Using the War Against Islamist Terrorism to Fight the Culture Wars; A Response to the DOD Stand-Down on Extremism

Copyright by James Carlson

President Elect Donald Trump Nominated Pete Hegseth for the Secretary of Defense

Hegseth is Opposed to Extremism Training in the DOD that is Waging a War on Patriots

During the March 2021 Stand-Down on Extremism, the Department of Defense (DOD) provided many topics for discussion in training materials to military personnel and government civilians to counter what they saw as a radicalization to extremism threat. However, in doing so, they repurposed the tools once use to combat international Islamist terrorism and turned them against Americans domestically whose views diverged from the ideology of the Progressive Left. The tools once used to fight international terrorism are now used in the Culture Wars against American military personnel and civilians alike.

In the definitions provided by the DOD with the Stand-Down on Extremism, Domestic Violent Extremism (DVEs) was identified as being motivated by domestic “social or political” issues rather than by a foreign terrorist organization and ideology. To the flip side, Homegrown Violent Extremism (HVEs) is motivated by a foreign organization’s ideology. Clearly, the Biden administration was focused on social and political ideology while blind to their own. It is clear that the Biden administration turned the war against international terrorism to fight the Culture Wars with a bias for Progressive ideologies. Biden’s activities are not new as they began under the Obama administration when Biden was still Vice President.

When Mr. Obama entered office in 2009, his security team wanted to dismiss any use of the phrase ‘Islamist terrorism’ as it was deemed difficult to separate Islamist from Islam. During the last year of the Bush administration, the war against Islamist terrorism was being reviewed in how to approach Muslim communities with a sensitivity to their civil liberties. It was made clear that the war against Islamist terrorism was not against Islam or Muslims but against a political ideology based upon the religion. This political ideology was radicalized to the extent of using violence to achieve their goals but the Obama administration was not willing to make this narrow distinction. Instead, they recast the war against Islamist terrorism as a fight against the radicalization of people with an ideology to extremist behavior and the war on terrorism was recast as Combating Violent Extremists (CVEs). So the use of CVEs was established as fighting the radicalization of ideology under Mr. Obama and under Mr. Biden, fighting terrorism internationally (HVEs) and domestically  (DVEs) became the norm.

In 2011, the Obama administration rolled out their strategy to fight this new war against radicalization, ideology, and extremism:

Countering Violent Extremist Propaganda While Promoting Our Ideals

Radicalization that leads to violent extremism includes the diffusion of ideologies and narratives that feed on grievances, assign blame, and legitimize the use of violence against those deemed responsible. We must actively and aggressively counter the range of ideologies violent extremists employ to radicalize and recruit individuals by challenging justifications for violence and by actively promoting the unifying and inclusive vision of our American ideals.

Toward this end, we will continue to closely monitor the important role the internet and social networking sites play in advancing violent extremist narratives.

Domestic surveillance was one method by which the Obama administration would incorporate people (Muslim and non-Muslim alike) to monitor individuals with what were dubbed ‘extreme ideologies.’ “If you see something, say something” was another tool that was recast to be used in the fight against terror to inform against a friend or neighbor with supposedly extreme views. While claiming to understand the importance of civil liberties, they were often overlooked in the pursuit of their goals. As the Muslim community saw through this type of activity, can we see through it when it is turned towards domestic activity? Sadly, this effort proved of little value.

The Brennan Institute debunked the idea of radicalization to extremism saying:

While this proposition may have some intuitive appeal, decades of empirical research disproves it. Many people hold views that can be described as “extreme” and never support or commit an act of violence based on those beliefs. And many who commit terrorist violence have little or no attachments to an extreme ideology.

As counterterrorism scholar and former CIA officer Marc Sageman stated, “Despite decades of research, . . . we still do not know what leads people to engage in political violence.” Moreover, ideas that once seemed extreme, such as women’s suffrage and civil rights for all, were necessary drivers of social progress. Suppressing violence is a laudable government goal. Suppressing ideas that don’t meet government approval is not.

Radicalization to extremism was an intuitive idea that had no scientific (re: no data) foundation. People who were radicalized didn’t always have an ideology and people with an ideology, weren’t always radicalized. The effort to use radicalization under CVEs as a means of combatting international terrorism under the Obama administration, however, took a turn under the Biden administration as DVEs and HVEs took over where CVEs left off. This is the launching point from which the government Stand Down on Extremism took place.

In March 2021, under the Biden administration, the DOD ordered a Stand Down for all personnel, military and civilian, to go through training that focused on the administration’s view of radicalization and extremism. This training began with the tacit acceptance of various socio/religio/politico perspectives that were to be accepted by people who largely did not accept them as a part of their own social/religious/political viewpoints. In short, this was an attempt to establish an enforceable narrative against the patriot soldier and civil servant.

It was during this Stand Down that people were order to retake their Oath of Office. This was as unusual as getting Baptized twice (you only need to do it once). The orders were of course followed but what was the point? Here is that Oath of Office:

I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

We are supposed to defend the Constitution, not the flag, of the United States of America. But what if those in power in political office, making people take classes contrary to their cultural world view and contrary to the application of the Constitution (re: progressivism) have in fact become the enemies of the Constitution? You can be sure that the people who took the oath are still committed to it. I’m not so sure about those who use the fight against terrorism as a means to fight the Culture Wars.

What is also interesting to note is the fact that people were reminded to uphold the following 3 things:

1.      The Constitution

2.      The Rule of Law

3.       

4.      Ethics

While there is nothing wrong with what is in this list, there is a problem with what is not in this list. Where is Morality in this list? Clearly, Mr. Biden, who put a cross dresser and a homosexual on his cabinet, had no respect for public morality. So here is an updated list of what I think people should be committed to upholding in their personal lives and professional careers:

1.      The Constitution

2.      The Rule of Law

3.      Morality, and

4.      Ethics

You can be sure that the inclusion of morals in a commitment to serve our country will be met with fierce opposition (radicalized leftist ideologues). That is because those who are in the White House have abandoned morality as the organic rule of society and government. In short, Progressive Liberals in Washington D.C. have become radicalized. And their Stand Down, although not violent extremism, was extreme enough to put Pete Hegseth on the warpath.

Pete Hegseth, former host on the Fox News Channel, was recently nominated to serve under the Trump administration as the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF). While serving our country as a soldier, he underwent the abuses of the Stand Down and has his own perspective of what happened. Earlier this year (June 2024) he wrote a book exposing the abuses that warriors in our military have faced:

In recent years, certain commanders in chief have used promotions into the general officer ranks to exorcise the perceived racial, gender, and social demons of the past. Quota first, quota often! The sad truth is that abandoning merit-based promotions for social equity advancement only locks in a grievance culture. Hunting for racism, today’s generals create racial strife. Pushing for gender equality, today’s generals weaken unit readiness. Rooting out “extremism,” today’s generals push rank-and-file patriots out of the formations (I’m one of them). Embracing “trans” soldiers, today’s generals walk on their own eggshells—instead of training up warriors. … Starting largely under Obama, and again under Biden, reaching [the general officer] level means a willingness to blindly impose social and political goals, the Constitution be damned. [Hegseth, Pete; The War on Warriors: Behind the Betrayal of the Men Who Keep Us Free; June 2024]

Pete Hegseth has become a champion against the misuse and abuse of the application of the radicalization theory, which in the Stand Down on Extremism, was pitched against warfighters and civilians alike. They were all introduced to the ideologies of WOKE, DEI, LGBTQ, and other left wing social agenda items. It was clear that this Stand Down on Extremism was meant to establish one religious, social, political viewpoint upon everyone working in the DOD. If you were going to move ahead in your career, you had to play ball according to the new rules.

As Mr. Hegseth noted in his book, many generals had imposed the Obama/Biden administrations’ social and political views on personnel under the DOD umbrella. In fact, prior to the Stand Down, 197 flag officers were removed under the Obama administration only to be replaced with more ideologically compliant generals and flag officers. Now, under the Biden administration, this purge is aimed at warfighters and civilians alike within the DOD as a whole.

The long history of the war on terror has undergone changes with the Obama and Biden administrations. As our nation is embroiled in a cultural battle between competing ideologies of religion, society, and governmental norms, we are told to embrace cultural ideologies that we do not share as the tools once used to fight the war against terror are now used to fight opposing views to Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden.

The War on Terror for some in the White House ended a long time ago (Afghanistan, etc.) but Islamist terrorist haven’t gotten the message yet; it’s still there. Instead of CVEs, we have DVEs where domestic terrorism is the focus and people on the wrong side of the isle are the targets of investigation and reprogramming. It will be good day in America when President Trump is sworn into office and Mr. Hegseth becomes our nation’s SECDEF (Secretary of Defense). The warfighter can then return to fight the War on Terror and we can put this social experiment of radicalization to extremism, disproven, behind us.