America’s Castrated Generals and Cuckolded ‘Experts’

If Donald J. Trump is re-elected to a second term as president, will that victory finally be enough to break the back of a military and policy “elite” who have surrendered to the anti-American mobs and the Democratic Party who made them possible?

By Sebastian Gorka, AM GREATNESS June 22, 2020

Who does our military serve? Are they subordinated to some ineffable “conventional wisdom” about justice and racial harmony? Do they march to the beat of a “politically correct” agenda defined by the organizations like Black Lives Matter, Antifa, or to the nostrums of ivy league grandees? Are their concepts of operations inspected and approved for their “egalitarian” content by CNN and the New York Times? Or are they under the command of the citizen America elects to hold the rank of their commander-in-chief?

Do we still have civilian control over the military in America and are our services still loyal to the Constitution? Or have our generals and admirals decided to mutiny in favor of those who hate the “deplorables” and Donald Trump, the man Americans chose to lead our country and command our military?

Since scores of cities have seen violence in the wake of the killing of George Floyd, the actions of several active duty and retired senior officers indicate we have a real crisis within the most powerful military superstructure mankind has ever seen. Something must be done about that crisis now.

George Floyd should be alive today and there is no reasonable justification for how he was killed at the hands of the Minneapolis police. While he had an extensive and violent criminal record, the manner of his arrest and subsequent death rightly have led to criminal charges against the officers involved. But the violence that has erupted across scores of cities since his arrest have nothing to do with Floyd or how much black lives matter.

As sober observers of all pigmentations have noted again and again, exactly nine unarmed black men were shot and killed last year at the hands of American police. Nine out of a population of 330 million, in a nation with 17,000 police agencies and more than 600,000 sworn peace officers. Twice that number were killed in one day in Chicago recently, without one Black Lives Matter protest. At the same time, were there in fact “systemic racism” among our police forces, it seems that that racism is against caucasian suspects, who are twice as likely to be shot than black suspects.

America is not a racist nation. In fact, we are the only country to have gone to war with itself over the issue of racism in a war that killed more than all our casualties in World War I, World War II, and Vietnam combined. Yes, America does have racists. All countries do, just as they all have murderers, thieves, and fraudsters. But for more than two generations America’s institutions have made it illegal to be racist and to systematically discriminate on that basis, such that our 44th president was of mixed race, with a white mother and black African father. That doesn’t happen in a racist country.

Systematically racist nations to still exist—just try apply for a white-collar job in Marseilles with a North African or Muslim name, or apply for a position of importance in the British Labour Party as a Jew, or try and buy property in the Philippines if you’re not a Filipino—but America is not one of them.

Yet the most senior U.S. naval officer, Michael M. Gilday, a man in charge of a dozen nuclear aircraft carriers, 60 submarines, 300 ships and our plans to wage war with China, Iran, or Russia, saw fit to record a five-minute “Message to Fleet” video wearing full combats and decrying institutional racism in America and her Navy.

At the same time, in his commencement speech to the highest institution of military education, National Defense University—where, for full disclosure, I taught for five-and-a-half years—our highest-ranking officer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley, felt compelled to make an apology. He apologized not because the Army has been found to have fallen short in its combat readiness, or because of a failure to provide the requisite support to the president, his only boss, but because Milley says he shouldn’t have been photographed with the president in public.

What was the egregious sin committed by the general in his own estimation? Was he photographed in blackface or wearing a Klan hood like the Democratic governor of Virginia? Was he caught trying to grope a sleeping female journalist like Democratic Senator Al Franken? Neither. He simply stood next to his commander outside the D.C. church, located one block from the White House, that anarchist rioters had tried to burn down, after the area had been cleared by the U.S. Park Police using smoke grenades and pepper spray. Let me repeat that: smoke and pepper spray. Not machine guns and bayonets.

For just a moment, before we move on to the fundamental issue of how Admiral Gilday’s and General Milley’s actions make a mockery of their military and constitutional duties, not to mention the utterly cowardly and disgraceful behavior of General Jim Mattis, former Marine and secretary of defense to President Trump, let me ask you a disturbing question: How do our enemies look at America after Gilday’s pandering to BLM talking points and Milley’s apology for having been seen to support the restoration of order on the streets of the nation’s capital?

Do the People’s Liberation Army of China and the Communist Party it serves see us as capable of countering their remilitarization of the Asia Pacific region? Does the obeisance to radicals of our highest-ranking officers make the mullahs feel better about their plans to attack our forces or set down the Straits of Hormuz? And is Vladimir Putin, the hard-bitten, erstwhile KGB officer impressed by the highest representatives of the U.S. military genuflecting at the altar of political correctness run amok?

So why have almost 20 Americans been killed on America’s streets since George Floyd’s death? Why have hundreds of millions of dollars worth of damage been done to hundreds and hundreds of businesses, many of them minority-owned? And how has Washington state so lost control of its territory that Seattle now has an “autonomous zone” patrolled by armed anarchists as the Democratic governor laughs about it all?

Quite simply because the “long march through the institutions” by those who replaced dreams of Communist revolution with cultural Marxism has borne fruit. The Alinskyite strategy to eschew a frontal assault on Western values and American culture and traditions and replace it with subversion from the inside of established institutions such as the news media, Hollywood, and our schools, actually worked.

Andrew Breitbart was right, politics is downstream from culture, but so is the U.S. military and the incestuous clique of talking heads who constitute the “expert” policy class in Washington, D.C., and thanks to Mattis, Milley, and Gilday, the depth of their corruption is finally clear for all to see.

In truth, their utter failure and moral bankruptcy should have been obvious for all to see.

Just choose any significant policy decision from the last 50 years. From Kissinger convincing President Nixon that it would be good for America to normalize relations with Communist China, to economic “experts” justifying the export of American manufacturing jobs overseas because, well, stuff would be cheaper. From criminally naïve neoconservatives telling George W. Bush that if we invaded Iraq, American troops would be welcomed as “liberators,” to Obama’s A Team deciding that releasing $140 billion dollars to a theocratic regime that wishes America dead would “balance” the Middle East, there is nary a decision that this fetid city made that actually served the people of America.

All of this explains why we chose a non-politician for president in 2016. Now the question is: if Donald J. Trump is reelected to a second term as president, will that victory finally be enough to break the back of a military and policy “elite” who have surrendered to the anti-American mobs and the Democratic Party who made them possible? First we need to get him reelected.

July 8, 2020 | 2 Comments »

Leave a Reply

2 Comments / 2 Comments

  1. Phrase was coined by Rudi Dutschke in 1967 under the influence of Gramsci, mostly, not Alinsky who was more of a tactician than strategist.

    “The long march through the institutions (German: der lange Marsch durch die Institutionen) is a slogan coined by Communist student activist Rudi Dutschke circa 1967[citation needed] to describe his strategy for establishing the conditions for revolution: subverting society by infiltrating institutions such as the professions. The phrase “long march” is a reference to the prolonged struggle of the Chinese communists, which included a physical Long March of their army across China.[1].

    The main influence on Dutschke’s thinking is commonly thought to be the work of Italian communist Antonio Gramsci who, while imprisoned by Mussolini, wrote about cultural hegemony and the need for a “war of position” to establish the conditions for a revolutionary “war of maneuver”.[2] Degroot also identifies Ernst Bloch as a major influence.[3] Bloch met Dutschke at Bad Boll in 1968 and admired his integrity and determination, qualities that he had written about in ‘The Principle of Hope’ (Das Prinzip Hoffnung) as being essential for the achievement of utopia.[3]

    Herbert Marcuse corresponded with Dutschke in 1971 to agree with this strategy, “Let me tell you this: that I regard your notion of the ‘long march through the institutions’ as the only effective way…”[4] In his 1972 book, Counterrevolution and Revolt, Marcuse wrote:[5]

    To extend the base of the student movement, Rudi Dutschke has proposed the strategy of the long march through the institutions: working against the established institutions while working within them, but not simply by ‘boring from within’, rather by ‘doing the job’, learning (how to program and read computers, how to teach at all levels of education, how to use the mass media, how to organize production, how to recognize and eschew planned obsolescence, how to design, et cetera), and at the same time preserving one’s own consciousness in working with others.
    The long march includes the concerted effort to build up counterinstitutions. They have long been an aim of the movement,but the lack of funds was greatly responsible for their weakness and their inferior quality. They must be made competitive. This is especially important for the development of radical, “free” media. The fact that the radical Left has no equal access to the great chains of information and indoctrination is largely responsible for its isolation.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_march_through_the_institutions

    “Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) was an American community activist and political theorist. His work through the Chicago-based Industrial Areas Foundation helping poor communities organize to press demands upon landlords, politicians and business leaders won him national recognition and notoriety. Responding to the impatience of a New Left generation of activists in the 1960s, in his widely cited Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer (1971) Alinsky defended the arts both of confrontation and of compromise involved in community organizing as keys to the struggle for social justice…”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky

  2. 2nd to last paragraph makes no sense. He thinks Kissinger and Bush were the product of the long march through the institutions? Why? How? Otherwise, good article.