cnn.com
Pentagon Orders Removal of Books from Military Academies
The Pentagon ordered all US military academies to remove books on race, gender, and other "divisive concepts" by May 21, establishing a committee to review and potentially sequester them; this follows the removal of nearly 400 books from the Naval Academy and a professor's resignation from West Point, reflecting a broader effort to eliminate DEI content within the military.
- What is the immediate impact of the Pentagon's order to remove books on military academy libraries?
- The Pentagon has ordered the removal of books deemed "incompatible" with its mission from military academies' libraries. A committee will review books dealing with race, gender, and related topics, with a May 21 deadline. This follows a broader effort to eliminate "diversity, equity, and inclusion" content across the military.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of this policy on the education, culture, and future leadership within the US military?
- The long-term impact could include a less diverse officer corps, hindered critical thinking skills among cadets, and potential legal challenges. The policy's broad interpretation raises concerns about academic freedom and the potential for future censorship within military education. The resulting limitations on intellectual freedom may influence the long-term development and critical thinking skills of future military leaders.
- How does this book removal policy connect to broader efforts within the Department of Defense to limit diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives?
- This action escalates the Defense Department's efforts to curb DEI content, impacting curriculum and potentially limiting intellectual discourse within military academies. The removal of nearly 400 books from the Naval Academy and a professor's resignation from West Point highlight the policy's sweeping effects and potential chilling effect on academic freedom.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the Pentagon's actions as an escalation of efforts to eliminate "diversity, equity, and inclusion" content, setting a negative tone from the outset. The use of terms like "sequester" and "offending books" further emphasizes the negative aspect of the policy. The inclusion of the professor's resignation and the ACLU lawsuit strengthens the narrative of opposition to the policy.
Language Bias
The article uses loaded language, such as "divisive concepts," which carries a negative connotation and implies inherent harm. Similarly, describing the removed books as "offending" preemptively judges their content. Neutral alternatives could include "controversial topics" or "books on certain social issues." The repeated use of "eliminate" regarding DEI content reinforces a negative framing.
Bias by Omission
The article omits discussion of potential benefits of DEI initiatives in military training and education, and the perspectives of those who support the inclusion of diverse voices and viewpoints in military academies. The lack of counterarguments to the Pentagon's stated justifications could lead readers to believe there is a unanimous agreement on this policy, which might not be the case. The article also omits details on the selection process of the Academic Libraries Committee, raising questions about potential bias in their review process.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the issue as a choice between "divisive concepts" and the military's "core mission." This simplifies a complex issue by suggesting that inclusivity and military readiness are mutually exclusive. The framing ignores the potential for DEI initiatives to enhance morale, recruitment, and understanding of diverse populations.
Gender Bias
While the article mentions gender ideology as a targeted topic, it doesn't delve into specific examples of gender bias in the book selection process or the broader context of gender representation within the military. The focus is predominantly on the policy itself, rather than its gender-specific implications.
Sustainable Development Goals
The Pentagon's removal of books deemed "divisive" from military academies restricts access to diverse perspectives and potentially limits students' critical thinking skills, hindering their education. The actions suppress intellectual freedom and limit the exploration of important social issues, negatively impacting the quality of education.