Rear Admiral Gaouette, former JOHN C STENNIS Strike Group Command was relieved of his command for a number of reasons, including: "...he spoke in a manner that tended to diminish confidence in or respect due to three other
admirals."
Thankfully, to our knowledge, no one else has spoken in a manner which might tend to diminish the confidence in or respect due to our Flag officers. Whew!
12 comments:
"Watch your conversations´- Are you advising that we should ensure that we can trust those that may witness our racist or demeaning discussions?
I am saying sometimes we tend to criticize our seniors without regard for the nature/basis of that criticism or who that conversation is with. The RDML was clearly wrong in his criticism and sharing it with his subordinates (whether informally or otherwise). We've all heard the conversations, "He/she only got promoted because..." I recommend against all such conversations.
I think one of the frightening things is that one or more of our Flag officers think this way. I would bet there are many more racists like him among that group. They are just keeping their opinions to themselves.
Snitch culture. Over a full career, I served under many superb senior officers, combat tested, tried and true, of various race and gender. They ALL had character flaws, or values that I might not have agreed with, personally. However, I never considered it my bounden duty to report on them like a good little commissar. Some people are simply disloyal snivelers.
One man's snitch culture is another man's integrity culture. Navy needs to decide what it values.
I value personal loyalty, physical and moral courage, and excellent professional relationships between juniors and seniors. I do not value PC culture which is selectively enforced (most vigorously against heterosexual white men), rewards snitching, backstabbing, double standards for protected groups, and "party" loyalty above personal loyalty. The term "integrity culture" here obfuscates the pathetic act of betraying the boss because he said bad words. According to the NYT, the complaint was filed by CO Stennis, Captain Ronald Reis, after he was admonished by Admiral G. for shoddy ship handling in the Malacca Strait. Apparently, the Captain didn't feel aggrieved until after he had been corrected. The rat who also can't drive a ship remains in command, while the Admiral who corrected a subordinate on a professional matter, and allegedly said bad words does not. The whole episode seems so ludicrous as to be unlikely. It makes me wonder what really happened.
Hold on. Everybody is a racist. Some just aren't in flavor right now. One is no longer supposed to act or behave like a racist cracker in public. That's for losers.
I don't know and never will know what happened but it gives JO's hope for a glorious future in the navy knowing that any time you open your stupid little mouth some sensitive little soul will doom your career on the alter of political correct enoughness. Or is that enoughtitude?
Wait, everyone is a racist? Don't believe that for one minute and as a leader in this great Navy we have the privilege of serving in, if you truly feel that way you shoud find employment somewhere that tolerates that sort of thinking and or behavior (and I wish you the best of luck). Certainly not trying to espouse that there are not racists in the military, or those who have exteme views. There are those out there, and I would hope there are many, who believe in tolerance vice racism and as a leader we should promote that sentiment vice seeking out the alternate.
Only the anonymous are racists. All the rest use their names. Racist!
The exact definition of racism is controversial both because there is little scholarly agreement about the meaning of the concept "race", and because there is also little agreement about what does and doesn't constitute discrimination. Critics argue that the term is applied differentially, with a focus on such prejudices by whites, and defining mere observations of racial differences as racism. Some definitions would have it that any assumption that a person's behavior would be influenced by their racial categorization is racist, regardless of whether the action is intentionally harmful or pejorative. Other definitions only include consciously malignant forms of discrimination.
Yes, racism still exists (and will at some level forever - fact of life). The problem with the way the Navy approaches diversity actually helps create a false appearance of affirmative action-type activities.
There are many, many Navy stories out there and most are about great Sailors doing great things. However, take one look at the Navy Office of Diversity and Inclusion Facebook Page and/or NPS site. There you will find stories that focus only on non-whites and women. Why is that? Why does our Diversity and Inclusion office focus only on a Sailor's race and/or gender and exclude any recognition of white male Sailors? I'm sure there are plenty of Sailors who happen to be white and male who bring very diverse characteristics and attributes to our Navy. Unfortunately, they are institutionally ignored and excluded from recognition afforded to others. That's racism/sexism, pure and simple.
Also, why devolve the accomplishments of these ‘diverse’ Sailors down to their gender and/or race? Isn’t it a bit insulting to have your personal achievements overshadowed by the Navy’s focus on your skin color or gender? Doesn’t it de-value your individual accomplishment?
It's my opinion that these sorts of activities actually hurt race relations within the Navy and help foster the beliefs that this RDML communicated to others. When you have the Navy Office of Diversity and Inclusion actively and purposely excluding (through stories and awards) Sailors because of their race and gender, then you're going to make that group feel a little less included and even discriminated against in the Navy and plant the seeds of discontent.
Yes, we've all heard the conversations and typically they are ill-advised. The admiral's comment that the vice admiral's race and sex may have aided “in her speed of selection” to vice admiral could be interpreted simply as him acknowledging the effectiveness of, and her benefitting from, a widely known and reported on navy program designed specifically to speed the promotion of "diversity" officers.
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jul/30/high-seas-segregation/
Text here over at CDR Sal's page.
http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2010/07/diversity-thursday_29.html
The photo and email from RADM G were completely inappropriate and he clearly lost SA.
Post a Comment