Ch-ch-ch-changes

The New York Times Shines a Light on the Dark Yard

I realize that DEI proponents will hate this post, and I accept that DEI opponents will find it similarly abhorrent, because what follows is not in pure line with either policy. As readers of this Substack from the beginning know, I have been an unenrolled voter for 30 years who has worked for and contributed to both parties. I call balls and strikes.

Sometimes the umpire isn’t popular with either team.

Last week’s New York Times article on the US Naval Academy bluntly titled “From Book Bans to Canceled Lectures, the Naval Academy is Bending to Trump” – portrays a once-respected institution increasingly paralyzed by its own internal politics. That’s not just an optics problem. It’s a strategic one. Having taught at the Academy for two decades and directed its museum, I witnessed leadership cycles and policy swings as well as… questionable… activities in the leadership ranks. I left last year, but I still get the calls, texts, and emails especially the past few days: What’s happening over there?

The answer is both simple and difficult. The Times article suggests the Academy has lost its ability to stand on principle out of other concerns. People forget it’s a military institution, subject to orders from the chain of command; but it is also responsible for education a next generation of leaders.

The incidents mentioned by the Time include orders and anticipatory actions:

· A lecture by Right Ben-Ghiat cancelled, allegedly because of her criticisms of Trump

· An MIT professor’s visit blocked for failing to “align” with executive orders

· 381 books pulled from the library

· The Naval Academy Foreign Affairs Conference (NAFAC) scrapped over a humanitarian theme

· A Ken Burns documentary on the American Revolution “rescheduled”

· A talk by Ryan Holiday on Stoicism – central to Admiral James Stockdale’s survival in a Vietnamese POW camp – cancelled without explanation

Each decision, taken in isolation might be rationalized or demonstrated to be lacking in rationale depending on a variety of an individual’s policy views.

At the top of the removed books list was Ibram X. Kendi’s “How to be an Antiracist.” As an author, I oppose censorship. I read Kendi, however, because USNA leadership encouraged division heads and others to do so. I found it lacking in academic rigor and occasionally absurd. I disagreed with it. I market it up with many notes and questions. So what? I’m certain some readers don’t like my naval history books or novels. Kendi certainly has sold more copies. But that is not the point. Removing these books won’t stop midshipmen from encountering challenging ideas – good or bad. They will read what they want and how. Those books are still sold at the local bookstores. They are available to order online. But the assumption that mids would read them in their spare time doesn’t consider the schedules to duties such as classes, sports, and extracurricular activities, leaving little time for personal reading. In addition, getting students to read 10-20 pages for each class was tough enough. The reality is that reading is declining. In 2023, only 15 percent of 15- to 17-year-olds reported reading regularly. This generation learns and absorbs information differently.

According to the Times, the order to purge titles mirrored vague guidance at West Point: remove material promoting DEI or critical race theory in ways that “subvert meritocracy.” Librarians – understaffed and caught in the crossfire – probably did what they could. I suspect they did a quick key word search. On a weekend they’re normally minimally-staffed and they probably removed as many as possible. I don’t blame them. It’s classic Admiral Nelson at Trafalgar - you don’t give a half-order and expect full execution. Be clear. This is likely why we saw a disparity in what books were removed and those that were kept. I do know one thing about them during my time there - the library staff from top to bottom were consummate professionals.

Removing books permanently is not unprecedented. I watched library directors remove many books over the years for space concerns on the shelves, lack of use, or relevance based on different eras – all realities of running a library. They would consult with the faculty on what should and shouldn’t remain. This recent removal had nothing to do with those. Removing books about a particular subject won't shield midshipman from ideas. It just shows them we are afraid of ideas, even the ones we don't like or may be wrong.

At the end of my senior year in college, my philosophy professor from whom I was also simultaneously taking a comparative US-USSR humanities course called me into his office:

Prof O: Mr. Berube, I don't understand something. You've got a D going into the final in my Marxist philosophy course but you're an A student in my US-USSR course.

Me: I don't agree with Marxist philosophy.

Prof O: I'm not asking you to agree with it. I'm asking you to understand it.

I pivoted and managed a C+ plus in the course after acing the final. It was a good lesson that I carried with me when I had my own students, especially listening to them and guiding them if needed.

It is also not unprecedented for lectures to be cancelled or rejected. I brought more speakers to USNA classes and the former museum lecture series than I can count – as did other professors. Students could have direct communication with other experts. Only once did I have to disinvite someone when I was on active duty. Erik Prince had agreed to speak to my maritime security class. He had been a Naval Academy midshipman for two years and was at that time head of the most highly visible private security company. I had previously interviewed him for some of my articles and a book. His perspective on private maritime security and Blackwater’s intended ship operations off the Horn of Africa seemed worth hearing especially since midshipman could ask him questions directly. But a tenured faculty member objected, went to the department chair and got it shut down. I lacked seniority, so Prince was out. Around that time, I recommended a widely published military experience professor for a visiting chair position in the department. It was also vetoed. The reason? “I'm not sure we want a conservative here.” Politics in a variety of forms and coercions do occur at the Academy; they shouldn't, but they do. The more than 1700 students from across the nation and the globe I taught were quick to assess what's genuine. You can't BS them whether in the classroom or from the podium.

More troubling than the book removals and lectures in my opinion was the cancellation of NAFAC. That conference gives mids practical experience in planning a large-scale event from logistics to execution. The theme this year was to be the “Constellation of Humanitarian Assistance Persevering Through Conflict.” Why cancel a conference about a proven Navy and Marine Corps mission?

I was one of thousands who served during Operation Unified Assistance after the 2004 tsunami. As it was early in our deployment, some of the same skills we practiced were used when we were subsequently in the Gulf and elsewhere. Probably nearly every officer and sailor in the fleet has participated in at least one HADR mission. Junior officers will conduct HADR missions in their careers. They'll coordinate with international NGOs many of whom originally attend conferences like NAFAC. Planning, logistics, intelligence prep, and command and control, are all essential skills in both combat and disaster response. Exercising the latter can help in the former, and gain goodwill among potential partners.

Collectively the times list of cancellations reflect a culture at the Academy that stopped thinking critically and reacted defensively, fearful of taking a stand lest it offend someone.

Instead of DEI, leave it to “dei.” Instead of institutionalizing dictates to implement or disestablish, leave it to the people actually working directly with midshipmen to voluntarily identify when telling a story or encouraging someone is necessary or appropriate. Here are a few examples of what I tried to do in addition to everything else like teaching them how to win wars through naval history and other classes, wargaming, etc.

- No one directed me to have an exhibit in 2016 called “Ability, Not Gender,” commemorating 40 years of women at the Academy since the 1976 law opened the service academies to women.

- No one prompted me to feature women naval historians as guests when possible on the Preble Hall Naval History podcast compared to two captains who filled the role in my absence or after I left. I was responsible for about 194 episodes; the next two museum directors managed 18 and 25 respectively. Sometimes numbers tell a story:

- In another case, a young alum contacted me about her work as she had left the Navy to become an artist. When I saw her pieces about Academy life, I immediately recognized their collective value. We had nothing like it in the museum's collection by an alum or otherwise about the social life of midshipman. I worked with her on an agreement and we made about 20 pieces part of our permanent collection. I immediately had them exhibited on the second deck, which were popular not only with traditional visitors but every midshipman who was drawn to them, because they told the story of their life. When the then Secretary of the Navy visited, I recommended one or two of her pieces to be displayed in his office at the Pentagon. He did so. Her work deserved that level of visibility. Had her work not been of the high quality it was, however, I would not have pursued the acquisition.

- When one of our museum’s artifacts was being returned from the outgoing vice president's office in 2021 and asked for a replacement “artifact”, I approached the new – and first - black female brigade commander and asked if she'd consider loaning her shoulder boards to Vice President Harris's office. This led to a video meeting between the two and what I consider a win for the midshipmen who will never forget that experience. But we worked with whomever asked, which is why, when asked, I populated the presidential lodge at Camp David with appropriate items during President Trump’s first term.

Those are the differences between DEI and dei by allowing the individual responsible to make sound judgments based on experience. I did the above because I felt it was right and for the benefit of midshipman and others not because it was ordered just as I ordered other historical exhibits. To be honest, if any of these had been directed by whatever authority was in power, I'm not sure if I would have done it or done it in the same way just as I doubt I would have reacted favorably to book and lecture bans.

I certainly did not always do the right things the right way, and I got plenty wrong. But when it came to teaching and encouraging midshipmen, I'd like to think I got far more right than wrong because of the mission and because I had also served. Each of those midshipmen would be at sea or land soon, likely in a combat situation, given most of my time there we were in Iraq and Afghanistan or conducting anti-piracy operations. I did my best, in my small role, to ensure they had the best chance to succeed both in school and in the field. Just as all the other professors did.

The Navy's civilian and military leadership need to trust them as well as the faculty, but they won't because there are far greater influences at play there. That's why I proposed something bolder earlier this year. Severe structural reform is needed in naval education. Let students attend two years at a civilian university and be exposed to the real diversities of geography, economies, philosophies, languages (if in a foreign country) and people and then attend the Academy for two years of specific military education – a finishing school completely devoted to preparing them for warfighting careers.

The Academy's job is not to mirror the winds of Washington; it is to produce leaders of integrity those who can think clearly, act decisively, and uphold their oath even if it costs them something.

The midshipmen see all of this. They're not fooled. They know when leaders waffle. They’re not naïve. They know when their school leaders are being political or are caving to political or financial pressure. They hunger for honesty, not manufactured pre-approved messaging. They are intellectually curious and can't be indoctrinated. They want to be challenged, and they want to challenge (in a respectful manner.)

We need to trust midshipmen to learn.

As David Bowie wrote, “they're quite aware of what they're going through.”