USAFA Grad: Disillusioned with the Direction of the Academy

By Lt. General Rod Bishop, USAF ret, USAFA ’74
STARRS Chairman of the Board

Recent email sent to General Bishop:

“I am a strong supporter/donator to STARRS and receive their weekly updates. Additionally, I saw a letter you wrote to Lt Gen (Ret) Gould and I strongly support your position against CRT/DEI and other issues that are seriously damaging not only our Academies, but also our combat capability.

Sadly, it appears our AOG either condones this direction or is just plain oblivious to this dangerous path.

I also follow Tom Fitton at Judicial Watch and noticed that USAFA has stonewalled his request for information regarding CRT being taught to cadets.

I am a very proud USAFA grad, but have become very disillusioned with the direction of the Academy since my 40th reunion back in 2019.

For example, at the gathering for several Prep School classes, the commander stated that they predominantly accept 3 groups of candidates: athletes (redshirt football players), minorities, and prior enlisted.

Then he added that, all you white guys would not get in today and would have to find another option.

The next day the Superintendent made clear that he wanted a cadet wing that was close to 100% of the makeup of the US population and that within a generation white males would not be the majority in the country.

Worse, back in 2020, Coach Calhoun and his coaching staff produced a sickening video in support of Black Lives Matter, unbeknownst to them that organization has Marxist ideology and its goal is the collapse of our capitalist economic system.

It’s also depressing that the service academies were exempt from the Students for fair Admissions Supreme Court Decision. Therefore, they can use race as a criteria for a coveted appointment to federal service academy.

BTW last Fall, I met with a representative from the Endowment who was visiting XXXX. I’ve been a generous donor to the AOG/Endowment and I knew this was about fundraising. After small talk, and when things turned to $$$, I unfortunately told her that my days of giving were on hold as a result of the Academy’s turn from its core values.

Just like billionaires are shying away from donating to their Ivy league Alma Maters, the same has to happen amongst USAFA graduates in order to make a similar statement.

Hi Mark, I imagine you get some emails like this one–I get many. A reason for our AOG to assist in the education mission we spoke about this past week. I think we both would like to NOT receive emails like this.

Perhaps more minds could be brought to a better understanding if we as a nation of Americans (first and foremost) stopped talking past one another on the issue of DEI?

Three simple things for all of us to understand:

1. CRT/DEI is rooted in Marxism with an intent to divide. ( If it comes from someplace other than the Frankfurt school (formerly called the “Marxist School’)–then please let everyone know where.) Given overwhelming reports from those experiencing the “training,” the goal of the intent to divide is more than being met.

2. No military leader worth his or her salt is against what the words “diversity and inclusion” mean on the surface. The issue though here is–although DEI are nice sounding words–today they are a metaphor for a powerful ideological movement bent on “recategorizing every American, not by his or her self worth or as an individual worthy of equal rights and dignity because of his/her humanity first and foremost, but instead nothing but an avatar of a particular identity group.”

3. It is not “Diversity and Inclusion” that are objectionable–it is the how (methods), the overkill (obsession on race), the diminishment of meritocracy, the blatant discrimination, etc that make it, we are told– demoralizing, divisive and demeaning.

Ample/overwhelming evidence exists to make each one of the statements above be grounded in truth–in other words, each one is easily provable.

We should not shy away from speaking and communicating the truth –much better than sharing opinions grounded in conjecture instead of facts.

So in the interest of furthering the purpose of our AOG as stated in our articles of incorporation–i.e., “promotion of a professional dialogue among its members,” would you considering using your instruments of communication to grads to move the conversation towards more ground truth instead of opinion grounded in conjecture ? Seems to be “truth” is more “professional” than “conjecture.”

Thanks, Rod

PS: As an example of the divisiveness being caused, cadets tell us overwhelmingly that they don’t like the DEI officers and NCO (purple rope wearers). Many consider them “spies.”

Here is what one parent sent me yesterday in an email after hosting a DEI “officer” in his home.

“(T)he Purple Epaulet Firstie explained that being DEI Officer “empowered” him to report other cadets using improper pronouns, or other offensive language or actions (deemed by DEI guidelines) to his superiors in DEI chain of command that was separate from Commandant and other regular chain of command. He was shielded from any pushback by cadets.”

Guess I would consider him a spy as well (not to mention that the whole idea seems to be a dilution of the responsibilities of “command.”).

No wonder many call them “political commissars.”

Top featured photo: Cadets attend a recent “Silver Wings Rated Diversity and Inclusion Event” at USAFA

Cadets pose for a photo after graduating from the Cadet Wing Diversity and Inclusion Program this summer, allowing them to advise students on diversity at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Each cadet wears a purple rope across their left shoulder symbolizing their position as a diversity representative. (U.S. Air Force Academy photo and caption)