Is it possible for a military institution, sworn to obey civilian leadership, to defy it so completely while maintaining the veneer of obedience? If one is looking for an answer, West Point offers a troubling case study. Despite President Trump’s executive order in January 2025 banning all DEI initiatives across the federal government, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s explicit directive to eliminate every last vestige of the DEI complex from our military academies, the United States Military Academy at West Point remains, in substance if not in name, a garrison of cultural Marxism masquerading as military virtue.
The formal actions have all been taken. DEI offices were renamed, cadet clubs dissolved, and a handful of “woke” courses quietly removed from the curriculum. But these gestures amount to bureaucratic theater. The rot remains. Like termites in the foundations of a colonial home, DEI ideology continues to burrow into the educational mission, faculty culture, and officer training that define West Point’s purpose. The language has changed, but the doctrine persists.
Consider the institution’s leadership. Lieutenant General Steven Gilland, the Superintendent, publicly referred to DEI as an “operational imperative” in his July 2023 testimony before Congress. Not an obligation, not a temporary adjustment to social pressure, but an imperative. Gilland did not merely tolerate DEI; he championed it. And now, despite a change in administration and a categorical order to dismantle the ideology, he remains in command, presiding over an institution whose transformation he helped engineer. One is left to wonder, what is the operational imperative now, to follow civilian command or to preserve the ideological revolution of his own making?
Gilland’s actions post-2025 have followed a familiar script. Rename the office, retain the staff. Rebrand the conference, keep the agenda. When scrutiny came, the DEI conference scheduled for April 2025 was not revised to reflect the administration’s values, it was simply renamed to obscure its nature. Only after external exposure did the event get canceled. This is not leadership; it is camouflage. What else has been renamed but not removed? What else remains hidden in plain sight?
The Academy’s academic leadership fares no better. Brigadier General Shane Reeves, the Dean of the Academic Board, has been a custodian of the ideological transformation under the guise of academic freedom. Under his oversight, West Point introduced race-centric materials, critical race theory perspectives, and coursework on “Whiteness,” justified through the vague rhetoric of inclusion and historical awareness. These were not extracurricular distractions; they were embedded in the academic core of future officers’ training.
When the Trump administration rightly ordered the removal of such materials, what did Reeves do? He did not purge the ideology. He did not audit the full curriculum or dismiss the faculty who embedded these views. Instead, he allowed a handful of classes to be retired, while the rest of the apparatus remained untouched. His defenders call this caution. Critics recognize it for what it is: inertia weaponized as defiance.
The result is not simply ideological inconsistency; it is institutional betrayal. An institution tasked with preparing the nation’s warrior-leaders should not be a finishing school for progressive dogma. Yet under Reeves, West Point still bears the ideological fingerprints of its past architects, most notably retired Brigadier General Ty Seidule. Though no longer at the Academy, Seidule’s curriculum, framed by a narrative of national shame and historical guilt, remains a defining influence. His tenure saw a deliberate redefinition of patriotism, recasting it not as pride in country but as a commitment to self-criticism. For Seidule, the moral core of an officer is not loyalty to the Constitution or a defense of liberty, but a perpetual apology for the nation’s sins.
If this sounds like Ivy League posturing, it is. And that’s the point. West Point was never meant to be a microcosm of the elite academy model, where social activism masquerades as scholarship and historical deconstruction replaces national pride. It was meant to be the forge of military virtue. Today, that forge is contaminated. DEI remains the hidden curriculum. Its slogans may be banned from the syllabus, but its assumptions endure in the pedagogy, the leadership, and the strategic vision of the Academy.
Some will claim that reforms are underway. Let them point to the removed clubs, the scrubbed syllabi, and the canceled events. But as every seasoned bureaucrat knows, appearances are easily staged. The true measure lies not in what is performed, but in what is believed and taught. And at West Point, the evidence points to a faculty and administration that do not believe in the mission outlined by the Trump administration. They do not believe that merit, cohesion, and warfighting capability depend on unity of purpose rather than diversity of perspective. They believe, as Gilland openly declared, that identity politics is the key to military strength.
That belief, if left unchallenged, will cripple the officer corps. No institution can train future generals while simultaneously teaching them that their country is a source of systemic oppression. No command ethos can survive when moral authority is ceded to grievance and historical revisionism. A military academy that tolerates this paradox does not educate warriors; it produces activists in uniform.
The only solution is a complete and unapologetic removal of the current leadership. If West Point is to be saved, Gilland and Reeves must go. Their tenure is not merely ineffective; it is incompatible with the directives and values of the civilian government they are sworn to serve. To keep them in office is to allow ideological sabotage to masquerade as continuity. West Point must be led by officers who understand the gravity of their charge: to shape warriors who love their country, not lecture it.
There is precedent for such clarity. In times of war and peace, the military has undergone radical restructuring when its culture fell out of step with national interests. Truman’s desegregation of the armed forces was not achieved by coddling dissenting generals. Reagan’s rebuilding of the military did not succeed by asking permission from entrenched bureaucrats. When the mission is clear, the execution must be decisive.
It is time to stop pretending that West Point is fixed. The Academy remains a citadel of DEI ideology. The language has shifted, but the loyalties remain unchanged. The officer corps is being poisoned, not by rifles or artillery, but by ideas. And like all poisons, the damage is cumulative, silent, and eventually fatal.
There is no middle ground in this fight. West Point will either be a training ground for American patriots or a pipeline for professional grievance-mongers in uniform. We must choose. The orders have been given. The compliance has not followed. It is time for command to change.
If you enjoy my work, please consider subscribing: https://x.com/amuse.
Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.
READ NEXT: Trump Intervenes At Harvard — Here’s What He Stopped
Assuming that picture is real, that punk’s assignment needs to be as the PLO somewhere until his obligated time runs out and then get rid of him. What a scumbag.
Clean out west point. And make them comply or shut it down!
I think it’s time for the Commander in Chief to make some military transfers to Alaska.
Take out the wrong worldview. Take out the people who support it with it Give them no quarters! They will destroy our young people with their satanic ideas!