When President Trump dismissed several high-ranking military officers earlier this year, the media immediately reached for its favorite narrative. Once again, we were told that noble, apolitical “guardians of democracy” were being purged by a reckless administration bent on politicizing the armed forces. But that story collapses under scrutiny. The truth is simpler and more uncomfortable for the Washington establishment. These generals and admirals had already politicized the military. Their embrace of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) ideology did more to weaken our armed forces than any enemy, foreign or domestic. Their removal was not partisan retribution; it was long-overdue accountability.
Take General Charles Q. “C.Q.” Brown, the recently dismissed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Brown made headlines for reasons that had little to do with combat readiness and everything to do with cultural politics. In his now-infamous memo to Air Force leaders, Brown ordered “purposeful D and I training” and mandated “diversity in recruiting and hiring practices.” He openly declared in an interview that the service needed to “break up the white boys’ club,” and in a 2022 memo, he pressed for explicit racial and gender quotas in promotion and selection processes. He spoke often about “managing diverse populations,” as if the Air Force were a corporate HR department rather than a warfighting force.
Admiral Alvin Holsey followed the same playbook. As commander of U.S. Southern Command, Holsey proudly led the Navy’s “Task Force One,” a group that promoted DEIA initiatives across the fleet. The task force’s report called for tracking sailors’ race and gender during disciplinary actions, ensuring “diverse” promotion boards, and even assigning race-based reviewers to personnel files. Holsey later tried to distance himself from the report, claiming he never asked to lead the effort. But by then, the damage was done. He left his command position for other reasons, but the message to sailors is clear: identity politics, not merit, was the Navy’s new compass.
Lieutenant General Joseph Berger III, formerly the Army’s Judge Advocate General, took a similar approach. From his perch in the Pentagon, Berger pushed for a new DEI office inside the Army’s Office of Professional and Organizational Development, framing racial and gender representation as a “readiness” issue. He authored articles urging impactful change through “diversity and inclusion,” promoting ideology rather than mission.
Vice Admiral Shoshana Chatfield, the Navy’s representative to NATO, was even more explicit. She told audiences that “misinformation” – not China, Russia, or terrorism – was the greatest threat to global security. Her social media presence read like a DEI consultant’s résumé: “Talks about #navalaviation and #DEI.” She proudly promoted “ALLY-ship” conferences and gender- based leadership panels at the Naval War College. These were not apolitical officers. They were political advocates cloaked in uniform.
For decades, the military’s strength has rested on a simple promise: that merit and mission come before everything else. The best person for the job, period. But under these DEI evangelists, that principle was replaced with bureaucratic social engineering. DEI ideology teaches that equality of outcome, not excellence, is the highest good. That worldview may be popular in corporate America, but in the armed forces, it is poison. It undermines discipline, corrodes morale, and divides troops by race, gender, and ideology, the exact opposite of what warfighting demands. Our enemies are watching. They saw a Pentagon more concerned with pronoun policies than precision strike capabilities. They saw admirals lecturing about “representation” while China launches hypersonic missiles and Iran arms proxies across the Middle East.
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth understood this from day one. His doctrine for the Department of War is clear: restore merit, readiness, and warfighting focus. That means rooting out the political rot that DEI ideologues have embedded inside the ranks. Holding senior leaders accountable is not “purging dissent.” It’s restoring professionalism. These officers weren’t fired for their politics. They were fired for letting politics consume the profession of arms. The American people don’t expect the military to be woke. They expect it to be lethal. And under Hegseth’s leadership, it’s finally on that path again.
The media wants to pretend that these dismissals mark the “politicization” of the military. In truth, they mark its depoliticization. The uniform should never be a platform for the left. It’s a symbol of sacrifice, unity, and mission above self. For too long, the Pentagon’s top brass forgot that. They traded the warrior ethos for the language of human resources. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth are right to remind them, and the country, what the military is actually for: winning wars, not diversity awards.
