This kind of crap really throws sand in my gears:
The US Army’s declining warfighting lethality is not a mystery—it’s a direct consequence of a feudal promotion system that rewards bureaucratic survival over bold leadership, misaligning senior-level priorities with the core mission of closing with and destroying the enemy. This patronage-based structure, decoupled from lethality metrics, incentivizes risk aversion and ethical compromises, eroding the force’s combat edge even as technology advances. We’ve invested billions in cutting-edge gear—Next-Gen Squad Weapons, advanced optics, and precision munitions—yet lethality is tanking. Fewer hits at Combat Training Centers (CTCs), slower quals, and dismal first-run crew scores tell the story. The root? Not tech.
Organizations host two groups—mission-dedicated (Type 1: warfighters) and bureaucracy-dedicated (Type 2: careerists). “The second group will gain and keep control,” Jerry Pournelle asserts, crafting rules that prioritize self-preservation over goals. In the Army, Type 2s dominate, sidelining Type 1s who champion core principles like honest readiness. They lose their “seat at the cool kids’ table,” as the system favors patrons over performance.
And:
Promotions rely on feudal patronage—loyalty to superiors, not lethality. As one analysis puts it, it’s a “bargain and sale” dynamic, decoupled from warfighting. Resources improve, but lethality drops because rewards measure compliance, not kills. We’ve optimized for career survival, not victory.
Read the whole thing if you need to have your good mood spoiled.
SecWar Pete Hegseth needs to get on top of this bullshit, and quickly.