly white SEAL force."
http://nation.time.com/2012/02/24/na...hade-of-seals/

[LAGC]

You mean like the cia did to Allede.

Exactly. Just like they tried to do with Chavez in Venezuela more recently, although that one didn't quite work out so well...

[FunkyPertwee]

Sociologist = socialist revolutionary.

[Goodman]

Obama's hand-picked officer corps goes to work...!

[BISHOP]

Just what our military needs Affirmative Action Generals running the military into the ground....
We already have an Affirmative Action President and look what its getting us.


BISHOP

[ltorlo64]

Nah, in this case, it just sounds like the Pentagon needs a little Affirmative Action lest the white male generals start thinking about trying to stage a military coup against a non-white, non-male president or something.

First, I would like to point out that once again it is liberals injecting race (in other words they are the ones that cannot stop thinking about the world and our country in racist terms) into the news.

5.56 posted an interesting demographic break down of the military. I found another one that backs up what 5.56 posted and further breaks down the officer corps by race (http://www.militaryonesource.mil/120...ics_Report.pdf).

Just looking at officer demographics you see that 77.8% is white, 9.5% is African American, 1.1% is multi-racial, .5% is Pacific Islander, .6% is Native American, 4.3% is Asian, and 11.3% is Hispanic. From the most recent census (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html) we see that the population of the US is 77.7% white (close enough to be the same as is seen in the officer corps), 13.2% is African American (greater than is shown in the officer corps), 2.4% is multi-racial (greater than in the officer corps), .2% is Pacific Islander (about the same in the officer corps), 1.2% is Native American (about the same as the officer corps), 5.3% is Asian (about the same as the officer corps), and 17.1% is Hispanic (which is more than the officer corps). This shows that while Caucasian Americans are represented close to their overall representation in the general population, African Americans and Hispanics are slightly under represented.

The question is why? I think this is answered by the requirements to become and officer. I will use the requirements to become a Naval Officer as that is what I am most familiar with, though the other services are very similar. You must not be older than 27 (may be waived to 31 for prior enlisted service), must have a BS or a BA in a technical major (ie engineering, physics, math, etc) or substantial advanced math courses (calculus courses) if a non-technical degree, no arrests accept for minor traffic violations (fine less than $200), no drug use (experimental use of marijuana may be waived).

For the African American community getting technical degrees is discouraged while getting liberal arts degrees is encouraged. This makes it harder for the military to recruit African American officers as it is harder to find those with the requisite training. Why do we want people with technical degrees or with extensive training in advanced mathematics? Because of two reasons, first it teaches logical thinking. It teaches people how to approach a problem without emotion to come up with the best solution. When your job is to place people in harm’s way, while emotion is there, it cannot be the reason for the decisions you make. Second, leading soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines is a very technical endeavor. Plotting courses, determining firing bearings, understanding how to overtake (or get away from) an enemy using tangents and geometry, requires an understanding of math that far exceeds taking general math in high school or refresher general math in college.

Another issue with both groups (with all groups but Asian actually) is drug use. As we have become more accepting of drug use that disqualifies many people. If you use drugs other than marijuana, and if you use marijuana regularly (not just once or twice) you are disqualified from serving. Why? Everyone else is becoming more accepting of drug use, why not the military? This is because of the lingering effects of the various drugs, even marijuana. It slows reflexes and makes understanding complex concepts difficult.

The other issue that really affects African-Americans has to do with criminal records. With the break down of the African American family more of them have records which then makes their joining the military more difficult.

This is not an issue for the military to solve, though I can assure you we are trying. This is an issue for society to solve. Unfortunately, the answer that society will push is not to uphold the high standards we currently have but to lower the standards so that we can allow people who should not be qualified to serve. Then we will wonder why the military is doing things that are immoral and socially unacceptable, and the answer will be to fire military leaders. Makes no sense.

[NAPOTS]

Just what our military needs Affirmative Action Generals running the military into the ground....
We already have an Affirmative Action President and look what its getting us.


BISHOP

Without saying too much I know of several minorities who have been promoted to a level for which I believe they are unqualified. My personal opinion is that this must make some higher up look good at the pentagon and in front of congressional comittees. Look how progressive I am, I am your boy, I promoted x number of minorities to field grade ranks.

[LAGC]

Very interesting and informative post, ltorlo64.

I was not aware that even the officer corps was that integrated already, more or less reflecting the general racial demographics of American society at large, minus a couple exceptions which you laid the case for well.

Is there a breakdown somewhere that details demographics of the top military brass? I imagine that would be what is most concerning to that director of sociology at West Point.

[ltorlo64]

Very interesting and informative post, ltorlo64.

I was not aware that even the officer corps was that integrated already, more or less reflecting the general racial demographics of American society at large, minus a couple exceptions which you laid the case for well.

Is there a breakdown somewhere that details demographics of the top military brass? I imagine that would be what is most concerning to that director of sociology at West Point.

Thanks. As for a break down of top brass I am sure there is I just can't find it in the public domain. It takes about 30 years for an officer to reach flag rank so I would argue that even if the senior ranks are not yet integrated they will be because the officer corps is more integrated. If this is true the Director of Sociology should understand that change takes time and we cannot make a flag or general officer overnight, or even in
decade.

[blacksheep]

Liberals are always concerned about race, why is that ?

[ltorlo64]

Liberals are always concerned about race, why is that ?

It distracts from arguing facts by inserting emotional arguments instead.

[Hatedbysheeple]

This issue was brought up earlier this year and a survey was sent out within my rate. The questions asked were basically the following, simplified down to the basics.

How do you feel about women in your rate.

How do you feel about minorities in your rate

What does the navy need to do to get more women/minorities in the rate

How do you feel about lowering standards to allow those people in.

The answers they got made them drop the subject, which were basically

No women, they are not worth the trouble for the 1 or 2 in 1,000,000 that can make standard and those that do can only perform in an extremely limited capability, and none of them are strong enough to carry a 220lbs guy wearing 60lbs of kit any real distance or any distance at all, not to mention the housing, berthing, and bathroom issues. This one is rough and not an easy thing for a lot of guys but it's reality.

No one gives a shit what color your skin is, if you meet the requirements and you're a good dude you're in, you're one of us, race doesn't matter.

Nothing, if they want it they will work to make it, just like all of us did, if they are not willing to overcome their individual hurdles we don't want them.

And finally, if you lower the standards for political reasons, those who make it in under those lowered standards will always be looked down upon and second guessed, they will be second class citizens. More importantly if they are willing to endanger our lives so that artificial race quotas are met a good majority of us would walk away from the job, we are an all volunteer rate.

[l921428x]

This issue was brought up earlier this year and a survey was sent out within my rate. The questions asked were basically the following, simplified down to the basics.

How do you feel about women in your rate.

How do you feel about minorities in your rate

What does the navy need to do to get more women/minorities in the rate

How do you feel about lowering standards to allow those people in.

The answers they got made them drop the subject, which were basically

No women, they are not worth the trouble for the 1 or 2 in 1,000,000 that can make standard and those that do can only perform in an extremely limited capability, and none of them are strong enough to carry a 220lbs guy wearing 60lbs of kit any real distance or any distance at all, not to mention the housing, berthing, and bathroom issues. This one is rough and not an easy thing for a lot of guys but it's reality.

No one gives a shit what color your skin is, if you meet the requirements and you're a good dude you're in, you're one of us, race doesn't matter.

Nothing, if they want it they will work to make it, just like all of us did, if they are not willing to overcome their individual hurdles we don't want them.

And finally, if you lower the standards for political reasons, those who make it in under those lowered standards will always be looked down upon and second guessed, they will be second class citizens. More importantly if they are willing to endanger our lives so that artificial race quotas are met a good majority of us would walk away from the job, we are an all volunteer rate.

well said and received. just because what you say IS true!

[ltorlo64]

This issue was brought up earlier this year and a survey was sent out within my rate. The questions asked were basically the following, simplified down to the basics.

How do you feel about women in your rate.

How do you feel about minorities in your rate

What does the navy need to do to get more women/minorities in the rate

How do you feel about lowering standards to allow those people in.

The answers they got made them drop the subject, which were basically

No women, they are not worth the trouble for the 1 or 2 in 1,000,000 that can make standard and those that do can only perform in an extremely limited capability, and none of them are strong enough to carry a 220lbs guy wearing 60lbs of kit any real distance or any distance at all, not to mention the housing, berthing, and bathroom issues. This one is rough and not an easy thing for a lot of guys but it's reality.

No one gives a shit what color your skin is, if you meet the requirements and you're a good dude you're in, you're one of us, race doesn't matter.

Nothing, if they want it they will work to make it, just like all of us did, if they are not willing to overcome their individual hurdles we don't want them.

And finally, if you lower the standards for political reasons, those who make it in under those lowered standards will always be looked down upon and second guessed, they will be second class citizens. More importantly if they are willing to endanger our lives so that artificial race quotas are met a good majority of us would walk away from the job, we are an all volunteer rate.

The liberal mindset is to remove all standards so that everyone can do everything, even if they cannot. The idea that we are different, have different skills, inteligence levels, and aptitudes cannot be allowed to exist, even though it is a fact of life. The problem is, as you point out, if you lower or remove the standards, there is no longer any standard and where there is no standard anarchy reigns.