Given that the role is as much diplomatic as it is operational, and given that 20% of the US military is African American, is a bit crazy that they could only find white people to fill the roles.
That’s not how the military works. They dont “find” people, they send whoever is in that theatre. And considering DEI is now commie or whatever, yeah. This tracks with their behavior
This is lowkey kinda racist, implying Black Americans need to be sent because their darker skin makes them more suited to negotiate with Africans.
Additionally your statistics are coincidental. Even if 20% of the armed forces is black, what percentage are ranked to these positions? Also there’s only 5 dudes. 20% would be 1/5, so missing 1 is within margin of statistical error.
A different and likely more damning bit of racism perhaps.
The argument is that if you have 99 white guys and 1 black guy in your pool of people, then the choice to specifically send that single black guy to Africa is a bit messed up. You probably should have more black guys in the people pool, and that surely points to some racial bias in the hiring process, but the decision on how to deploy those people is a different decision that can be racist or not all on its own.
The argument is that if you have 99 white guys and 1 black guy in your pool of people
Okay. But why is it so difficult to get non-white guys in your officer’s corps to begin with?
the choice to specifically send that single black guy to Africa is a bit messed up
Given the history of African states under European colonial occupation, I might argue that sending any of the white guys (particularly white guys with a certain expressed stigma against domestic nonwhites) is a foolish move.
the decision on how to deploy those people is a different decision that can be racist or not all on its own
The heavily predicated on the attitude American leadership has towards the African state they’re deploying troops. If they consider military in the country part of a mutual defense partnership, it makes sense to send people who are relatable and who integrate well with the political establishment. If they consider military in the country an occupation - or military leadership a diplomatic corps for dealing with wealthy white business owners - then the leadership will reflect American priorities rather than Host Nation priorities.
Sending a guy who looks and talks like Elon Musk to server as senior commander in Botswana sends a very particular message, especially when it is coming under a Presidency that keeps insisting South Africa is doing reverse-genocide against Afrikaners.
Okay, sure. You do understand that the vast majority of African Americans have been rooted families for generations now? I can’t underline enough how fucked up it would be to send someone to Africa because they have dark skin. That is a verbatim echo of all sorts of internal American racism.
You do understand that the vast majority of African Americans have been rooted families for generations now?
They are overrepresented in the military as enlisted soldiers and underrepresented in the officer’s corps. What would “being rooted for generations” have to do with their ability to advance in military command?
Advancing through the ranks is a different issue. There are problems there that need to be addressed, and such changes would be expected to bring a shift in demographics among different military roles over some period of time.
None of that changes the current military roster. You just can’t send the black guy to Africa for the color of his skin. If you had a ratio of 50:50 black guys to white guys in command, and we ignore other demographics for a thought experiment, then it would be obviously weird and racial if a crew of five commanders in Africa were white. That is not the case. It would be weird and racist if three of the current commanders in Africa were black because that is an obvious skew of the commander statistics.
Your argument about demographic spreads in the military looking racist right now is valid. We should address those demographic skews directly, not insist that people are deployed in ways to offset those demographics. Picking the fewer black commanders we have and sending them to Africa specifically because they are black is insane. I shouldn’t even need to type that.
The current military rooster under Pete Hegseth has changed radically in a matter of months. Most recently, SOUTHCOM Commander Admiral Alvin Holsey abruptly left his command over the attacks on Venezuelan fishing vessels.
Meanwhile, we gave four different CTOs the rank of Lt Colonel in July. All of them have been tightly allied with the Thiel/Musk wing of the Administration in their efforts to integrate the Pentagon with the Silicon Valley surveillance state.
Clearly, we are not above rapidly changing the military rooster to meet the immediate demands of the President.
Your argument about demographic spreads in the military looking racist right now is valid.
These trends aren’t new. Prior to the Clinton Admin, they were significantly worse, but they’re still abysmal even after neoliberal reforms.
And when the function of the modern US military is to facilitate wealth transfer from occupied foreign nations to (overwhelmingly white) American shareholders and executives, you can’t help notice a certain pattern in who they send.
Given that the role is as much diplomatic as it is operational, and given that 20% of the US military is African American, is a bit crazy that they could only find white people to fill the roles.
That’s not how the military works. They dont “find” people, they send whoever is in that theatre. And considering DEI is now commie or whatever, yeah. This tracks with their behavior
This is lowkey kinda racist, implying Black Americans need to be sent because their darker skin makes them more suited to negotiate with Africans.
Additionally your statistics are coincidental. Even if 20% of the armed forces is black, what percentage are ranked to these positions? Also there’s only 5 dudes. 20% would be 1/5, so missing 1 is within margin of statistical error.
But the whites only officer corps is what, exactly?
A different and likely more damning bit of racism perhaps.
The argument is that if you have 99 white guys and 1 black guy in your pool of people, then the choice to specifically send that single black guy to Africa is a bit messed up. You probably should have more black guys in the people pool, and that surely points to some racial bias in the hiring process, but the decision on how to deploy those people is a different decision that can be racist or not all on its own.
Okay. But why is it so difficult to get non-white guys in your officer’s corps to begin with?
Given the history of African states under European colonial occupation, I might argue that sending any of the white guys (particularly white guys with a certain expressed stigma against domestic nonwhites) is a foolish move.
But you don’t have to take my word for it. You can ask any of the leaders of the seven different African governments that have seen officers’ coups overthrow the sitting Western-backed governments and replacing them with African nationalist military leadership.
The heavily predicated on the attitude American leadership has towards the African state they’re deploying troops. If they consider military in the country part of a mutual defense partnership, it makes sense to send people who are relatable and who integrate well with the political establishment. If they consider military in the country an occupation - or military leadership a diplomatic corps for dealing with wealthy white business owners - then the leadership will reflect American priorities rather than Host Nation priorities.
Sending a guy who looks and talks like Elon Musk to server as senior commander in Botswana sends a very particular message, especially when it is coming under a Presidency that keeps insisting South Africa is doing reverse-genocide against Afrikaners.
Okay, sure. You do understand that the vast majority of African Americans have been rooted families for generations now? I can’t underline enough how fucked up it would be to send someone to Africa because they have dark skin. That is a verbatim echo of all sorts of internal American racism.
I’m addressing that very specific point.
They are overrepresented in the military as enlisted soldiers and underrepresented in the officer’s corps. What would “being rooted for generations” have to do with their ability to advance in military command?
Advancing through the ranks is a different issue. There are problems there that need to be addressed, and such changes would be expected to bring a shift in demographics among different military roles over some period of time.
None of that changes the current military roster. You just can’t send the black guy to Africa for the color of his skin. If you had a ratio of 50:50 black guys to white guys in command, and we ignore other demographics for a thought experiment, then it would be obviously weird and racial if a crew of five commanders in Africa were white. That is not the case. It would be weird and racist if three of the current commanders in Africa were black because that is an obvious skew of the commander statistics.
Your argument about demographic spreads in the military looking racist right now is valid. We should address those demographic skews directly, not insist that people are deployed in ways to offset those demographics. Picking the fewer black commanders we have and sending them to Africa specifically because they are black is insane. I shouldn’t even need to type that.
The current military rooster under Pete Hegseth has changed radically in a matter of months. Most recently, SOUTHCOM Commander Admiral Alvin Holsey abruptly left his command over the attacks on Venezuelan fishing vessels.
Meanwhile, we gave four different CTOs the rank of Lt Colonel in July. All of them have been tightly allied with the Thiel/Musk wing of the Administration in their efforts to integrate the Pentagon with the Silicon Valley surveillance state.
Clearly, we are not above rapidly changing the military rooster to meet the immediate demands of the President.
These trends aren’t new. Prior to the Clinton Admin, they were significantly worse, but they’re still abysmal even after neoliberal reforms.
And when the function of the modern US military is to facilitate wealth transfer from occupied foreign nations to (overwhelmingly white) American shareholders and executives, you can’t help notice a certain pattern in who they send.