The War on Woke at West Point

New York Magazine | Jasper Craven

On 9 October, the Board of Visitors at West Point convened in the library's Haig Room to review military training, featuring cadet presentations on special-operations combat-diving in Key West and a joint drone targeting project with Palantir. Lieutenant General James B. Bartholomees III highlighted the 224-year-old academy's commitment to developing multi-dimensional, multi-domain leaders, supported by comments from senior fellow Frank Luntz.

However, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and aligned conservative military groups contend that civilian leadership has ideologically compromised the institution. In his 2024 book The War on Warriors, Hegseth claims that academic lectures prioritise topics like white rage and transgenderism over tactical readiness, while alleging partisan cable news broadcasts in executive offices. Institutional friction continues to deepen. This conflict between traditional military curricula and political oversight creates direct pressure on academy leadership, potentially driving administrative reform, curriculum restructuring, and reevaluated governance across US military educational institutions.

Comment

Political contestation over officer education at West Point threatens to disrupt the standardisation of Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) instruction across the armed forces. When civilian political figures challenge curricula, institutional friction delays the integration of emerging technical frameworks, such as the Palantir drone-targeting projects demonstrated to the Board of Visitors. This friction undermines the US Army Training and Doctrine Command's capacity to maintain a cohesive operational doctrine across service branches.

The operational mechanism driving this friction relies on administrative friction within military academy academic boards, where curricular review cycles become prolonged by ideological oversight. Delayed approval for updated multi-domain doctrine limits cadet exposure to automated sensor-to-shooter chains before joining active units. Consequently, the operational transition speed for young platoon leaders integrating into the 11th Airborne Division's tactical networks suffers directly.

Strategic Question for Discussion

If political oversight at West Point delays the adoption of tactical data platforms like Palantir, how does that lag impact the operational readiness of junior officers integrating into multi-domain formations?

The available evidence points toward a growing gap between cadet instruction and active-duty operational requirements. Delayed integration of real-time targeting tools at the academy forces operational units to conduct remedial technical training that should occur prior to commissioning. My assessment is that this friction will ultimately reduce early-career command efficacy in high-intensity electronic warfare environments.

Share your assessment in the comments below.

Read the original article