As Memorial Day nears, a desperate call to a lost America

As Memorial Day approaches and we struggle with illegal invasions, record-high inflation, crime, massive injections of paper money by a corrupt, lawless and incompetent government, let me give you a different perspective:

In 1986 the top priority of the U.S. Air Force and Navy was producing the best fighter pilots possible.  Of course whether that would enable America to win wars would depend, as always, on what the morons in Washington decided to do, but at least the capability would be there.

And in 1986 a movie came out that celebrated that skill.

Top Gun was an advertisement for Navy fighter pilots.  It celebrated skill, excellence, and unalloyed masculinity.

Today the "elites" in this country sneer at all three of those qualities.  The Navy of 1986--like the rest of our military of that time--no longer exists.

Now, 36 years later, a sequel to Top Gun is about to be released.  Tom Cruise plays the same character, but the country he serves would be unrecognizable to a citizen of 1986.

The original film showed American fighter pilots as an elite group who through grueling training and skill were by most accounts the best fighter pilots in the world.

Through the end of the Cold War, the leaders of our military had one goal: warfighting.  To achieve that goal the military set rigorous standards for men wanting to be pilots, for the sole purpose of making sure the U.S. would have more proficient pilots than any opponent.  

But when the Cold War ended, the goal of having the most proficient pilots was replaced by political correctness.  To do this, standards were lowered, and are now in free-fall.  For example, in the 1980s one-fourth of pilot-training students washed out.  Just ten years later the graduation rate had risen to 90 percent, and by the 2010s the flight school graduation rate reached 96 percent.  

No, the military hadn't figured out how to choose better trainees.  Instead they went the other way: In 1991, obeying their political bosses, the squirrels at the Pentagon announced their intention to put women into jet fighters.  Under political pressure from congress, the Navy accepted several women to fighter-pilot training.  Then, to the surprise of no one, the chain of command pressured instructors and school commanders to pass most of them, despite repeated failed checkrides and red flags that would have caused male students to wash out.

The result was only surprising to the politicians who ordered the policy: the Navy’s first female carrier-based fighter pilot--An admiral's daughter--crashed her F-14 just months after barely qualifying for the position.

That was nearly thirty years ago.  At the time, the idea of adopting double standards solely for the sake of diversity was controversial enough to be mildly criticized even by left-leaning 60 Minutes.  

You'd never hear a critical word about "diversity programs" from any Mainstream Media outlet today.

While you might think the military would have learned a lesson from double-standards, and gone back to a single (high) standard for all fighter pilots, the real lesson was just the opposite: males who want to be promoted learned to say nothing negative.  Everyone who wanted to be promoted enthusiastically supported lower standards (or pretended to) in the single-minded pursuit of "diversity."

And it's not just the Navy.  Here's the Air Force Times:

Air Force leaders have signed off on a new plan to build a more diverse pilot corps by 2030, looking to *level the playing field in a profession that remains dominated by white men.*  

The strategy aims to grow opportunities for women and minority airmen in some of the Air Force’s premier professions, including [everything].

“Maintaining our strategic advantage … requires the agility of a *diverse workforce* to tackle challenges from different perspectives.”

The Air Force has multiple teams *looking at minority and women’s issues* to build a service that works better for everyone, from less stringent hair regulations for women to reconsidering how cockpits could fit people of more shapes and sizes.

The military’s gushing enthusiasm for diversity is so over-the-top that it sounds like parody.  Here's Lt. Col. Edemumo Oboho:

“Diversity is a warfighting imperative. Diversity brings us the best talent, the best skill, it gives us the best potential, it gives us the ability to look at the problem from multiple solutions.  It helps us avoid our blind spots. The innovative potential with diversity is huge.”

The colonel speaks of "retaining aircrews by harnessing diversity and optimizing diversity through data."  “We call this the holistic approach to solving rated diversity,” he said.

In 1986 the military's highest priority was warfighting, and our selection and training reflected that goal.  By contrast, today’s military has become a tool of domestic politics.  The top generals and admirals know that "diversity" is the top priority.  Winning wars is far down on the list.

In the corporate world, making diversity your top priority, at the expense of competence, may cost a company a billion dollars--which of course can be cleverly blamed on some other cause.  But in the combat units of our military, incompetence gets Americans killed.  

Top Gun was not a deep film.  It was a story about the excellence of top pilots.  As such it was an archetype that American boys yearned to be for generations, throughout our golden age.

In 1986 most of America celebrated masculinity, skill and excellence.  Now America's "elites" sneer at all three.  In today’s America masculinity is considered toxic.  Top military think-tanks release reports denouncing “toxic masculine culture" in the service.  The accolade "excellence" is reserved for athletes.

Back in 1986 the U.S. military wanted the best and the most skilled war-fighters.  Today’s military--bowing to its political masters--publishes papers about “systemic bias” and the merits of “cognitive diversity” in military units.

In combat, sacrificing skill and top competence for "dieversity" will get Americans killed..