The Army Might Be Ditching Its ‘Woke’ Image As It Faces Historic Recruiting Problems

[Doug1943]

Link to your source dummy. Or are you saying you were full of shit all along. As usual.

Obviously, he doesn't have a link, or he would have posted it by now.

This is a weird debate: the general position of people on the Right is that the military is having recruitment problems and that one cause of this is the drive to make the military 'woke', not only putting off potential recruits but also hurting retention. Things like this: [ Exclusive: Army Says Soldiers Must Shower with Transgender Persons ]

But Couchpotato seems to be on the Right, and is saying this is not true, the military is not having recruitment problems, the Right is wrong (on this issue).

I thought Admiral Rockwell Tory was a Lefty, but he's saying it is true. The Right is right. On the other hand, he called Couchpotato a 'faggot', which is definitely not something a Lefty would ever do.

Strange times! But it's reassuring to see political argument reach its usual high standard here.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The Army Might Be Ditching Its ‘Woke’ Image ​

As It Faces Historic Recruiting Problems​

The Army Might Be Ditching Its ‘Woke’ Image As It Faces Historic Recruiting Problems

'Something that everyone can get behind'

dailycaller.com

11 Mar 2023 ~~ By Micaela Burrow

• The U.S. Army’s new brand and ad campaign largely omits reference to woke identity politics and could be just what the service needs to overcome historic recruiting obstacles, experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
• Prior advertising efforts alienated conservative families that once served as the Army’s primary recruiting base, according to experts.
• They “forgot that the primary market for Army recruiting is young men from traditional families, looking for a challenge,” Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, told the DCNF.

The Army’s new branding campaign, unveiled Wednesday, shied away from social justice and diversity themes as it seeks to overcome a historic drop in recruiting, military experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
The service’s buy-in on identity politics could turn off conservative families, which have traditionally served as the military’s largest recruiting base, and exacerbated the service’s recruiting woes in fiscal year 2022, experts and lawmakers warn. But, the years-in-the-making rebrand, with a goal of showcasing the Army’s role in defense and innovation throughout American history and encouraging soldiers to push their limits, could help the Army meet its ambitious recruiting goals for 2023, experts in military readiness told the DCNF.
~Snip~
The Army has come under fire for embracing perceived left-wing values in branding, according to Task and Purpose. One example is a 2021 advertising scheme that emphasized the different kinds of people who could join the service, highlighting a same-sex family.
Left-wing trends in the military’s education and personnel policies — including emphasizing inclusion of LGBTQ+ servicemembers, dubling down on outreach to minority communities, and teaching CRT and giving pronoun advice at the military academies — to support “diversity as a strategic imperative” could cause conservative, often white families to believe they “are not welcome or appreciated in the military,” Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, told the DCNF in June.
~Snip~
The Army and every other branch needs to focus on appealing to all Americans, regardless of their political beliefs or background,” Republican Indiana Rep. Jim Banks, who chairs the military personnel subcommittee on the House Armed Services Committee and has sworn to crack down on wokeness in the military, said to the DCNF.
~Snip~
The Army missed its recruiting objectives for 2022 of 60,000 new members by 25%; to make up for that offset, the service set a “stretch goal” for 2023 to 65,000 recruits, according to Wormuth.
The Army accelerated launch of the new branding effort to help with recruiting for 2023, Wormuth explained at the event Wednesday. The new campaign cost roughly $117 million to execute, she said, and is a result of extensive work that included focus groups with relevant stakeholders. But leaders are confident that a data-driven approach will yield results.
The U.S. needs an Army that shows itself to be a capable, hard-hitting force that can defeat and deter enemy aggression, not one that prioritizes inclusion over competence and lowers standards to accommodate more self-described identities, GOP lawmakers argue.

​

~Snip~
About 84% of new recruits come from military families, according to Gen. McConville.
“So we’re becoming a military family business. We want to be an American family business,” he told reporters Wednesday.
“We need every young person in this country, we need every parent in this country, to know that the United States military is a pathway to success,” McConville said.


Commentary:
Methinks that the efforts of Woke Secy. of Defense Austin and Woke Gen. Mark Milley to feminize our military with transgender's has failed miserably. Sounds more like they're changing the label on the can, but not the contents. Bait and switch.
A TV commercial is going to save it all?
Take a long hard look at The Commander In Chief. Would you fight under him? Look at The Kabul Fiasco. Look at his woke generals and SOS. Not to mention the fact that Biden appears to be instigating for WWIII. Haha.
With people like Biden, Austin, and Milley leading the country and the military, what would you expect to happen. They're intent on using the armed forces of this country for political rather than defense purposes.
The joint military forces will have to do more than change its commercials to fix its recruiting problems. Their 'woke' choices has damaged its institutional reputation for years, and it's going to need to get rid of everyone involved at the top, starting with Biden, Austin, and Milley.

Doesn't really matter how they present it, the reality is that people don't want to die for rich people to get richer....

 

[Doug1943]

Doesn't really matter how they present it, the reality is that people don't want to die for rich people to get richer....

Well, that's always been the case. In the Civil War, there was a saying, "A rich man's war but a poor man's fight." There were even anti-draft riots in New York City, but before you start cheering, note that they burnt down a Black orphanage and killed a lot of Black peop;le.
"The New York Draft Riots occurred in July 1863, when the anger of working-class New Yorkers over a new federal draft law during the Civil War sparked five days of some of the bloodiest and most destructive rioting in U.S. history. Hundreds of people were killed, many more seriously injured, and Black New Yorkers were often the target of the rioters’ violence."
[ https://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/draft-riots ]
But the Union side in the Civil War was the just side. It was a "good war".

And ... it's not always the case that the poor do the fighting while the rich stay home and get richer. In WWI, the British officer corps, drawn almost exclusively, at least to start with, from the upper classes, suffered terrible casualties. Here's an article from the leftwing Guardian with the details: [ First world war roll call shows senior officers mown down just like the ranks ] (A good book to read about this period is Vera Brittain's Testament of Youth. [ Testament of Youth - Wikipedia]. It's both an anti-war and a feminist classic. She was from an upper class family, just starting at Oxford, when the war began. She dropped out and became a nurse. As you read throug the book, she recounts how her fiancé, her brother, and several other young men she knew, were all killed in combat.)

Human society is naturally stratified. There will always be capitalists, or commisars, at the top, in any war. But some wars are worth engaging in -- the war to stop Hitler, for example. Others are not. We have to decide on a case-by-case (or war-by-war) basis.

 

[dudmuck]

Leftist: 'Woke' people are just people concerned about social justice, racism, sexism, homophobia, colonialism, transphobia, ableism, MAPphobia ...
Also Leftist: 'Woke' people don't exist, they're a figment of your imagination.

 

[Doug1943]

Got nuthin', huh?

 

[Couchpotato]

Army Yanks Ads After Star Narrator Charged With Strangulation Assault | ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Well that won’t help…

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, that's always been the case. In the Civil War, there was a saying, "A rich man's war but a poor man's fight." There were even anti-draft riots in New York City, but before you start cheering, note that they burnt down a Black orphanage and killed a lot of Black peop;le.
"The New York Draft Riots occurred in July 1863, when the anger of working-class New Yorkers over a new federal draft law during the Civil War sparked five days of some of the bloodiest and most destructive rioting in U.S. history. Hundreds of people were killed, many more seriously injured, and Black New Yorkers were often the target of the rioters’ violence."
[ https://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/draft-riots ]
But the Union side in the Civil War was the just side. It was a "good war".

And ... it's not always the case that the poor do the fighting while the rich stay home and get richer. In WWI, the British officer corps, drawn almost exclusively, at least to start with, from the upper classes, suffered terrible casualties. Here's an article from the leftwing Guardian with the details: [ First world war roll call shows senior officers mown down just like the ranks ] (A good book to read about this period is Vera Brittain's Testament of Youth. [ Testament of Youth - Wikipedia]. It's both an anti-war and a feminist classic. She was from an upper class family, just starting at Oxford, when the war began. She dropped out and became a nurse. As you read throug the book, she recounts how her fiancé, her brother, and several other young men she knew, were all killed in combat.)

Human society is naturally stratified. There will always be capitalists, or commisars, at the top, in any war. But some wars are worth engaging in -- the war to stop Hitler, for example. Others are not. We have to decide on a case-by-case (or war-by-war) basis.

Thing is that before people needed the money, now they don't so much. So convincing them to make money from this is harder and there's more information and ideas out there for people to be pessimistic.

 

[Doug1943]

Thing is that before people needed the money, now they don't so much. So convincing them to make money from this is harder and there's more information and ideas out there for people to be pessimistic.

Judging why people do, or do not do, something is always problematic. When the country is attacked, military recruitment soars, and the people joining are probably not really motivated by material concerns. In times of peace, it's different: there are families which are 'military families', where service in the military is just assumed (for males); these families almost certainly have a strong sense of patriotism.

During 'peacetime' (when the US is not fighting an active war overseas) it's different. Material considerations (the salary, access to socialized medicine) are much more paramount.

All we can really say is that low unemployment rates don't help, the continued physical and mental deterioration of the American population doesn't help, and almost certainly that the transformation of the military into a 'woke' social justice clinic also won't help among that demographic which looked to military service as a way of affirming traditional masculine personality traits.

Patriots must hold their noses and do military service, at least in State Defense Forces and the National Guard. If necessary, pretend to go along with the 'woke' insanity ... although it should be easy enough to privately convey your disgust to the real soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen with whom you serve. It shouldn't be necessary to spell out why we must have a substantial presence in the military.

What's probably no longer possible is to make a career in the military, where, to advance, you will almost certainly have to affirm that unqualified people are qualified for promotion and assignment to intellectually-challenging jobs, men are women, American history is one of continual racism, etc.

If not you're prepared to enthusiastically participate in renaming a military base as 'Fort George Floyd' you just won't get promoted.

It's sort of like having to work in an occupied country. But it's where we're at right now. It won't last forever.