Our military prepares for war. It can handle a library.
One evening 25 years ago, in the wardroom of our guided-missile destroyer, some fellow officers and I joked before dinner about who took the weakest classes in college. Once we'd had our fun, the conversation turned political. 'What I want to know,' one officer began, 'is why some schools offer women's studies as a major! I mean, why isn't there a men's studies?' Before I could bite my tongue, my flippant response rolled out: 'There is. It's called history.' After some jostling, the group took the point: The prevailing stories are not the only ones that matter.
The Pentagon's assault on diversity initiatives brought this memory back to mind. The latest casualty is the library at the United States Naval Academy. Officials at the college confirmed that nearly 1,000 books were flagged for potentially violating President Donald Trump's executive order that requires schools to promote 'patriotic education' and avoid those deemed to champion diversity, equity and inclusion. Ultimately, 381 titles were removed, charged with sowing division and pushing 'anti-American, subversive' ideologies. Multiple books by Hitler survived the purge; a midshipman's honors paper on police violence did not.
The rationale for banning these books and articles is as flimsy as the process by which they were chosen. As with other efforts to scrub federal websites by searching for specific keywords — ranging from 'Black' and 'women' to 'equality' and 'cultural differences' — the academy undertook a similar practice to identify books for removal from the library. Books by authors whose titles contained words such as 'racial inequality' were taken off the shelves, while other books on the same subject — by the same authors but with less explicit titles — remain in circulation. The point of these executive actions isn't to deny students information that can be easily accessed elsewhere, but to communicate whose history is notable and an example to us all — and whose is not.
The White House and Pentagon appear to believe that students — even midshipmen who swear an oath to the nation — will love the nation less if presented with its checkered history, discriminatory political interests and constitutional shortcomings. A close read of some of the banned books would show those concerns are unfounded. They contain histories of men and women who answered the call for service even though they could not vote, serve in combat under the American flag, seek equal justice in the courts, or access veterans' benefits. People who volunteer for military service don't do so because the nation is perfect, they do so even though it is not — that sacrifice is what makes patriotism resilient.
Instead, the Pentagon is exercising a thin-skinned nationalism that bans books, fires senior military leaders who are disproportionately Black or female, and believes diversity introduces weakness. In doing so, it mistakes colorblindness for the removal of unflattering histories and the refusal to acknowledge racial inequality. And it acts as though avoiding discussions of gender or race or injustice is a precondition for meritocracy. Not only is this wrong, but it also undermines military strength, readiness and cohesion.
Most of all, it messages a lack of faith in the men and women who wear the uniform, suggesting that they are capable of facing the ugliness of war but not the quietude of the university library. And that while they can put guided missiles on targets many miles away, they are helpless against the prose of an author with whom they might disagree. Again, a trip to the Naval Academy's library stacks will put those attitudes to rest: Writing about the importance of an educated military, British general William Francis Butler observed that 'the nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards.'
The wardroom conversation turned to stories from our day at sea just as one of the ship's two female officers walked in and joined us for dinner. This was the ship's first deployment with women on board and integrated by race and gender at every level of leadership and operations. It was a historic deployment, filled with unit awards and commendations. And perhaps small evidence of two things the country should remember: Diversity offers strategic advantages to smart nations, and the histories of the people who constitute it matter, too.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump dumps the Federalist Society — and even Republicans are shooketh
In a major about-face, Donald Trump is turning on the conservative powerhouse that built his judicial legacy, the Federalist Society. Yale Law professor Akhil Reed Amar warns that this break with the very group that helped propel him to power marks a dangerous shift. 'He just wants loyalty to himself—thugs and hacks,' Amar says, adding that Federalist Society judges are principled and loyal to the Constitution, not to Trump. 'The Senate needs to play a really important role now—especia
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
White House aide calls Los Angeles anti-ICE protests an 'insurrection'
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senior White House aide Stephen Miller on Saturday condemned protests in downtown Los Angeles against federal immigration raids as an "insurrection" against the United States. Helmeted police in riot gear engaged in a tense confrontation with protesters on Friday night after Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents conducted enforcement operations in the city and arrested at least 44 people on immigration violations. "An insurrection against the laws and sovereignty of the United States," Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, wrote on X. Miller, an immigration hardliner, was responding to video footage on X showing a large number of people protesting in downtown Los Angeles. The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) said it had not made any arrests related to the demonstration. FBI deputy director Dan Bongino posted on X that they were reviewing evidence from the protests. "We are working with the U.S. Attorney's Office to ensure the perpetrators are brought to justice," Bongino said. "The Right to assemble and protest does not include a license to attack law enforcement officers, or to impede and obstruct our lawful immigration operations." President Donald Trump has pledged to deport record numbers of people in the country illegally and lock down the U.S.-Mexico border, with the White House setting a goal for ICE to arrest at least 3,000 migrants per day. But the sweeping immigration crackdown has also included people legally residing in the country, including some with permanent residence, and has led to legal challenges. Television news footage earlier on Friday showed caravans of unmarked military-style vehicles and vans loaded with uniformed federal agents streaming through Los Angeles streets as part of the immigration enforcement operation. "Forty-four people (were arrested) on immigration charges," Yasmeen Pitts O'Keefe, a spokesperson for Homeland Security Investigations told Reuters on Saturday. The LAPD did not take part in the immigration enforcement. It was deployed to quell civil unrest after crowds protesting the deportation raids spray-painted anti-ICE slogans on the walls of a federal court building and gathered outside a nearby jail where some of the detainees were reportedly being held. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass in a statement condemned the immigration raids. "I am deeply angered by what has taken place," Bass said. "These tactics sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of safety in our city. We will not stand for this." (Reporting By Lucia Mutikani; editing by Diane Craft)
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is arming Gazan militias and clans an effective tactic?
Relying on a tribal militia or clan in Gaza may work in the short term. However, in the long term it is unlikely to achieve success. On June 5 reports confirmed that Israel has been arming and apparently supporting or working with an armed militias in Gaza. Some reports refer to this group as a 'gang.' Other reports describe the leader of the group, Yasser Abu Shabab, as a member of a large clan in southern Gaza. There may be more clans being activated or encouraged than just the one linked to Yasser Abu Shabab. Shabab is not his real name and his name is a nomme de guerre, meaning the full details about this group continue to be shrouded in some mystery. As the details are shrouded in some fog, it is hard to know if these groups will become an effective anti-Hamas movement. If the groups aregangs that are more well-known for looting and crimes in the past, rather than achieving much, then they will likely not be embraced by the average people. If the groups are made up of clans or even men with links to Bedouin tribes, then it's possible that it will be hard for them to make inroads among other Gazans. It's worth asking whether the new militias in Gaza may be effective and whether history tells us that arming militias is an effective tactic. First, let's look at what we know about Gaza. It's worth noting that Gaza's population is divided into different groups. There are people who came to Gaza as refugees in 1949 1949, fleeing areas in the Negev that became part of Israel. These people likely make up more than half the population of Gaza. Then there are the people in Gaza who trace their heritage to people who lived in Gaza for hundreds of years before 1948. Those people could be called the original Gazans. They are very different than those called 'refugees.' The refugees moved to camps such as Khan Younis, Rafah, Maghazai, Deir al-Balah, Jabaliya, Nuseirat and Shati. The camps became the backbone of the Palestinian political and armed movements. They also became a hotbed of Hamas activity in the 1980s and 1990s, and thus a hotbed of terrorist activity. The Gaza Gazans, who predate 1948, are less inclined toward Hamas. This means that any attempt by the armed militias, gangs or clans will face hurdles in terms of penetrating Gazan society. This is because groups that have roots in one area, may not be popular in others, or they may even alienate people. Back in the 1980s, Gazan families and clans were often involved in violence against one another. This kind of family violence is also common to Arab villages in Israel, where there has been an unprecedented level of gun violence in recent years. This kind of violence means people are often divided and it is hard to unify them, either militarily or politically. What does history tell us about the challenge that militaries or countries have in recruiting or arming tribes, mercenaries, militias or other types of paramilitary groups? In antiquity, it was not uncommon for tribes to play a role as auxiliaries alongside normal military formations. In addition, it was common that when countries were at war they would often bring along a cavalcade of smaller allies. For instance, when Hannibal was fighting Rome, he had to recruit people from Italy because the actual number of Carthaginians in his army began to decline over time. By the 15th and 16th century, mercenaries played a major role in fighting amongst the Italian city states. This was the era of Machiavelli, who wrote that mercenaries were often 'disunited, ambitious, [and] undisciplined.' However, mercenaries continued to be used by European states. The British employed Hessian mercenaries and others during the Revolutionary War. These groups generally did not prove effective. In addition, the British and other colonial powers often relied on alliances with tribes to help during wartime or to keep the peace on the frontier. For instance, at the battle of Isandlwana, the British army fighting the Zulus included a number of local native troops. The native troops of the Natal Native Contingent, for instance, included tribes that had fought the Zulus. Henan Cortes, during his conquest of the Aztec empire, allied with groups that had been suppressed by the Aztecs in the past. In the modern times, many countries have sought to work with tribes and militias. For instance, Lawrence of Arabia worked with tribes that were in revolt against the Ottoman Empire. During the Vietnam war, the US often worked with Montagnard fighters who opposed the Communists. The US also worked with the Hmong people in Laos. Later, during the US occupation in Iraq the US relied on a group called the Sons of Iraq or Sahweh, which were Sunni tribal militias. These were concentrated in Anbar province. Rwanda has long backed groups in eastern Congo who are made up of members of the Tutsi minority. What this history tells us is that there is a long tradition of working with tribal militias, clans, gangs or mercenaries. However, historically these groups do not have a lasting ability to achieve results. Usually, they are used as part of a policy and then they are usually abandoned when a war is over. In other cases, they simply fade away. The Sunni 'awakening' groups in Iraq, for instance, were starved of resources after the US left Iraq in 2011. Some of the tribes that supported the US continued to play a role. During the ISIS invasion of Iraq, a number of tribes near Haditha helped hold off the ISIS attack. These included the Jughayfa tribe and the Albu Nimr tribe. ISIS persecuted tribal groups that resisted. Key Sunni tribes such as the Shammar opposed ISIS and similar extremists. However, most of these tribes are not able to operate on a national level, they can only help secure certain areas. The use of tribes and militias usually enable states to carve out areas of influence in states they are intervening in. When there is a chaotic state on the border or a weak state, countries will often seek to arm local groups to help protect their borders. This can backfire because the groups may end up going on rampages and massacring people, or they may escalate a war in a neighboring country. The Vietnam War, for instance, destabilized Cambodia and Laos and this led to great suffering over the years. Minority groups who were exploited as allies often were betrayed. In other situations states will try to co-opt or even work with drug cartels, which is how Mexico's former PRI appeared to have run the country in the 1980s and 1990s. When this broke down the country fell into a brutal cycle of violence as the cartels had become more powerful than some state governments. Relying on a tribal militia or clan in Gaza may work in the short term. However, in the long term it is unlikely to achieve success. The theory that Israeli soldiers' lives will be saved via this alliance is not necessarily proven by history. Usually, when states think they can provide guns to tribes or militias as a short-term fix, they find out later that they are drawn into more complex wars. For instance, the spillover from the Rwandan genocide has led to fighting in eastern Congo for thirty years. Has the use of proxies and tribes and militias there helped Rwanda or Congo or anyone else in the long term? Probably not. The same can be said for Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia or many other states teetering on failure and civil war. A long civil war in Gaza will likely harm Israel in the long term.
