Skip to content

Review of Irresistible Revolution: Marxism’s Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of the American Military by Matthew Lohmeier

Those of you that have kept up with the radical transformation of America’s military from an elite team of true warriors and defenders of the founding ideals into a woke gan of perpetually losing Social Justice Warriors likely recognize the name Matthew Lohmeier. That brave former officer was the one man who stood up to the woke brass and called out the Marxist infiltration of the military and was punished for his efforts, dismissed from the Space Force for daring to stand for American values.

And how did he call out the Marxist takeover of America’s armed forces? By writing a brilliant, thoroughly researched book on the subject titled Irresistible Revolution.

Lohmeier begins his book, as is right, by describing what it’s about and why the topic is of such crucial importance to the United States:

This book is largely about Marxism, something that is ugly and which can even be appropriately associated with evil aims and ends.1 But it is unlikely the reader will fully appreciate or see its ugliness for what it is unless this book begins with an examination of something that is beautiful and right—something Marxism seeks to dismantle, disrupt, and destroy…

Marxism has begun its destructive conquest of even the United States military, its most alarming manifestation in the United States to date…

Mainstream media, social media, the public education system, including the university, as well as federal agencies have all become vessels of various schools of thought that are rooted in Marxist ideology—an ideology bent on the destruction of America’s history and founding philosophy, of Western tradition, specifically Judeo-Christian values, and of patriotism and conservatism.

And what has that Marxist takeover of the American armed forces done to what was once a premier, patriotic fighting force? Our once great and powerful military has decayed. Patriots flee from the sinking ship of the USS Woke Agenda, popping out in the few available lifeboats as their former fellows chant “four legs good, two legs bad” and praise the very ideology that seeks to destroy the nation they’ve sworn to defend.

Or, as he puts it:

Will the Red Wave come crashing down on the Democrat's heads in November?(Required)
This poll gives you free access to our premium politics newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

It is sad, but true, that many young servicemembers who take the oath to defend the Constitution do not fully appreciate liberty, the civil society, republicanism, and economic prosperity; but what is worse is that they do not fear their loss.

That’s why you have West Point cadets making the black power salute. It’s why the Navy is having officers read How to Be an Anti-Racist. It’s why Milley is proud that the Army is teaching CRT to troops. They don’t love America; rather, they love wokeism.

Hence why the military is promoting the horrific works of Nicole Hannah-Jones, a woman that clearly doesn’t love America or Americans:

Hannah-Jones, who received a fellowship to travel to Cuba to study its Communist universal healthcare and education systems before she made her attempt to reframe American history, has no problem putting her strong disliking for America on public display. And she has taken heat for her views. Ironically, even Socialists from the world Trotskyist movement were so off-put by Hannah-Jones’ remarks made during a speech she delivered at New York University in 2019 that they took to the web criticizing her, saying: “there was not a single statement made by Hannah-Jones that evening, on historical issues, that withstands serious examination.” They condemned her remarks about the Holocaust, and attacked her comparisons of the United States with Nazi Germany, saying that she “came dangerously close to endorsing the conception that genocide…was a solution to inherent racism.” These hateful views are not a recent development, however. Years earlier, in a letter to the editor of Notre Dame’s Observer that a younger Hannah-Jones would never have anticipated would be paraded for the world to see, she wrote that “the white race is the biggest murderer, rapist, pillager, and thief of the modern world.…whites have always been an unjust, jealous, unmerciful, avaricious, and blood-thirsty set of beings.” In the same letter she also wrote that Christopher Columbus is “no different then [sic] Hitler,” and insisted that white European descendants of America’s settlers continue to be “bloodsuckers in our communities.”

And, to be clear, the military is promoting the virulently anti-American works of Hannah-Jones, as Lohmeier exposes:

Among the reasons I have taken interest in the 1619 Project is that it has already begun reshaping the American military culture, and with disastrous effect. As shall be seen in this book, the military’s “Diversity and Inclusion” trainings—as well as other dialogues about race that are foisted upon young people in uniform—are increasingly grounded in the misunderstandings propounded by these Times ideologues. Racial identity is becoming a defining characteristic of military forces whose primary identity would otherwise naturally be linked to an oath and a uniform.

And that indoctrination has real consequences.

Now, rather than focus on warfighting, the military is spending time, money, and effort indoctrinating young soldiers, sailors, and airmen into the lefist ideology, as Lohmeier exposes in a few short stories from his career:

I WAS SURPRISED BY WHAT I ENCOUNTERED last year after taking command of an operational squadron in the Space Force. During my first month in command, military professionals across the base—predominantly Air and Space Force personnel—were asked by base leadership to watch two videos in preparation for a “virtual wingman day,” during which trained facilitators would mediate discussions on race and inclusion. This, in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd. The first video the base was asked to watch portrays American history as fraught with racism from 1619 till the present—“400 years of white supremacy,” is how the film’s director describes it. The film teaches that the US Constitution codified a racist social order intended to allow whites to remain in power and subjugate and oppress blacks, and that we as a nation have never escaped from that foundation of racism. Further, that upon ratification of the Constitution, “white supremacy was now the official policy of the United States of America.” At one point, reference is made to former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and it is asserted that because the mentality of white supremacy has become engrained in our nation’s psyche, he, and other whites like him, do not want blacks “to get too far.” The idea is that the racism of these white people is true whether they recognize it or not. They simply cannot help it.

The second video portrays Republican politicians as racist, claiming, for example, that George Bush won his election by causing Americans to fear black people, and also showing clips of Donald Trump before the 2016 election that cast him in a negative light, insinuating that he has fueled systemic racism in America. Later in the video, President Trump (who was President and commander in chief both at the time the video was created as well as when it was distributed to the base) is cast in a terrible light—and out of context—directly implying that he enjoys oppressing blacks and keeping minorities in an inferior status. Democrat politicians, on the other hand, are portrayed as aiding the black community. There are favorable clips of Barack Obama, and Bill and Hillary Clinton, who all had, at least as depicted in the video, undoubtedly contributed greatly to the eradication of anti-black racism and the systemic oppression of the black community at large. The video also contains clips of an interview with Marxist activist Melina Abdullah (organizer of the Black Lives Matter, Los Angeles chapter) whose comments are intended to build a suitably unfavorable narrative about American history so as to justify—and demonstrate sympathy for—violent riots in the United States. Throughout the film, the United States is referred to as a “system of oppression.”

And what is all that leading to? What is the end of the road for the Marxist ideologues? Serfdom. The road Hayek showed such an ideology leads to:

Why is it that despite increased rhetoric touting the importance of equality, servicemembers sense a looming injustice and unbalanced approach to accountability? It is because in this newly emerging American military culture, the drive for equality means forced inequality. Hayek had it right in his Road to Serfdom, written in the shadows of Hitler’s totalitarianism and in the wake of global conflict that ushered in the Cold War, when he explained that “even the striving for equality…can result only in an officially enforced inequality—an authoritarian determination of the status of each individual in the new hierarchial [sic] order—and that most of the humanitarian elements of our morals, the respect for human life, for the weak, and for the individual generally, will disappear.

Far from being the apolitical organization our leaders claim it is, the military has gone full woke. Its indoctrination efforts target America, patriotism, and conservatism and have been going on for a long, long time. Our troops, thanks to the woke brass, fight for CRT, not America.

There are more stories in Irresistible Revolution, of course. Lohmeier had run-ins with a CRT-obsessed chaplain, more than his fair share of discussions with woke officers, and constantly had to deal with the anti-American propaganda being spewed by the very organization theoretically meant to defend this great nation. But you’ll have to read it to learn about all that, I can’t transcribe them all for you!

Overall, Irresistible Revolution is a great book. Lohmeier, in anecdotal stories and with cold hard facts, flays the military alive for its embracing the thoroughly un-American ideals of the critical race theorists, shows just where its Marxist ideas will lead, and shows in vivid details why such a path is dangerous.

However, there is a problem with it, and it’s the same problem found in many works about culture war issues: Lohmeier simply isn’t willing to go far enough. He approaches the logical conclusion, which is that wokeism is evil and all those who preach it must be destroyed if America is to survive, but then shies away from that logical conclusion, as in this passage:

By way of brief caveat, we must also note the following. Having criticized the cultural transformation that is underway within the uniformed services, it is necessary to acknowledge the fact that there are decent people actively engaged in what we might term Inclusion initiatives who are trying to ensure the services do not foster environments of discrimination. The desire to eliminate illegal discrimination is inherently noble and, inasmuch as it is sincere, reflects the best in mankind. Many of the people engaged in these efforts are genuine in their concern for others—that has been true in the past and remains true today. The critique here is not meant to spurn the intentions of such people.

That’s the wrong mindset to bring to such a discussion. WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

There are no good critical race theorists or diversity commissars just as there were no good NKVD executioners or Red Guard fanatics.

“Inclusion initiatives” are at the very root of what’s wrong with America’s armed forces.

We had no diversity consultants in World War II or Korea, yet those wars were unvarnished wins. Even during the Vietnam War, where the integrated services had to deal with the racial tension of the Civil Rights Era while fighting an unpopular war in a jungle nation halfway around the world, diversity consultants weren’t called in to make the armed forces “inclusive.” Instead, troops were left to their own devices and did well; black, white, or any other color they fought and died together as brothers in arms.

From: here

They didn’t care about their races. They fought and died for each other and whatever artificial racial lines might have been constructed back in America were irrelevant for our boys in green. Because it wasn’t a class they had to sit through, it didn’t matter to them. Listen to any Vietnam veteran interview; with a small minority of exceptions, any veteran will say the same thing. Race just wasn’t something that mattered between fellow soldiers.

Do you think it would have been the same had they all had to sit through seminar after seminar about “systemic racism” in America? Whether the person giving the talk was “well-meaning” or not, such rehashing of racial issues only serves to increase the divide between service members. “Environments of discrimination” are overcome naturally by putting men together in a situation where they must fight to survive, not by letting the diversity consultants preach to them about the evils of whiteness.

The simple fact is that there can be no accommodation of the diversity radicals. We can’t hedge and say that some of them are well-meaning. We can’t let the less radical ones preach to people and divide America and her troops. Whatever their intentions, their ends are evil.

Yes, discrimination on the basis of race alone is wrong and morally reprehensible. That should be obvious to anyone at this point. Hence why rehashing it is unnecessary; who honestly believes that any soldier, sailor, or airman thinks that the armed forces are full of discrimination or that the virulent racism of the Jim Crow South is a good thing? No one does. That mode of thought was stamped long ago, not by diversity consultants but by good-natured people living their lives and treating others based on the content of their characters rather than the color of their skin. To now go back and keep discussing racism only furthers the leftist agenda and divides America.

Sadly, that seems to be a fact that Lohmeier either can’t or won’t accept. He’s right on target when he discusses the Marxist takeover of America’s military and how devastating that takeover has been. But he needs to reach the logical conclusion, which is that such a takeover could only happen because of the Trojan horse of diversity and inclusion initiatives. If we want to stamp out CRT, then we need to kick all those who preach any variant of it out, no matter what their declared goals are. There can be no compromise with evil, especially in an institution as important as the military.

So, Irresistible Revolution is a mostly good book about an important topic. But, in the end, Lohmeier slightly whiffs. He needs to take the next step on the red-pilled path.

By: Gen Z Conservative. Follow me on Parler and Gettr.