They Live. The Marxist-rooted CRT/DEI/Woke ideology inculcated into people doesn’t just go away. Here’s a former full West Point professor who taught in the Department of Social Sciences touting the need to focus on people’s identity and race in the military. This ideology divides people and harms unit cohesion. What kind of mindset was he passing along to WP cadets while he was there? Whatever he had taught has been taken down on the WP website.
Here’s his response to another West Point grad’s letter to the Wall Street Journal (There Are No Race Theorists in Foxholes), then read the comments on the letter, which shows he just doesn’t get it (but the people do).
The Military Needs Race Theorists in Foxholes
When identity is ignored, readiness suffers. When race is dismissed, strategy weakens.
In “There Are No Race Theorists in Foxholes” (op-ed, May 15), Doug Philippone suggests that integrating race theory into military education undermines the moral and strategic foundations of our armed forces. As a former West Point faculty member and combat soldier, I respectfully disagree.
Understanding social dynamics in combat, including race and identity, is necessary for effective leadership and unit cohesion. Such knowledge also equips leaders with the tools to navigate the cultural landscapes of the regions in which they operate. In conflicts where winning hearts and minds is as crucial as tactical victories, cultural competence is an asset.
This isn’t merely philosophical. In his book “Divided Armies,” Dartmouth Prof. Jason Lyall provides empirical proof that how a military treats its own—especially along ethnic, racial and identity lines—is a key determinant of whether it prevails or falters in war. Put plainly: When identity is ignored, readiness suffers. When race is dismissed, strategy weakens.
It’s worth asking, then, whether we’ve had too few race theorists in foxholes. Perhaps the reason America has struggled in combat is that we have underestimated the role of identity-centered understanding in military operations. If we had more culture theorists in command and fewer who know only about doctrine and firepower, perhaps we’d have fewer foxholes and a more durable peace to show for it.
Mr. Philippone’s call for a return to “serious moral instruction” is important. Yet morality must encompass an understanding of justice, equality and the lived experiences of all service members. Dismissing race theory as ideology ignores its practical applications in fostering inclusive and effective leadership.
Col. Isaiah Wilson III USA (Ret.)
Comments on the article:
“Absolute BS, no racial or cultural divisions into groups and categories should be tolerated in the military. To form a cohesive unit, the only acknowledged color should be green (maybe blue for the navy). We’re all one force, not an amalgamation of intersectionality.”
“Racial discrimination is evil, immoral, and in this country, illegal no matter who practices it. Likewise “race theory.” It has no place at all anywhere. Happily the racist Col. Wilson is retired and out of West Point.”
“Never so happy to see (Ret.) at the end of a title.”
“I served for just shy of 24 years and I couldn’t disagree more with the author. Our teams worked together just fine without all of the race baiting junk being pushed down our throats. If you were a good team member and proficient at your job you were welcomed and embraced. If your were lazy or incompetent your were isolated regardless of your race. Prior to retirement in 2023 we would be required to do survey after survey trying to get us to say how racist everyone was. That’s the stuff that separates teams!”
“Race blindness is essential for fair treatment and unit cohesion. This letter is delusional.”
“The only cultural theorist officers the U.S. military needs are those who specialize in our adversaries. The U.S. military automatically always sets and adapts its own culture quite well, and has done so without any assistance for 250 years.”
(From STARRS President Ron Scott): “Data can be very deceiving. Rigorous data analysis first requires good questions. The data collected or generated in response to the questions must be relevant to the questions and then normalized for rigorous analysis. There is no rigor evident in the book. The author obviously had a worldview on the subject and attempted to “cook the books” to “appear” to provide empirical evidence to support it. Here is an analysis of the data used by the author: Appraisal of Project Mars and the Divided Armies Argument | International Studies Quarterly | Oxford Academic”
“Every Marine is green.”
“Jerry Kramer famously said of Vince Lombardi, ‘He treats us all the same, like dogs.’ Coach’s record speaks for itself.”
“Put the best guy in the foxhole. Nothing else matters.”
“The racial theories the Left seeks to promote cause divisiveness, not cohesion, and, unfortunately, that is their purpose.”
“I thought the idea of crafting any group is first to rid all members of outside identity and focus a unified identity to accomplish a goal. All rowers pulling in the same direction at the same time.”
“No one needs race theorists.”
“The author conflates the need to understand social dynamics, important to effective leadership, with his support for indoctrination in divisive identity-based ideology (harmful and unnecessary). He also (inaccurately IMO) refers to the US military’s recent “struggles in combat.” In reality, our military has consistently achieved overwhelming success and won battles at the tactical level, that of the foxhole to which the author refers. Any struggles we may have faced have been at the level of senior leadership, both military and civilian, in terms of the failure to set clear objectives for military intervention, effective strategy to achieve those objectives as well as a clear exit. Look in the mirror, colonel.”
“32 years active and reserve. Germany, DS, Bosnia Afghanistan, Iraq. The good, the bad and the ugly. White, black, Asian etc, male, female. Did not need any “training” despite the repetitive “classes”over and over again. I never cared. Just preferred the good. Accomplish the mission. Period.”
“So emphasizing racial differences enhances unit cohesion? Sorry Colonel, but I am glad you are no longer teaching at West Point.”
“The difference of race, gender or ethnicity does not necessitate difference in thought or behavior. Almost all of the Cultural Diversity teaching and policy takes this lazy approach to equate the two.”
“A person who self-identifies as a “thought leader” in their LinkedIn profile is typically a legend in their own mind and rarely worthy of emulation. This letter is a perfect example of the principle.”
“We all have “lived experiences.” The most important one is the immediate experience of working with the other members of your unit to the common goals of unit readiness and combat effectiveness.”
“Thank goodness, you are retired.”
“Dead wrong. The only identity in a foxhole should be brother in arms.”
“It’s no surprise that even a combat veteran with a PhD can fall for the trappings of the woke mind virus. Yes, cultural awareness has its place—but leadership is built on trust, mission, and performance, not academic theory. Troops don’t bond over identity seminars. They bond through shared hardship, discipline, and the urgency of the mission. Injecting race-centric frameworks into military training risks turning leadership into a maze of sensitivities instead of a model of strength and clarity. The military exists to win wars—not to navigate ideological debates. Real cohesion comes from unity of purpose, not from dividing soldiers by race or ideology. When we prioritize theory over readiness, we put lives—and victory—at risk. Sincerely, RT Poore, Colonel and Combat Vet (Ret)”
“Wow! It’s a good thing for our country that this Col. is retired.”
“Almost without exception, every comment I’ve read so far rejects the letter writer’s thesis as nonsense.”
“Another wake-up call to get rid of this type of thinking in our military and government.”
“I have to fall back on what the Chief Justice of the United States, Roberts: “the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” I spent a career as a combat arms soldier, most of it at and below battalion level. I was in Korea when I saw a Division where the leadership was so obsessed with race that it could not function. Race should play no part in training or leading soldiers, period. They are all OD Green.”
“I went to the US Air Force Academy and my classmates were fellow warriors with the same goals….to fly and fight and don’t you forget it. I was an “exchange” student to West Point for a semester and they were even more gung ho. Everyone knew the core mission of infantry is to engage and defeat the enemy in direct ground combat. This is achieved through a combination of fire and maneuver, allowing infantry to close with and destroy the enemy. Now that was way back in the 70’s when the earth was cooling and dinosaurs ruled the world…..Thankfully before Col. Isaiah Wilson III USA (Ret.) was there.”
“For perspective, are we better off having our troops led by West Point graduates or by Columbia University graduates? There are differences in what is taught at the two institutions and reasons for it.”
“”If we had more culture theorists in command and fewer who know only about doctrine and firepower,” Are you kidding me? That statement is an embarrassment. Soldiers aren’t supposed to be diplomats; they are supposed to be warriors. Furthermore, identity is not being ignored, and race is not being dismissed. That’s hyperbole. The only color that matters in a foxhole is the olive drab of your uniform. The only identity that matters in a foxhole is the flag on your uniform.”
“Check all the boxes, end up in a box!”
“[….Understanding social dynamics in combat, including race and identity….] I was boots on the ground in the Vietnam war and worked with and around Filipinos, Hispanics, blacks, civilians and who knows what. The uniformed services has an important word: Uniform. We were all the same with the same basic mission to our country. In Basic Training our DI didn’t discriminate – he hated all of us equally (for a few weeks.)”
“Good thing this guy is retired. DEI under any name has proven to be divisive everywhere it’s been implemented, and promoting it in a profession where cohesion is literally a matter of life and death can’t be good for anyone.”
“As a former Army officer, Corporate Leader, and now Entrepreneur, I select people to lead my teams based on their character and abilities to accomplish the mission at hand, not their race or skin color or sex.”
“When the boys landing on Omaha Beach were fighting for their lives, they weren’t thinking about “an understanding of justice, equality and the lived experiences”.”
“All I can say, Col. Wilson, is that I am certainly relieved that you are retired. Your opinions on race and identity are precisely what the military does not need.”
West Point Cadet Projects: Deconstructing Patriotism and Cross-Dressing in the Military
Leave a Comment