Air Force Colonel faces reckoning for insisting on a racial reckoning

Following the death of George Floyd and the police misconduct that may have caused it, many institutions and entities changed their policies and practices, and in some cases even their name. The mainstream media and the rest of the left called this a “racial reckoning.” I called it racial hysteria.

Whatever its label, the phenomenon was far-reaching and impactful. It affected corporate hiring and promotions, law enforcement, college admissions, K-12 education, government contracting practices, public monuments, etc.

However, the racial reckoning now faces a reckoning of its own. For example, in this post, I discussed how corporations, finally coming to their senses, are pulling back from DEI, perhaps the most noxious feature of the racial reckoning.

Other examples of the reckoning’s reckoning include courts striking down federal racial set-aside programs, as happened here and here. State DEI programs are also now under siege, according to the headline (paper edition) of this Washington Post article.

The racial reckoning’s reckoning also includes encouraging developments on the criminal justice front. For example, this New York Times article reports on new tough-on crime legislation in Louisiana. And even Washington, D.C.’s left-liberal city council has passed what the Washington Post calls a “massive public safety package that puts the liberal city on a track toward harsher punishments for a range of crimes from illegal gun possession to retail theft. . . .”

But what of individuals who succumbed to George Floyd fever? Have they faced a reckoning?

As far as I can tell, they have not. However, here’s an exception:

Five weeks after Floyd’s death, Col. Benjamin Jonsson wrote an article for the Air Force Times called “Dear white colonel … we must address our blind spots around race.” The article consisted mainly of the colonel complaining that during a meeting, his fellow “white colonels” did not share his view that the Air Force discriminates against blacks. He characterized this as “defensiveness.”

The only evidence of discrimination Col. Jonsson cited in his article was that black Airmen are disciplined disproportionately compared to their representation in the service. But he presented no evidence that blacks are disciplined disproportionately to their representation among those who commit disciplinary infractions. Absent such evidence, Jonsson’s fellow colonels were justified in not subscribing to Jonsson’s jaundiced view of their Service.

As a result of Col Jonsson’s attempt at punditry, Sen. Eric Schmitt (Mo). is blocking his promotion to brigadier general. The Washington Post is incensed. Joe Davidson, who writes about federal government issues moans:

Once upon a time in another America, many considered diversity, equity and inclusion fundamental national values, at least nominally.

Now those notions are so reviled in much of America that one senator is threatening the promotion of a highly qualified and praised Air Force officer.

If DEI was once considered a fundamental national value, let’s chalk it off to temporary insanity.

Sen. Schmitt states: “Leaders must emphasize unity of mission and purpose, not our immutable differences if we are to maintain our military as the greatest meritocracy in the world.” William Thibeau, the Claremont Institute’s American Military Project director, agrees: “Col. Jonsson exhibited a toxic embrace of DEI policies that have no place in the U.S. military. His public characterization of ‘white colonels’ blindness is inherently divisive and sends shock waves through his command.”

I think that’s right. I would add that Col Jonsson’s shrill overreaction to George Floyd’s death — the fact that he succumbed to George Floyd hysteria — suggests an unfitness to command, or at least to command as a brigadier general. One would hope for a cooler head at that high level of the military.

Accordingly, I believe there should be a strong presumption against promoting the colonel. Maybe, there’s enough countervailing evidence of leadership qualities to overcome that presumption. I don’t know. But if there isn’t, Col Jonsson shouldn’t be promoted.