Spirit of VMI Preempts WaPo Hit Job

by James A. Bacon

Looks like Washington Post reporter  Ian Shapira is loading up the big guns to fire another salvo in his unrelenting war on Virginia Military Institute alumni who are critical of the new leadership’s Diversity, Equity & Inclusion policies. This time, instead of attacking traditionalist alumni as a group, he appears to be focusing on Matt Daniel, head of The Spirit of VMI PAC, as an individual.

Shapira obviously has done a lot of digging. Since his Nov. 21 article insinuating that dissident alumni are racist for criticizing VMI’s African-American Superintendent Cedric Wins, he has published only one other article (on a topic unrelated to VMI). Three months after his last hit, the WaPo hatchet man emailed a lengthy list of questions to Daniel that hint at specific allegations the article will make.

One question, for example, sets up the VMI grad and former fighter pilot on charges of anti-Semitism for a blog post in which he criticized leftist mega-donor George Soros — not for Soros’ ethnic identity but his role bankrolling leftist causes. 

Anticipating a hatchet job, The Spirit of VMI has published Shapira’s email, and you can read it here. And you can read The Spirit of VMI’s response here.

“What is obvious from the tone, type, and number of questions is that Mr. Shapira … will try to doxx and cancel another VMI Alumnus who has attempted to freely speak and react to to the corrosive actions of the Northam Administration,” said the Spirit of VMI statement. The statement continued:

SOVP will not be slowed or intimidated by weaponized journalism, and stands behind Matt Daniel, who will not be canceled. No one who knows and appreciates Matt as a man will turn away from him because of more pious virtue signaling from a would-be Beltway overlord who has no comprehension of the true VMI, or the traditional Corps who were forged into leaders and examples by the Institute’s unsurpassed ethos, traditions, and ever-challenging crucible.

Although I have been highly critical of Shapira’s reporting in the past, it is premature to comment on what he might write.

But I will say this: I have gotten to know Matt fairly well over the past couple of years. I can say confidently that he is genuinely concerned that VMI under the new regime installed by former Governor Ralph Northam is undermining the traditions — the Honor Code, the Rat Line, etc. — that made VMI a storied institution. Daniel has not uttered one word in my presence that would lend support to any insinuation that he is motivated by racial or ethnic bias. He has a different idea of what’s good for the country. He, like a majority of Americans, supports the concept of opportunity for all, not equity (or equal outcomes) for all.

Perhaps Daniel’s fears about VMI’s new direction are overblown. Perhaps he is exaggerating the degree to which VMI’s Diversity, Equity & Inclusion initiatives are aligned with Critical Race Theory. Those would be valid topics for The Washington Post to explore: weighing the evidence Daniel presents against the evidence the VMI administration presents.

But Shapira has never been interested in sorting through the nuances of philosophical principles. His VMI narrative is a racial melodrama like the movie Django Unchained — with VMI traditionalists as the bad guys cracking the whips. Will Shapira’s next article follow the same trope? We’ll just have to wait and see.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

100 responses to “Spirit of VMI Preempts WaPo Hit Job”

  1. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    Much has been made recently about a poll (Gallup) indicating about half of Americans believe the MSM is intending to foist a POV in most stories. Only 25 percent agreed with a statement there was no intent to mislead. My concern is for the half or so who remain blind to this truth.

    https://fortune.com/2023/02/15/trust-in-media-low-misinform-mislead-biased-republicans-democrats-poll-gallup/

    Ignoring any and all contact efforts by that “reporter” is justified.

    1. Reminds me of the polls on congressional approval, which currently hover around 25%. Yet somehow roughly 90% of incumbents get reelected. How is that? Well, it’s pretty simple actually. Everyone hates congress, its selfishness, political hackery, two-faced nature, and porky handouts. Except for one’s own representatives, that is… ahh, my guy or gal is great. S/he gets the job done!

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        The devils we know. Most don’t know any reporters except maybe a TV talking head.

    2. SH – I totally agree. On occasion I’ve been contacted by ‘journalists’ requesting an interview about my work… doing my due diligence I research and read a few of the articles by the ‘journalist’ reaching out to me. That insight drives my decision to respond or not.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        A recording device is always a worthwhile investment.

    3. No, NBC Dateline, and NBC News’ Brian Williams “blazed the path”. CBS and ’60 Minutes’ had a lesser, but significant, part as well.

      EDIT: Hold on, I just remembered the Audi 5000 hit piece and the Jeep hit piece done by 60 Minutes, so they were way ahead of Dateline and Brian Williams.

      1. John Harvie Avatar
        John Harvie

        Then there’s NPR

      2. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Waaaay before the Audi was the exploding pickup truck.

        But lest we forget, there’s only one member of the MSM facing a billion dollar judgement…. at the moment.

      3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Well, technically Rush Limbaugh blazed the path…

        1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
          James Wyatt Whitehead

          He died two years ago to the day.

    4. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      One of those carefully crafted polls to be sure.

      In fact there’s one on this page care of Disqus… right there to the right… the one that says, “Do you trust Woke Joe’s answer on the Chinese bioweapon balloons? YES/NO”

    5. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      A better indicator of yellow journalism than some poll of questionable provenance would be a finding for the plaintiff to the tune of a couple billion dollars.

    6. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Fox is just as biased and agenda driven as CNN or MSNBC.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        Apparently with regard to voter fraud, more than biased. But apparently these days there is little daylight between bias and outright lying.

      2. LarrytheG Avatar

        and that’s way beyond “bias”. Broadcasting lies that the on-air personalities were telling each other they KNEW they were lies but still going on air and broadcasting those lies.

  2. DJRippert Avatar

    I like Shapira’s question #2:

    “You were very supportive in your class notes column of Cedric Wins when he was selected as VMI superintendent. Recently, the PAC released a statement questioning why he received a bonus, citing the 25 percent decline in enrollment. Why do you believe the enrollment crisis is Wins’ fault?

    So, a supposed racist was “very supportive” of the appointment of a Black VMI Superintendent. That seems odd. Very odd.

    Then, an alumnus thinks that the man in charge should not be rewarded for a 25% decline in enrollment. The question isn’t whether the enrollment crisis (it might or might be). The question is whether he has addressed the crisis. If he did, that might be worth a bonus. But it sounds like Wims has not addressed the crisis.

    1. James McCarthy Avatar
      James McCarthy

      Equity in the US has produced women’s suffrage, Brown v Board of Education, one person one vote among a few enduring values. Only woke conservatives deplore equity as promoting equal outcomes, I.e., compromising merit. Woke conservatives have abandoned Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and the classical Greek philosophers in this regard. The current woke conservative ideology advocates absolute equality of the law sans equity.

      1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
        James Wyatt Whitehead

        Equality not equity. I don’t seem to remember Elizabeth C. Staunton, Thurgood Marshall, or even Margaret Sanger ever using the word equity. When you use phrases such as “woke conservative ideology” it signals to me that your team is losing this argument.

        1. Right, it’s definitely a newly coined word, but it’s not a newly minted concept. The idea is to give people what it takes to succeed, even if it means you treat them “unequally.” In fact, it’s a very old concept, starting with the Freedmen’s Bureau’s following the Civil War. I wouldn’t be so sure about who and what is winning the argument at this point. Too early to tell.

          1. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            Equity does not require treating individuals unequally.

          2. DJRippert Avatar

            “The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.”

            Sounds like a call for unequal treatment to me.

          3. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            Only if you believe that yours is the prevailing proposition. As noted in other comments, equity may require affording individuals (school children – lunch, counseling) support to compete equally.

            A good journalist would present the entire quotation which is prefaced by the sentence, “The only remedy to racist discrimination is anti racist discrimination.” The lead in sentence creates a different context from the abbreviated version quoted.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar

            so do you think food pantries are giving stuff to people that other people are not getting also?

          5. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            Equity seems to be present in the English language in the early 1300s. Dervived from the French term equite, which means equality. Equite is derived from aequitas of the Latin language. Also means equal. I wonder the name of the scholar who turned this word upside down?

          6. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            The two concepts can be, as the Jesuits would opine, distinguished but not separated. Equity in jurisprudence is often underlying the criticism that judges legislate from the bench. CJ Roberts canard that judges are umpires, calling balls and strikes is inherently contradictory. See Alito’s decision in Dobbs.

          7. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            I know what you are talking about. The old English Chancery Courts were discharged with the duty of rendering justice and fairness to even the score. It was done away with for some reason.

          8. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            The chancery courts in US were essentially merged. See Art. 3 of US Constitution empowering courts with jurisprudence in law and equity.

          9. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            My search indicates in French equality is egalite while equite is equity.

          10. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            I looked it up in my grandfathers 1909 edition of the Volume Library. Forward by Teddy Roosevelt. Makes a good car seat booster too.

          11. I didn’t mean that it was a new word altogether, obviously; just in the context societal issues. I don’t think it’s turned upside down. Rather, I think the concept now means putting people on a level playing field. The English language evolves at a rapid rate. So be it.

        2. James McCarthy Avatar
          James McCarthy

          Seems the opposite is true as conservatives demean equity. Defining equity as promoting equal outcomes is Newspeak. While women, as a matter of equality, were entitled to vote equity – fairness- delivered the result as it did in Brown. Massive resistance did not argue for equality but for fairness, not to be integrated in schools. Contemporary conservative complaints about equity compromising merit echo similarly. See Thurgood Marshall’s 11/18/1978 speech at Howard to refresh your recollection. Review Sanger’s support for eugenics as a means to advocating for equal outcomes.

          1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            I’m getting the hang of this now. And liberals seem to be knee deep in it too. See abortion. The new 3/5ths clause.

          2. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            Liberals have been knee-deep in equity for a very long time. Despite the distorted view of some the Constitution endorses, authorizes the judiciary to consider its jurisprudence to include law and equity. When black letter law (common law) produces unjust results, equity may prevail to avoid harsh results. Thus, when your farm animal trespasses upon my property, common law holds I can exert dominion over the beast. Equity prevents that unfair outcome.

            BTW, Stanton’s writings for the Seneca convention assumed the progress women achieved in property rights prior (1840s) to the primary suffrage campaign. Those rights emerged as legislative and court decisions based upon fairness or equity.

          3. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
            James Wyatt Whitehead

            The word equity appears only two times in the US Constitution. I see your point about Article 3 section 2 but it deals with affairs outside the US. Equity appears zero times in the US Declaration of Independence. I can’t find that word in the Virginia Declaration of the Rights of Man either. I did find the word equity 10 times in the King James version of the Bible. But it appears that only God has the power to render things level. One thing is certain, iniquity abounds wherever we look.

          4. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            Art. 3 clearly addresses national jurisprudence in the courts. The absence of the term “equity” in some documents does not lessen its impact or import in judicial and agency application. Our imported jurisprudence from England contains equity principles. Moreover, it is not the appearance of the term that prevails but its utility. Equity exists precisely because strict interpretation of equality can produce unjust results. Home schooling exists (Yoder v Wisconsin) as a matter of equity.

  3. “Daniel has not uttered one word in my presence that would lend support to any insinuation that he is motivated by racial or ethnic bias.” The phrase “in my presence” does a whole lot of work in your statement. By contrast, Mr. Daniel’s on-the-record written statements and cartoons are, well, alarming, and can be interpreted as bigoted. The Wapo gave him a chance to explain himself. He should take them up on it, instead of penning a meaningless, and frankly unhinged, harangue about the PAC’s purely imagined battle with communism. And let’s be honest, JB. There’s no way you’d ever give the author a fair shake, so let’s dispense with the ‘wait and see.’ Deny the story’s validity now. It must be fake, just like all those other well-researched and -sourced stories about racism at VMI;-).

  4. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    What do you expect from the Washington Post?

    I once wrote an op-ed criticizing the Post’s parade of editorials demanding more and more state tax increases. I pointed out that the Mark Warner tax increase cost Fairfax County taxpayers about $107 million in higher taxes and, despite the tax increase being for education, Fairfax County Public Schools received only about $7 million in new revenue the first school year after the tax increases took effect. My sources were Senator Janet Howell, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and Delegate Vince Callahan, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, as well as the FCPS CFO. The Senate Finance Committee staff did the calculations.

    Needless to say, the Post refused to publish the op-ed. But Fairfax County residents got higher state income and sales tax bills, as well as larger class sizes in FCPS. Goebbels had nothing on the Post’s editors. And it appears that darn little has changed.

  5. Wins called one of your most recent cartoons about a recent speaker’s visit “homophobic and racist.” He said you were “looking desperate and racist” in his own Facebook post before removing the comment and apologizing to you. What do you make of Wins’ reactions to your cartoons and his post calling you out?

    Were I in Mr. Daniel’s shoes I would answer this question as follows: “I don’t make anything of Wins’ reactions to my cartoons and his post calling me out because he has since retracted his comments and apologized to me. I have accepted his apology and have nothing more to say on the matter.”

    1. I don’t think it’s accurate to say that he “retracted” his comments. This is his actual statement: “In a statement, Wins said he thought the cartoon was, iin my view, both homophobic and racist in its references to an invited speaker and the diversity office leadership at VMI.’ He added: ‘Rather than engage with what could be considered a personal attack by referring to the cartoonist by name, I should have chosen to ignore it. I removed the post with my comments and sent a note of apology directly to my classmate, Matt Daniel.’

    2. DJRippert Avatar

      Seems like Wins has something of a self-control issue. Kind of odd for a retired flag officer.

      1. Don’t know what happened to my earlier comment. Anyway, I would actually say the opposite. If you had to deal with the level of nonstop outrageous criticism and personal attacks that he’s been subject to by alumni and right-wing press since the day he started, you’d be shocked about the level of self-restraint displayed.

  6. James McCarthy Avatar
    James McCarthy

    A journalist not interested “in sorting through the nuances of philosophical principles.” It’s not unreasonable to be skeptical that authored articles contain some POVs to be challenged. Articles or reporting that defy credibility thru the publication of false or grossly misleading material is of a different order. On 1/25/2023, BR crossposted an article “On the Unlawful Nature of Equity in Virginia” containing the following statement:

    “First, the 14th Amendment demands equal protection of the laws and all but forbids the practice of “equity.”

    More than a mere POV no matter how ardently such opinion is held.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      If one takes it literally, and some do, any extra resource spent on a kid – like to help those with dyslexia or other learning disability, like autism is violating the “equity” idea.

      1. James McCarthy Avatar
        James McCarthy

        Actually, the assertion is that such extras violate equality and compromise merit.

      2. James McCarthy Avatar
        James McCarthy

        Actually, the extra help, in the opinion of some, violates equality or equal protection of the law.

  7. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
    Virginia Gentleman

    The questions from Wapo seem completely reasonable to me.

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      It is what good journalists do… ask for comment before publishing…

      1. Virginia Gentleman Avatar
        Virginia Gentleman

        My guess is the Spirit of VMI will fade away when they realize their views are as archaic as they are and that their relevance is as empty as their open minds.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      On Nov. 3, the Spirit of VMI posted a cartoon on Facebook, a mock flier that read, “The Virginia Military Institute Dept. Diversity Equity Inclusion Introduces Its 2022-3 Speaker Series: ‘Dark’ Days in Lexington.”

      Beneath the language was a depiction of a voluptuous woman in VMI shorts clasping a stripper pole, identified as the “VMI pole-dancing club captain,” and another of a topless man clad in a thong and a collar whose caption reads: “Sista Capuccino Boneya.”

      Well, certainly nothing sexist, homophobic, or racist there. Of course, if it’s not, then BR shouldn’t mind it being reproduced here so everyone can judge the “good clean fun” a bunch of alumni have over how well they diversify.

      https://scontent.forf1-4.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/312564505_429760482677365_4994443068533918331_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=r2UlnfjEZxIAX9Wai5b&_nc_ht=scontent.forf1-4.fna&oh=00_AfCMmK9fa9G_7XwSX6mIqnSbUZPQZybKMUcCs65ceUlR_Q&oe=63F5592D

  8. Nope, Ian is right here, this guy is doing incredible damage to the school and is pushing more people away (prospective students & families and alumni).

    1. I just wonder what sort of prospective cadets the PAC, The Cadet, Villani and their supporters are looking to attract with their diatribes. What ambitious, thoughtful kid looking for a challenge different than regular college says, “Yeah, I want to go to the college where a vocal group of Confederate-loving alumni publicly attack run-of-the-mill DEI training as Marxist indoctrination. Being part of that group will set me up well for the real world, by God!” Who in their right mind wants to be a part of such a toxic group? This whole thing is so sad.

      1. Seriously. If I was a high school senior today, I wouldn’t touch the I with a 10ft pole. What’s absurd that even Liberty University and the Citadel have DEI programs.

        Like you said, its so sad and so unnecessary. Especially, since this is probably not more than 10-15% of the entire alumni base (open to being challenged on that figure). If these guys succeed in taking over the school (and honestly I have no idea how this thing is going to unfold), I would support closing the school.

        1. Agree, and Citadel is knocking it out of the park in terms of enrollment and admissions. They’ve had a strong DEI program for nearly a decade, so apparently having some rudimentary DEI programs isn’t a barrier to entry for like-minded prospective cadets! I don’t know the percentages in terms of alums who oppose what’s going on the school, but I would say it’s like 20% or so. People like me are clearly outnumbered, but there’s a vast center who, I imagine, just wants to get on with life and not have a fight to the death every time the school tries to modernize. And like you, if the regressive cohort takes over, I’m done. Have it, turn it into a Confederate playground for white men, and watch it die a quick ignominious death. At the beginning of this whole thing I said that it was an existential fight that VMI was in, perhaps without realizing it. I think that’s even truer today than it was in 2020.

          1. One last thought here, but every single alum I know (’13-’16), supports Wins and the changes being made. I literally know of no one under the age of 35 who supports the PAC. Worse, most of them want little or nothing to do with the I anymore because of that PAC and they’re very successful too.

            I’m in a grad program at UVA, so i’ve kinda future-proofed my resume (i.e., mitigated whatever negative impact VMI may have) but I worry about the current cadets and recent alums who are on the job market and the scrutiny they may face because of this.

          2. Well, fellow Keydet/Wahoo, I’m glad the younger generations are trending that way. I’m concerned there’s not enough runway to make it through, though. There are simply too many backwards thinking folks in positions of influence at the present time. It’ll take half a decade or more for things to change to the positive, and we don’t have that long. But it’s worth fighting the good fight.

          3. Well, fellow Keydet/Wahoo, I’m glad the younger generations are trending that way. I’m concerned there’s not enough runway to make it through, though. There are simply too many backwards thinking folks in positions of influence at the present time. It’ll take half a decade or more for things to change to the positive, and we don’t have that long. But it’s worth fighting the good fight.

  9. I am a Yankee. I would have fought and died for the UNION and STILL I know it is WRONG to be tearing down Confederate monuments and disparage their dead.

    620,000+ died in our country’s Civil War. Millions of families suffered. Their generation bore the greatest tragedy in our country’s history so WE didn’t have to.

    I hope that more scholars will take up the task of disseminating some of the myths of Confederate statues. They should remind people that in the decades following the Civil War, most Confederate statues were created in NORTHERN factories in Connecticut, New York out of the SAME MOLD and the same materials. Civil War monuments were placed in front of court houses and public parks from New Hampshire to Alabama for the exact same reason, there was so much loss, so many were buried in unmarked graves, these statues acted as grieving points for families who had no idea where or how their sons had died.

    1. Also, so many confederate monuments were created as part of of the City Beautiful Movement. Monument Avenue in Richmond was one of the greatest collections of Beaux-Arts sculpture in America. It rivaled the grand boulevards of Paris. It was listed by the Department of the Interior on the National Register of Historic Places! It is a tragedy that towns throughout the south are losing their most elegant public works of art; The incredible Fame statue in North Carolina, now regulated to a cemetery. The Monument in Jacksonville, under fire. The Raphael Semmes statue in Mobile sent to the dusty corner of a museum. I have not seen such an attack on America since 9/11

    2. James McCarthy Avatar
      James McCarthy

      Precisely what tragedy was shouldered so WE didn’t have to? If slavery had not existed, there would have been no civil war and no lives sacrificed, no necessity for grief memorials.

  10. Donald Smith Avatar
    Donald Smith

    I think most of y’all here know that I’m the president of the Bacon’s Rebellion chapter of the Stonewall Jackson fan club. (We’re having a President’s Day special on annual dues, BTW.)

    The Stonewall Jackson legacy doesn’t obviously relate to DEI…but, when you think about it, it does.

    The same crew that insists that DEI is vital, can’t seem to figure out a way to include the legacy of Stonewall Jackson at VMI. All the evidence indicates that they simply can’t (or won’t) do it, for whatever reason.

    Think about that. In order for VMI to be truly “inclusive,” in 21st century parlance, VMI has to scourge itself of any sign of respect for a man who was not only one of America’s greatest battlefield generals, but also put his personal reputation and the safety of his family on the line to sponsor and run a Sunday School for slaves. Nowadays, people stay silent because they fear being the subject of some mean Tweets. Jackson’s personal example, as a citizen should be honored and emulated. Something which, apparently, is impossible at today’s DEI-sensitive VMI.

    This is a horrible example to set. Great leaders set good examples. Today’s VMI—an institutions that’s supposed to create great leaders—is setting an example of hypersensitivity, and cultural and emotional brittleness. I’m sure the Chinese military is laughing. If I were them, I would.

    When VMI sandblasted Jackson’s name off the arch on Old Barracks, don’t blame the Chinese if they saw that and presumed that the hypersensitivity of today’s American made such a drastic action necessary. Don’t blame the Chinese, or other American foes, if they conclude that today’s American is easily triggered and upset. (If you think I’m exaggerating, watch Netflix’s documentary “American Factory,” and watch the part where the Chinese boss gives his assessment of 21st century American workers.)

    Perhaps one of the reasons that so many VMI alumni are so disgusted with Ian Shapira, is that he apparently deliberately distorted Jackson’s legacy in his WaPo reporting. He didn’t mention Jackson’s sponsorship of a Sunday School for slaves, or his noteworthy battlefield accomplishments in the Valley Campaign, or Second Manassas, or Fredericksburg, or Chancellorsville in any of his many articles written during the time when Jackson’s legacy was being debated at VMI.

    Shapira is a professional journalist and an Ivy League graduate. It beggars belief that he (or his editors) didn’t comprehend the importance of being even-handed in his reporting. So, we can safely presume that he (and his editors, who work at a newspaper which is supposed to be a flagship of American and world journalism) chose to distort the historical record and thus mis-inform their readers.

    Or, perhaps those editors realized that today’s WaPo readers want their biases reforced. And, it’s always good business to give the customer what he/she wants. Maybe it’s just business.

    Either way, it’s grounds for us to reassess institutions that were once pillars of our society—the WaPo, VMI—and determine whether they still deserve to be pillars or not.

  11. Donald Smith Avatar
    Donald Smith

    I’m presuming there’s some issue with the WP commenting software, because the comment I’m about to make was on the site earlier, but isn’t anymore.

    I’m sure that everyone here knows that I’m the president of the Bacon’s Rebellion chapter of the Stonewall Jackson fan club. That doesn’t directly related to DEI, at first thought. But actually, it might. And the way Jackson’s legacy has been treated at VMI, by the same folks who are now waving the DEI flag, has no doubt made Matt and the Spirit of VMI folks view DEI as a cancer that could easily destroy VMI.

    Stonewall Jackson was an imperfect person—as are we all. But he was one of America’s most accomplished battlefield generals. As a citizen, he risked his community’s wrath (and a rock or two thrown through his window) to create, fund and operate a Sunday School for slaves. When community activists threatened him with legal action, Jackson didn’t back down. Nowadays, most people back down when they fear getting some nasty Tweets. Only a moron would confuse Stonewall Jackson with Simon Legree.

    None of this apparently mattered to the Virginia DEI crowd. In order for VMI to be “inclusive,” every sign of Jackson’s legacy has to be sandblasted (literally) from Main Post. Outside observers could easily draw the conclusion that VMI is creating a culture that produces cadets that are emotionally and culturally brittle. That’s the obvious conclusion. Sandblasting an arch is a drastic, destructive act. Yet, apparently, that’s what has to be done nowadays to soothe the DEI-sensitive VMI cadet or faculty member.

    DEI is a good theory, just like socialism or communism. But the people who are implementing DEI are doing it in a way that’s sowing division and mistrust, and damaging institutions.

    I’ll bet that Matt and the folks at Spirit of VMI realize that, if a critical mass of Virginia voters and legislators come to the conclusion that VMI has turned into a emotionally and culturally brittle institution, they’ll think twice about continuing to fund it. (Which is, I suspect, exactly what a critical mass of the DEI crowd wants in the first place.)

    If DEI, as it’s currently being practiced in the U.S, results in a mindset that people like Stonewall Jackson cannot be honored in any way, but must instead be shunned, then it should be resisted. Otherwise we’ll end up with a divided, embittered and hypersensitive populace with a bland heritage.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      The legitimate question to me is why would we memorialize someone in the first place and was it with concurrence and support from all citizens , not just some but not others?

      If you’re an institution trying to attract young black folks to your institution, what do you do about statues and memorials dedicated to those who fought, killed others, to keep people enslaved (even if they also wanted to “educate” them)?

      Fair question?

      1. Donald Smith Avatar
        Donald Smith

        First of all, you don’t patronize them. You don’t presume they are so easily offended that they cannot walk by a statue or under an arch with a Confederate general’s name on it.

        You also don’t present them a shallow, emotionally-charged image of America’s history. You acknowledge our past flaws, but point out that, as a nation and a common people, we overcame the flaws, identified and took advantage of the strengths all of our ancestors had, and created a stronger people. E plurubus unum. Out of many, one.

        You also point out the danger of establishing standards that enable hypersensitivity. There are statues to US Colored Troops, “Buffalo Soldiers” at several US Army bases. If those statues offend Native Americans, who know that the USCT provided the US Cavalry with many of the troopers who swept the Native American tribes from the Western plains—what do we say to the Native Americans, if they want those statues to go too? Standards are only fair if they apply to everyone.

        We are Americans. The world expects us to be able to handle complex thoughts and concepts. They expect us to be wise. DEI, as it’s currently being practiced now, rewards emotion over reason, enables shallow thinking and breeds hypersensitivity.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          How do you decide what is right or not? Are you presuming you understand how they feel (or should feel) without getting their views directly?

          It’s not about statues and memorials to blacks and native americans. It’s about statues to blacks or native americans that fought and killed others to continue enslaving.

          What “offends” is not the statue in terms of whether it depicts a white guy or a black guy or a native American – it’s what the statue stands for – what the subject of the statue did in the past that merits the statue or memorial. Buffalo soldiers or even native americans that killed Custers troops were not fighting to enslave them. We don’t have statues of Hitler for a reason even as we have statues of others from that same era. Not about their color or ethnicity – but about who they were and what they did merits a memorial.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar

            If we took a poll of black folks only and a strong majority wanted the statues gone, would you (should we) abide by that?

        2. Donald Smith Avatar
          Donald Smith

          If you look at the Barnes Thornburgh report, you’ll see that the biggest percentage of respondents who objected to the Stonewall Jackson iconogaphy were faculty.

          Larry, as you know, I’m on record as not objecting to the base name changes, or removing the Monument Avenue monuments, or the Stonewall Jackson statue at VMI. I suspect that, by bringing them up, you’re trying to muddy the issue at hand—DEI’s impact on an important institution of learning.

          VMI’s mission is to train leaders. To train someone qualified to lead our enlisted sons and daughters off a landing craft under fire. DEI, as it’s currently being practiced, emphasizes division and feelings and hypersensitivity. It fosters a culture of victimhood. Not leadership.

          It’s the DEI mindset that leads people to reach for the sandblasters.

          Overly sensitive people shouldn’t go to a place like VMI. Let them go to UVa or VCU.

        3. Donald Smith Avatar
          Donald Smith

          “Are not the reasons for and presence of Confederate memorials implicit testimony honoring slavery?”

          Um, stating the obvious, no. But, if that’s the conclusion you reached, then you go fella! Thanks for placing yourself on record.

        4. Donald Smith Avatar
          Donald Smith

          “Are not the reasons for and presence of Confederate memorials implicit testimony honoring slavery?”

          Um, stating the obvious, no. But, if that’s the conclusion you reached, then you go fella! Thanks for placing yourself on record.

          1. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            If slavery did not exist, there would have been no civil war and no dead to memorialize. The existence of Confederate memorial would not exist.

          2. Donald Smith Avatar
            Donald Smith

            “If slavery did not exist, there would have been no civil war and no dead to memorialize. The existence of Confederate memorial would not exist.”

            True, but that kind of reasoning is shallow, even immature. Which is exactly the kind of thinking we can’t afford to have at an institution that trains leaders.

            Responsible people do not try to describe complex matters in simplistic terms. They do not look for simple explanations to complex situations. Simplistic people do that.

    2. You are correct. Unfortunately, it was operator error using the commenting software and clicking a tiny global delete box instead of the adjacent individual delete box. I apologize to all who were affected. This morning , I restored all comments that did not include disguised profanity, inadequate snark, or insulting attacks.

      1. Donald Smith Avatar
        Donald Smith

        Carol, thanks for taking on a difficult but vital job.

      2. LarrytheG Avatar

        Good to know and I actually do appreciate what Carol is doing in that more than a few who were liberally using Ad Homs, no longer. And I’m fine with whatever the “rules” are as long as they are uniformly applied to all no matter their philosophical leanings.

        Having said that, there still appears to be some who do their thing with Carol either not watching that commenter or seemingly sometimes allowing more leeway for some than others.

        Tough job. Easy to criticize. But I do think it has reduced the Ad Homs though some still play games with them.

  12. Donald Smith Avatar
    Donald Smith

    It’s not as if we haven’t had a chance to look at Shapira’s reporting in the past. This fellow is not exactly an unknown entity. He has well-established bona fides as a biased writer, more of an activist than an objective journalist.

    In the case of Stonewall Jackson, it’s safe to conclude he wanted to shape the Jackson statue debate, not report on it. In his articles written before VMI decided to remove all trace of Jackson from Main Post, he omitted information about Jackson’s background that might have led his readers to come to a different conclusion about Stonewall than the one Shapira obviously wanted them to come to—Jackson as an enslaver of six people.

    Shapira only mentioned Chancellorsville as the place where Jackson was shot by Confederate troops. He didn’t mention at all the Valley Campaign, Second Manassas, Cedar Mountain, Fredericksburg, First Manassas or Jackson’s Sunday School for slaves.

    Shapira is an Ivy League graduate, so we should presume he should know the importance of providing all the pertinent facts. He didn’t, and we have to presume he did this deliberately.

    So, no, Eric, Shapira doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt. His bias is obvious, and apparently deliberate.

    1. Donald Smith Avatar
      Donald Smith

      “His stories are supported by facts.”

      As I said upthread, he omits important facts that distract from the impression he is trying to create. In so doing, he is de facto misleading his readers. We should expect more from reporters at major American journalism institutions.

      Do you really think Ian Shapira painted a balanced, complete, professional portrait of Stonewall Jackson in his reporting?

      Perhaps Shapira realizes that the WaPo’s audience is easily upset, and wants its biases reinforced, so he reports what they want to hear. That is good business, but it’s terrible journalism and even worse citizenship.

      Could it be that the DEI supporters realize that, if people got a full picture of Stonewall Jackson’s legacy, they’d realize how much the DEI crew has overreacted, how much they took advantage of COVID and the George Floyd tragedy, and how petty and shallow they look?

      1. “Do you really think Ian Shapira painted a balanced, complete, professional portrait of Stonewall Jackson in his reporting?” No, but believe it or not, Jackson was never the story. The story was the people who supported Jackson, what that statue represented, and why in the context of 2020. And I would say that those stories are supported by facts, and the PAC and others prove the truth of that reporting every day.

        1. Donald Smith Avatar
          Donald Smith

          What qualifies you to decide what Stonewall Jackson meant to everybody?

          Did the George Floyd protests, led by Black Lives Matter, mean that all of those protesters were Marxists who wanted to challenge the concept of the nuclear family? No, of course not. But that’s what Black Lives Matter’s charter said about the organization.

          If you claim the right to proclaim that everyone who respected Stonewall Jackson was a Lost Causer, then why can’t I assert that everyone who attended a BLM protest was a Marxist who wanted to destroy the nuclear family. I won’t do that, because it’s obviously wrong. But, if I was following your standard, I’d be justified in making such a claim.

          Moreover, it is disappointing that the Jackson legacy opponents, of all races, were unable to see anything redeeming in his legacy. That’s the message that’s sent when you sandblast a name off an arch. That’s the obvious inference from an action as violent and dramatic in that. I had expected VMI graduates to be more wise and broad-minded than that. Was I mistaken?

          1. In the context of VMI, I think I have plenty of knowledge when talking about the Stonewall issue. I’m not sure that there’s anyone with more knowledge, in fact. The debate over Stonewall brought out the worst in a significant part of the alumni base. The group agitating for his return to Post today can be fairly be described as fanatical. There was actually a time and place for reasoned debate on what to do with Stonewall, his legacy, and what he meant to the school. I tried very hard to get that conversation started. But sadly, that never took place. Politics and events took over.

          2. Donald Smith Avatar
            Donald Smith

            No doubt you know more about the ins-and-outs of the Stonewall-at-VMI story than the rest of us. But the DEI crowd sure seems fanatical too. It also sure seems that they took advantage of the dual national traumas of COVID and George Floyd to bully VMI, especially General Peay. Effective?
            Yes. Honorable? Hardly.

            Once again, apparently at VMI it was deemed necessary to sandblast Jackson’s name off a National Historic Landmark. You can’t expect us to take your word that such an extreme act was necessary. That it was vital to not just remove his statue, but also take his name off the chapel, and scour Main Post for any mention of him. Are you saying that VMI was so overrun by racists that these extreme actions were absolutely necessary?

            Nope, not buying it. I’m still waiting for a good explanation of why some VMI graduates couldn’t see any redeeming qualities in Stonewall Jackson’s legacy. All they could see was a Confederate who owned slaves. Nothing else he did or stood for seemed to matter. Is that the kind of citizen-soldier VMI produces nowadays? If VMI produces graduates who can’t see the big picture in life, then Virginians might want to think twice about continuing to support the institution.

          3. Donald Smith Avatar
            Donald Smith

            If you really think the whole range of actions VMI took against Stonewall Jackson’s legacy were necessary and proper, then you really should come up from the comments section and write a front-page article for BR making your case.

            From where I (and many of us) sit, the treatment of Stonewall Jackson’s legacy at VMI is an example of activists and easily-offended people taking advantage of a national crisis to achieve their objectives. That is NOT something honorable citizen-soldiers do.

            You seem to be saying that the situation at VMI was so bad that all of this was necessary, and we should take your word for it. That’s not how this works. Americans look at the obvious evidence and draw their own conclusions.

            I don’t see the evidence that justified how Jackson’s legacy was treated. It sets a terrible example for how to handle American heritage questions overall. Good leaders do not set bad examples—bad leaders do.

            I’ve laid out my reasons for that judgement on the front page, multiple times. It’s time for you to do the same thing. Or, don’t be surprised if many of us conclude that you don’t have the evidence to back up your arguments.

            Ralph Northam’s not here to run top cover for the DEI crowd anymore.

          4. Donald Smith Avatar
            Donald Smith

            “The group agitating for his return to Post today can be fairly be described as fanatical.”

            Or, they could be described as worried, even desperate. And they might have good reasons.

            They might have realized that educated outsiders know that Stonewall Jackson wasn’t Simon Legree. But, some VMI alumni, activists and opportunistic politicians apparently feel compelled to treat him that way.

            Those outsiders probably are wondering to themselves whether VMI has gone nuts.

            If a college graduate looks at Stonewall Jackson’s legacy and only sees Simon Legree, it makes you wonder about the college that educated him.

            Who wants to graduate from a college that’s acquired a reputation as, as the British would put it, a “figure of fun.” Who wants to be known as a graduate from the military college that went woke and succumbed to cancel culture? What taxpayer wants to pay for a woke military college?

            So, perhaps the “fanatics” you see are actually concerned for the reputation of VMI, outside of the small world where the DEI crowd and hypersensitive people run the show.

          5. I’m happy to talk to you about Stonewall. I don’t like what happened overall, though I doubt you’d appreciate where I think they fell short (they didn’t go nearly far enough). I’m happy the statue is gone. It should have happened much earlier. I wish rational people could have discussed the entire matter. Many of us offered to do just that. We were turned down.

          6. Donald Smith Avatar
            Donald Smith

            I am sorry the statue is gone, but I understand and accept that reasonable people thought it was a good idea for it to go. What I don’t understand is the sandblasting and all the other excesses that followed. (Taking his name off the chapel? Seriously?) IMO it makes VMI look petty and weak-minded. It’s cancel culture in action. It’s the kind of stuff that Winston Smith’s Ministry of Truth would do.

            I also don’t understand why so many at VMI directed so much hate at the legacy of a man who, for his times, did much more for African-Americans than virtually anyone else in his community. It’s as if they can’t, or wouldn’t, see the big picture and look at the man’s whole legacy. If VMI is producing graduates that can only see every Confederate as a clone for Simon Legree, IMO that reflects poorly on the education VMI provides. I’m confident many people outside of Lexington will come to the same conclusion. So much for VMI’s reputation as the “West Point of the South.” It now appears to be on the path to becoming “Oberlin Military Academy.”

            As I said upthread, I suspect that’s one reason why Matt Daniel and the Spirit of VMI PAC is fighting DEI so hard.

          7. To your point, I spoke to a prominent Civil War historian who was in favor of taking down Stonewall (and a number of other monuments) who said that VMI “botched” what they did with Stonewall; meaning that there was something valuable they could have done for cadets by teaching his legacy, good and bad. Instead, they just erased him from the school, which is ahistorical and doesn’t tackle the more critical issue for VMI of slavery and racism. I fundamentally disagree with the way that VMI’s board went about their business w/r/t Confederate monuments and iconography, and there’s very little doubt that they’ll have to revisit their decisions in the future. As for the PAC, their methods and public statements are unhinged and bigoted. So if that’s the way they fight, it does nothing to advance the conservative argument for what VMI should be. It detracts from it, brings negative media attention to the school and deters potential cadets from attending. No one can have a discussion with that group; it’s all bigoted attacks all the time.

  13. Inadvertent error. Unintended deletions restored.

    1. Donald Smith Avatar
      Donald Smith

      It’s better than the old system BR had for dealing with wayward commenters.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFvqDaFpXeM

      1. Because people post over a period of days. The moderation screens are chronological.

    2. Much appreciated.

  14. Donald Smith Avatar
    Donald Smith

    A word of advice. You, as with the rest of us, are a guest in BR’s house. CB is one of the house’s owners. It is impolite to insult your host openly and publicly, while she’s listening. Perhaps you are so special that you can insult your host publicly, in her own house. But perhaps not.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      You’re are correct. It requires guile. More fun that way anyway.

    2. LarrytheG Avatar

      There is no intent to insult. There is a question as to how the rules are working and it’s a valid question that has nothing to do with insult but more to whether there is consistent and fair treatment of the content of the comments as long as they do conform to the stated rules.

      If JAB believes that such questions deserve booting the person asking the questions from the blog, then so be it.

      I’ve been here for quite some time and the changes of late with regard to comments is not consistent with what I thought JAB intended when he first created the blog.

      He could have changed and now this is the way he wants it.

      If discussing it is not allowed, then so be it.

  15. Carmen Villani Jr Avatar
    Carmen Villani Jr

    Some may believe that alumni such as Matt Daniel and myself are damaging VMI. How is saying “VMI is Good” is bad? Who is running VMI right now? Is it the PAC or Matt Daniel? Why are those that have put forth policy and made the decision to not vigorously defend VMI against the false charge of structural racism given a pass? Did they not introduce CRT/DEI? Is it not their policies that are being implemented?

    Some have questioned what harm has DEI done. For starters, it doesn’t promote free speech. The civil liberties organization FIRE sent a letter addressed to the Commandant cautioning them on VMI’s infringement on First Amendment rights of The Cadet newspaper. When professors and students are reluctant to speak out against the policies being put forth because of the adverse consequences they may face, is that really promoting “principled dissent?” It has created division within our ranks as evidenced by some of the other alumni who comment on this blog. VMI’s mission is to produce “advocates of the American Democracy.” Hard to achieve when the focus is taken away from the inherent goodness of it. Is it really education when you don’t have debates on topics such as CRT or January 6th?

    Is Colonel Pegg suing VMI or the PAC for $15 million? This is an alumnus that graduated first in his class, epitomizes the citizen-soldier, served this nation with honor for over 30 years, and received the VMI Achievement Award for “steadfast dedication and commitment to the Virginia Military Institute.”
    Let’s look at what their policies/decisions have helped to produce. VMI saw one its lowest enrollment number in years, nearly a 100% acceptance rate, and of those accepted, fewer of them on a percentage basis decided to attend VMI. Not only that, VMI has lowered its goal of 500 new students to enroll to 45o next year. One final point, data provided during the last BOV meeting showed that the average GPA for this year’s incoming class for the first semester was the lowest it has been going back 5 years. Sure seems like it is going in the wrong direction.

    On the other hand, many alumni believe Honor, Meritocracy, and Inclusion is a better path and what VMI had evolved into. What kind of students has such an approach produced? From the VMI Website – “Nobel Prize winner, 11 Rhodes Scholars, seven Medal of Honor recipients, a Pulitzer Prize winner, college presidents, and generals and flag officers.” Let’s not forget a civil rights hero.

    Mr. Shapira has produced somewhere in the neighborhood of 35 articles on VMI. Safe to say they can be viewed as “negative media” towards VMI? How does negative media help VMI?

    As for Matt Daniel, he has my support.

    1. James McCarthy Avatar
      James McCarthy

      One would be on an Impossible Mission to avoid the rewards and benefits of equity in school, work, property ownership, taxation, marriage.

    2. Carmen Villani Jr Avatar
      Carmen Villani Jr

      As is typical with you Michael, you can’t argue the facts so you attack the messenger. You align yourself with those that have harmed VMI and yet accuse those of us that have defended VMI as the ones doing the damage. It is unfortunate that your intelligence is overshadowed by your utter hypocrisy.

    3. Carmen Villani Jr Avatar
      Carmen Villani Jr

      VMI was cast as a racist college for some 2 years. Do you expect any college or business to be adversely impacted by something like that? Ian Shapira was part of that false charge.

      1. Carmen Villani Jr Avatar
        Carmen Villani Jr

        Jeff Schapiro is with the Richmond Times-Dispatch. Ian Shapira is with the Washington Post. I would suggest you go to their website and type Ian Shapira into their search engine. Not sure how I was being disrespectful but I hope we can agree that I had the right person.

        1. Carmen Villani Jr Avatar
          Carmen Villani Jr

          No problem. Have a good day.

    4. Jake Spivey Avatar
      Jake Spivey

      Wrong – BG Larry Burris was selected for Brigadier General 2 NOV 2020. https://www.gomo.army.mil/public/Biography/usa-10940/larryq-burrisjr
      I think you are confusing the GO/FO list because the person’s graduation year is listed. It takes at least 20 years to gain the requisite training, education, and experience to become a flag or general officer.
      https://www.vmi.edu/media/content-assets/documents/archives/VMI_Flag_Rank_current.pdf

  16. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    “When I was a child, I thought and behaved as a child. Then I attended VMI and cemented that behavior.”

  17. Donald Smith Avatar
    Donald Smith

    Not Today, that sound you hear is CJBova sawing off the branch behind you, after you climbed out on it.

Leave a Reply