Does partisan activity on social media hurt the military profession?

SSG Carlos Madden — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:22:44 -0400

I personally think it does. I was taught that in or out of uniform, if people know you are in the military or a veteran, you are a representation of the whole force. I live my life with the assumption that I am a representative of every soldier, SSG, NCO, Iraq Veteran, reservist, every unit I'm associated with and job I had in the military and I do my best to never give anyone a negative impression of any of those things.

I saw this article and thought it was a good question. https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2021/september/partisan-activity-social-media-hurts-military-profession

Partisan Activity on Social Media Hurts the Military Profession

Military leaders should establish clear, consistent guidance on partisan political speech on social media.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2024 12:39 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:39:27 -0400

yes

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2024 12:53 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 12:53:22 -0400

Only when they take the pensions away from those who debate diversity, Equity inclusion like that Fired LTC in the Space Force.

What other generals were fired for debating the president like MG Singlaub Being against President Carter pulling troops out of Korea. or 5 star general Douglas MacArthur was fired Four being against the president and wanting to nuke china during the korean war, both those Generals retained their pension.

I think it's for the good of the service to know what's going on.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/space-force-commander-lost-pension-criticizing-crt-military-says-gut-punch-betrayal

Space force commander who says he lost pension for criticizing DEI in military opens up on being...

Former Lt. Col. Matt Lohmeier speaks to Fox News Digital about allegedly being fired for opposing critical race theory in the military.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2024 1:01 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 13:01:54 -0400

As long as you are out of uniform and saying this is your opinion, This is not in violation of the hatch act.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act

You also can't be a retiree wearing your Prior service uniform running for office...

Hatch_Act

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2024 1:02 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 13:02:36 -0400

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/tulsi-gabbard-video-military-uniform-politicians-world-war/

For some reason , she didn't get busted , but the space force O-5 did.

Tulsi Gabbard posts video in uniform accusing 'self-serving politicians' of wanting to start...

'Now is the time to be reminded of the grim reality that we all face if we don’t stop them.'

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jul 8 at 2024 1:47 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 13:47:52 -0400

There is an absolute prohibition on military personnel engaging in partisan politics. However, I am no longer serving. I am a "PFC". I believe, however, it is my duty to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves, especially when other veterans speak out with opinions that I believe are harmful to America, it's citizens, and those who now serve. I also do my best to never give anyone a negative impression of those who serve/served, but I see no merit in the argument that keeping silent is the best manner in which to accomplish that goal. Always keep in mind that silence is reasonably assumed to be acquiescence.

Response by Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen made Jul 8 at 2024 2:05 PM

Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 14:05:53 -0400

Overall I'd say yes. While we are prohibited from partisan activity when on active duty, the average civilian social media user has no idea of that fact. So once we are out of uniform and can express our partisan beliefs those civilians who know one has a military background believe what is posted, as you said, are a representation of the entire force.

Response by Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin made Jul 8 at 2024 2:16 PM

Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 14:16:51 -0400

How is having a partisan conversation on social media any different than one in person? I realize there is more of a measure of anonymity, but that's beside the point. All members of the military are allowed to voice their political perspectives, and like any other American, should never be denied that right. We have our rules on how to do so, both in and out of uniform and during/after service, and then there are levels of respect that should be maintained, regardless of one's current status. Not just because we're Veterans, but because this is how humans should act in general. There is nothing wrong with pushing a partisan perspective and having the ensuing debates. I welcome those discussions, so long as they are civil and respectful, and there are some people, even on RP, who are capable of having them. Those which are not, I block the individual and move on, while pointing out where they went wrong with me. As for those who break the rules (such as the TOS here or the UCMJ in general) that's on them.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2024 4:09 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 16:09:16 -0400

The military profession Has had desegregation since 1947. Yes , critical race theory tries to give guilt to white officers. I worked for an african american one star general. We've had Is african american forestar generals way before General Colin Yet the leftist ideology has been rubber stamped into the officer and NCO Corps.
This was totally wrong and unnecessary, and i'm glad that space force commander spoke up.

https://nypost.com/2022/06/20/west-point-cadets-being-taught-critical-race-theory-report/

US Army teaching Critical Race Theory to West Point cadets: report

The US Army has introduced Critical Race Theory to West Point cadets, new documents show, according to Fox News Digital.

Response by SGT Ruben Lozada made Jul 8 at 2024 4:46 PM

SGT Ruben Lozada — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 16:46:55 -0400

Good afternoon SSG Carlos Madden. Excellent post. Thank you for sharing this Brother Carlos.

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Jul 8 at 2024 4:57 PM

Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 16:57:13 -0400

Short answer YES!!!!! Long answer for me...RP is the only "social media" I see or use...never have, never will.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Jul 8 at 2024 8:55 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 20:55:26 -0400

Thanks for posting SSG Carlos Madden and thank you for mentioning me my friend LTC Private RallyPoint Member I concur with my friends CPT Jack Durish Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth and Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Jul 8 at 2024 10:12 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 22:12:48 -0400

SSG Carlos Madden Hurt My Profession? If Telling the Truth "Hurts" My Profession, So Be It! 21 years as a Navy Spook and Naval Communicator I'm Not Shy about My Past!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 9 at 2024 1:33 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 09 Jul 2024 01:33:59 -0400

Listen to USAR LTC Tulsi Gabbard shred VP Kamala Harris. She did debate her in 2020. I do not think Gabbard violated the Hatch act. I heard this on Fox News today. Gabbard is an Independent who left the Democratic Party because the party morphed leftist. Recently Senators Manchin and Sinema also left. Bernie Sanders may be an independent but he is leftist as well.

Kamala Harris is not qualified or capable of being president: Tulsi Gabbard

https://www.foxnews.com/video/ [login to see] 112

Kamala Harris is not qualified or capable of being president: Tulsi Gabbard | Fox News Video

Former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard discusses what a Kamala Harris presidency could look like on 'The Ingraham Angle.'

Response by MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P made Jul 9 at 2024 11:07 AM

MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P — Tue, 09 Jul 2024 11:07:40 -0400

I think we would all do well to return to the days of civil and polite discourse without all the mud slinging, insults, and foulness.

Response by MAJ Byron Oyler made Jul 9 at 2024 12:15 PM

MAJ Byron Oyler — Tue, 09 Jul 2024 12:15:07 -0400

I feel we should be as apolitical as possible when displaying the rank, even as a retiree. Look at my posts, many here will argue I favor the right but really I try to stay as midline as possible. You also will not find my religion stated. Eisenhower did not vote in an election until his presidential election and he could have ran for either party.

Response by Bethina Lee made Jul 9 at 2024 5:01 PM

Bethina Lee — Tue, 09 Jul 2024 17:01:16 -0400

I had multiple individuals, claiming stolen valor as well as claiming to be officers in the military. Somehow they accessed the individuals photos, professional info, and other private info.
Publicly stating and posting to social networks your personal opinions on political decisions, current affairs your profession is involved with, etc...is extremely unprofessional. Just because you have "Freedom of Speech" does not necessarily mean you should exercise that freedom. Because
1) You will be given repercussions for your
statement & actions
2) Reflects and will be detrimental to your career/profession as well as your fellow service members
3) Being actively enlisted/deployed or even serving through the National Guard/Reserves/JR. Branches

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Jul 10 at 2024 11:05 AM

CAPT Kevin B. — Wed, 10 Jul 2024 11:05:35 -0400

Politics and religion on social media is like football. Three things can happen and two of them are bad. It isn't a good idea to dabble in it for all to see as if it's going to be used, it won't be for your good. Same with people in my cigar groups posting their current smoke with their guns. To what purpose? I keep my stuff to amateur radio, community bulletin boards, cigars, and some soccer referee stuff. My personal FB usually has outdoor activities, tractor stuff on the spread, whatever food I'm cooking up; yup pretty boring. Remember, people will make decisions about you based on what they see. In soccer, I'd tell the coaches and players, don't give the referee a reason to blow the whistle in the box.

Response by CSM William Everroad made Jul 11 at 2024 10:56 AM

CSM William Everroad — Thu, 11 Jul 2024 10:56:01 -0400

Regulatory guidance aside, I would say yes, in the aggregate. This is especially true if the person participating in SM discussion (of any type really) has a profile that can be linked to military service.

Very few of us are experts at most things, but we are professionals. It is difficult for a citizen bystander to separate the two and objectively review someone else's opinion as simply "speech" from another citizen.

We attach all kinds of bias and preconcieved judgement even if we do not know the person making the statement. Now add in the label of "military service member", and it adds an additional layer to the conversation.

I firmly believe that everyone should be able to participate in the public forum, but I stop short of suggesting that SM should be classified as a public forum. We are in a time where our speech is forever immortalized and it is increasingly difficult to "take back" statements made that are either ignorant or genuinely exploratory. This makes SM an "all in" proposition where in cases where someone could be wrong, they double down on the wrongness and use any number of rhetorical strategies to be on the side of "right". Most times, this continually pushes the conversation into opposite corners of a discussion, with no room for collegial debate.

All of this combines to make participating in SM a tenuous endeavor for anyone who wants to be seen and treated as a "professional" and maintain the values of the military. Every statement made by a thoughtful service member is balanced on the same scale as every statement made from ignorance or hate. The general public has no way to tell the difference between the two and, since bucketing people makes it easier to have conversations, they get lumped in together.

In all, people should really have training on civil discourse to solve the problem, but since that will never happen, we have the age old problem of not being able to have productive conversations with people. Some suggest it is getting worse, because the people who would not normally participate are "picking a side".

My recommendation for everyone is to continue to participate in civil discourse, just very definitively separate your online persona from your professional (military or not). My only exception is RP, simply because we understand how to respect each other and what our self imposed labels mean (even though some members stray a bit). For example, I tend not to include my military background or my professional work profiles on social sites and do not link my social profile on my professional ones.

Response by SGT Mary G. made Jul 12 at 2024 2:07 PM

SGT Mary G. — Fri, 12 Jul 2024 14:07:27 -0400

Good question SSG Carlos Madden I think it is good to be careful about how we express our opinions - no matter where and when. It is possible to discuss issues without being partisan - even though people like to assume that where one stands on issues they know something about, defines their political leanings, or the party they register with (to be able to vote in the primaries), when that is not necessarily the case. Who isn't Conservative about some issues and Liberal about some issues?
At RP it shouldn't do much damage to let off steam - especially about what is not acceptable. And there is actually room for thoughtful exchanges on most social media platforms.
It is also advisable to not get oneself in trouble while serving - so when in doubt, don't . . . say or do something that violates UCMJ!
After we leave the military, it is good to remember we have responsibilities as citizens to ourselves, and everyone else. I think we need to be participatory as the self=governing people we, collectively, are. We need to learn what is going on in government, and discuss it with other people, imo - and social platforms are useful for sharing actual information given there is so much misleading nonsense and that is what people believe if they know nothing else. And there is often something to be learned from other folks about the issues.
We need to advise those we elect about how we need them to represent us - especially issues we have made an effort to inform ourselves about or that are problematic and need solutions.
The folks we send to D.C. don't know everything about all issues, and many of them appreciate hearing from their constituents. They also learn from the CRS Reports. Perusing them is useful. https://crsreports.congress.gov
If we know something they do not include, or we simply want to express an opinion about how we would like someone to vote on an issue, then we should do so.
Otherwise, the lobbyists , industry, and illegal foreign lobbyists (unregistered) will be who they get their information from and who they represent.

Just a moment...

Response by SSG Rick Miller made Sep 11 at 2024 6:25 PM

SSG Rick Miller — Wed, 11 Sep 2024 18:25:34 -0400

Whether partisan activity hurts the military profession, I would think that for certain groups of people, the answer is yes. It tends to give a negative impression of the military, considering that WE who are serving, have served are the real 1%. I have always followed one rule when partisan politics becomes the conversation, and ultimately leads to argument. That rule? Never argue with an idiot, the people watching might not be able to tell which one it is.