10 ms·

Another example of the institutional rot that is happening across our county in aging institutions that have little accountability. Will any leadership be held

Another example of the institutional rot that is happening across our county in aging institutions that have little accountability. Will any leadership be held accountable? No. The US Military is a jobs program first and a fighting force a distant second.

rwmurrayVT 5y ago
There have been major changes in the shipyard since the fire. Navy leadership, RMCs, and ship's force have been more involved at every level. The question to follow now is when will they return to complacency.
- PicassoCTs 5y ago
  The density of these incidents seems to be increasing, ships run by untrained crew crashing into other vehicles, steered by software that does not work. Now the leadership that created the circumstances and conditions for this mismanagement to flourish, rushes to fix a problem they allowed to create?
  - rwmurrayVT 5y ago
    There's a major difference between repair/maintenance fires and the incidences afloat. Shipyard fires are being held to the highest standards ever since Oscar Austin, the submarine, and now LHD.
twofornone 5y ago
The leadership is more concerned with diversity and inclusion than combat readiness. This institutional rot, across industry, academia, and military, is a symptom of antimeritocratic hiring bias. For example, apparently women are so valuable to our military that the brass has decided to quietly lower standards in return for positive political coverage. This has been going on to an increasing degree for at least a decade, and is only accelerating under the current administration and, frankly, it's insanity. Also extremely toxic to morale.
- s5300 5y ago
  > The leadership is more concerned with diversity and inclusion than combat readiness. How exactly did you reach this conclusion?
  - twofornone 5y ago
    Well, for one, there was a letter signed by 1xx retired leaders but I'm having trouble finding it on google under the pile of pro D&I propaganda that exclusively makes up search results. For two, consistent anecdata from personal acquaintances and forum posts. The demographics are also completely changing. The military was until recently carried primarily by white men from small town America. Now white maleness is effectively a career handicap when genitals, skin color, and sexual orientation are considered for promotion. I think the recent army advertisements are a valid proxy for the negative value that current leadership places on white-maleness. A military which is still majority white and male is releasing recruitment videos which exclusively feature minorities, females, and a healthy sprinkling of homosexuality. Here's a nice illustration, comparing recent US ads to those from Russia and China[0]. Only two of those forces are actually interested in recruiting competent soldiers, if these ads are any indication. China is laughing. 0. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfe6d6MzeLM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfe6d6MzeLM Edit: the sister post by jimmygrapes found one of the reports/letters I was looking for. I urge you all to read it to see, among other things, what happens to morale when demographic considerations are added to promotion evaluations. What is reported is consistent with what I've been hearing from former servicemember acquaintances.
    - ceejayoz 5y ago
      Are you a lost time traveler? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9981 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9981
      - twofornone 5y ago
        What do you think a diversity quota is, if not discrimination? Maybe you're suggesting that it's time for the supreme court to step in, given that these hiring and promotion practices are, as your link clearly states, illegal? This is pretty cut and dry. You may be supportive of D&I but by definition it is an exclusionary, discriminatory, a-meritocratic, and illegal policy. The fact that these quotas tend to be implicit does not change the legality (or morality) of the widespread practices.

rwmurrayVT 5y ago

There have been major changes in the shipyard since the fire. Navy leadership, RMCs, and ship's force have been more involved at every level. The question to follow now is when will they return to complacency.

PicassoCTs 5y ago
The density of these incidents seems to be increasing, ships run by untrained crew crashing into other vehicles, steered by software that does not work. Now the leadership that created the circumstances and conditions for this mismanagement to flourish, rushes to fix a problem they allowed to create?
- rwmurrayVT 5y ago
  There's a major difference between repair/maintenance fires and the incidences afloat. Shipyard fires are being held to the highest standards ever since Oscar Austin, the submarine, and now LHD.

twofornone 5y ago

The leadership is more concerned with diversity and inclusion than combat readiness. This institutional rot, across industry, academia, and military, is a symptom of antimeritocratic hiring bias. For example, apparently women are so valuable to our military that the brass has decided to quietly lower standards in return for positive political coverage. This has been going on to an increasing degree for at least a decade, and is only accelerating under the current administration and, frankly, it's insanity. Also extremely toxic to morale.

s5300 5y ago
> The leadership is more concerned with diversity and inclusion than combat readiness. How exactly did you reach this conclusion?
- twofornone 5y ago
  Well, for one, there was a letter signed by 1xx retired leaders but I'm having trouble finding it on google under the pile of pro D&I propaganda that exclusively makes up search results. For two, consistent anecdata from personal acquaintances and forum posts. The demographics are also completely changing. The military was until recently carried primarily by white men from small town America. Now white maleness is effectively a career handicap when genitals, skin color, and sexual orientation are considered for promotion. I think the recent army advertisements are a valid proxy for the negative value that current leadership places on white-maleness. A military which is still majority white and male is releasing recruitment videos which exclusively feature minorities, females, and a healthy sprinkling of homosexuality. Here's a nice illustration, comparing recent US ads to those from Russia and China[0]. Only two of those forces are actually interested in recruiting competent soldiers, if these ads are any indication. China is laughing. 0. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfe6d6MzeLM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfe6d6MzeLM Edit: the sister post by jimmygrapes found one of the reports/letters I was looking for. I urge you all to read it to see, among other things, what happens to morale when demographic considerations are added to promotion evaluations. What is reported is consistent with what I've been hearing from former servicemember acquaintances.
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    Are you a lost time traveler? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9981 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9981
    - twofornone 5y ago
      What do you think a diversity quota is, if not discrimination? Maybe you're suggesting that it's time for the supreme court to step in, given that these hiring and promotion practices are, as your link clearly states, illegal? This is pretty cut and dry. You may be supportive of D&I but by definition it is an exclusionary, discriminatory, a-meritocratic, and illegal policy. The fact that these quotas tend to be implicit does not change the legality (or morality) of the widespread practices.