The Diminishment of Seriousness in Military Discourse

In an age where the grand, somber tasks of national security and defense policy should dominate our discourse, we are instead treated to performative declarations about "alpha males" and drag queens. The recent remarks by Virginia’s Republican Senate candidate, Hung Cao, about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in the military are emblematic of a broader problem: the trivialization of serious issues in favor of cultural skirmishes designed to energize the partisan base. This is not politics in the sense that Lincoln or Churchill would recognize; it is theatrics, divorced from the true complexities of national defense.

Cao, a retired Navy captain, demonstrated during a debate with Democratic Senator Tim Kaine that his concern for the military's readiness centers less on logistical or strategic deficiencies and more on the supposed cultural rot imposed by drag queens and DEI programs. His hyperbole about “alpha males and alpha females who are going to rip out their own guts, eat ’em, and ask for seconds” is not merely absurd—it reveals a mindset fixated on machismo rather than thoughtful consideration of what military readiness truly entails.

Yes, the armed forces face a recruitment crisis. But to lay this entirely at the feet of progressive social initiatives like DEI is to ignore the myriad factors contributing to the issue. Kaine, in his rebuttal, rightly called DEI “a red herring,” pointing to other, more salient factors like the failure to adequately promote the real benefits of military service. Meanwhile, Cao clings to the notion that military readiness is primarily a matter of attitude, of cultivating warriors who can endure unimaginable physical trials. But wars are not won on the strength of posturing and bravado alone. They are won by a disciplined, well-equipped, and intellectually engaged military—one that understands both the tactical and moral dimensions of warfare.

Cao’s claim that "when you’re using a drag queen to recruit for the Navy, that’s not the people we want" is a statement that would be risible were it not so emblematic of the hollow sensationalism that now dominates much of our political rhetoric. To suggest that the presence of drag queens in recruitment materials is somehow indicative of a broader military collapse is to ignore history. The U.S. military, which survived the integration of African Americans and the inclusion of women in combat roles, is capable of withstanding recruitment campaigns that reflect the diversity of the country it defends.

Indeed, Cao’s argument smacks of nostalgia for an imagined past—one where the military was supposedly a bastion of hyper-masculine warriors, untainted by the supposed frailties of inclusivity. It is the same rhetoric that has, in recent years, demonized transgender service members and turned military institutions into battlegrounds for culture wars. Yet it is worth remembering that military service in a democracy is not confined to any one race, gender, or sexual orientation. The strength of our armed forces lies in their ability to reflect the very diversity of the nation they protect.

Cao’s critique also ignores more concrete challenges facing the military. The Pentagon has acknowledged that a significant portion of its enlisted personnel rely on food stamps to make ends meet. Is this not a far greater threat to military morale and readiness than the presence of DEI initiatives? Is the true crisis not that we ask our young men and women to risk their lives while failing to ensure that they can afford basic necessities? A military preoccupied with survival at home cannot be expected to project strength abroad.

Moreover, the focus on DEI as the root cause of recruitment woes overlooks the growing disconnect between the military and the broader population. Military service is increasingly concentrated in certain geographic areas and among certain socio-economic groups, leaving vast swaths of the country with little personal connection to the armed forces. This, more than drag queens or critical race theory, explains why recruitment numbers are down. The solution lies not in dismantling DEI but in better educating the public on the full spectrum of opportunities and benefits that military service provides.

This is not to say that DEI initiatives should escape scrutiny. Any program, especially one as important as fostering inclusivity, must be subject to rigorous evaluation. But to suggest, as Cao does, that these initiatives are singularly responsible for the military’s challenges is to engage in political theater. The stakes are too high for that.

Hung Cao’s remarks are a symptom of a broader malaise in our political culture. We are witnessing the erosion of serious discourse, replaced by the trivial and the sensational. National defense is too important to be left to the cultural commentators who masquerade as statesmen. If we are to meet the real challenges of the 21st century, we must return to the virtues that once characterized our political life: sobriety, seriousness, and an unwavering commitment to reality. The nation deserves better than rhetorical performances about "alpha males." It deserves leadership grounded in wisdom and fact.