How DEI Weakens the Military

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Radio Free Hillsdale Hour

Episode: How DEI Weakens the Military

Date: March 21, 2025
Host: Scott Bertram (Hillsdale College)

---

Overview of the Episode

This episode of The Radio Free Hillsdale Hour explores three distinct but thematically linked topics: an introduction to the fundamentals of capitalism (with Dr. Charles Steele), a deep dive into the impact of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies on the readiness and effectiveness of the U.S. military (with Will Tebow), and accessible advice for appreciating classical music (with Dr. Derek Stoff). The primary focus is on Will Tebow’s recent report analyzing how DEI initiatives have, in his view, weakened military preparedness by shifting priorities away from merit-based standards.

---

Segment 1: Understanding Capitalism

Guest: Dr. Charles Steele, Director of the Center for Commerce and Freedom, Hillsdale College
Timestamps: 01:21 – 11:51

Key Points & Insights

• Defining Capitalism

  • Capitalism is not “rule by capitalists” but “an economic system based on private property rights, freedom of contract, and the use of money as a medium of exchange.”
    Quote:

    “Capitalism is an economic system. It's not ruled by any particular people... The primary prerequisites… are, number one, private property rights... the freedom to contract... and then thirdly, we also need money.”
    (Dr. Charles Steele, 02:00)

• Human Nature and Capitalism

  • Capitalism aligns with human nature—self-interest and being social—by leveraging incentives to serve others’ needs.
  • Adam Smith’s view: self-interest isn’t inherently selfish, as it undergirds cooperation and prosperity.
  • Quote:

    “Smith points out... man is first of all most interested in what concerns him. He's also the one who is most capable of understanding what he needs and what he can contribute to others.”
    (Dr. Steele, 03:47)

• Why Capitalism Works

  • Profit and loss provide feedback—profit signals creating value, loss signals destroying it.
  • Quote:

    “If we earn profit, profit is essential. That's gain. And it shows that one has taken resources... and converted them to something that is more valuable.”
    (Dr. Steele, 04:55)

• Addressing Critiques of Capitalism

  • Crony capitalism is not true capitalism but government interference (historically called “mercantilism”).
  • Quote:

    “Crony capitalism... is actually what Adam Smith called mercantilism... That's the use of government to interfere with capitalism.”
    (Dr. Steele, 06:35)

• Foreign Perspectives

  • After experiencing socialism firsthand, foreign students largely viewed capitalism as superior.
  • There is a risk of taking successful systems for granted and idealizing alternatives.

• Democratic Socialism

  • Labeling aside, socialism is centralized, unresponsive to market signals, and inefficient, whether adopted through democracy or not.
  • Quote:

    “Democratic socialism is socialism... And whether we voted for it or whether it was imposed by a dictator, it's still socialism and it doesn't work.”
    (Dr. Steele, 08:58)

• Capitalism and American History

  • America’s economic freedom is foundational to its success and global leadership.
  • Understanding economics is key to understanding American history.

• Course Aim

  • Dr. Steele emphasizes the practical and moral case for capitalism, hoping students “understand the importance of private property, individual liberty and sound money.”
  • Quote:

    “Capitalism is really the system that permits human flourishing... this has both practical implications, but also that it's a moral system.”
    (Dr. Steele, 10:46)

---

Segment 2: The Impact of DEI on the U.S. Military

Guest: Will Tebow, Director, American Military Project, Claremont Institute
Timestamps: 14:09 – 28:55

Main Theme

Will Tebow presents research arguing that DEI policies fundamentally weaken U.S. military effectiveness by prioritizing diversity quotas over merit and readiness.

Key Points & Insights

• Purpose of the U.S. Military

  • The military has a unique function: “to apply violence at an industrial scale in defense of the American nation.”
  • Civilian values and military values are inherently distinct; importing civil diversity goals muddles mission clarity.
  • Quote:

    “The military is the only institution that exists exclusively to apply violence at an industrial scale in defense of the American nation.”
    (Will Tebow, 14:32)

• Is Military Diversity Necessary?

  • Tebow asserts that mirroring the nation’s demographics is not necessary; in fact, it detracts from the military’s unique needs for hierarchy, discipline, and a focus on mission above individual identity.
  • Quote:

    “It's not necessary. And there are many reasons to believe that if such a reflection is a goal... the military would inherently lose its focus from its core, unique mission.”
    (Will Tebow, 15:11)

• Nature of DEI Initiatives

  • DEI pushes for proportional racial and gender representation; when natural outcomes differ, the assumption is systemic injustice.
  • Focus is on equal representation “between the races and sexes” regardless of job qualification or mission.
  • Quote:

    “The DEI project... is the effort to demand and guarantee equal representation between the races and sexes in the military and in the nation writ large.”
    (Will Tebow, 16:47)

• Consequences for Military Effectiveness

  • Standards are eroded: “DEI has upended the essence of what standards mean for the military… [It] forces a consideration of innate characteristics... to influence the ultimate decision about personnel and programs.”
  • Policies lead to discriminatory practices against majority groups to fulfill diversity quotas, causing “a crippling lack of manpower and military resources.”
  • Quote:

    “Majority groups are discriminated against in order to meet diversity outcomes, goals and quotas of any kind.”
    (Will Tebow, 18:02)

• Impacts on Morale and Cohesion

  • Emphasis on demographic representation undermines cohesion and trust essential for military units.
  • The rationale that minority soldiers need demographically-matched role models is called “a pernicious one of the DEI left.”
  • Quote:

    “It's the corrupt notion that there is something wrong if a unit looks a certain way, regardless of the standards that led to them being composed in that exact manner.”
    (Will Tebow, 20:00)

• DEI and Women in the Military

  • Argues that personnel decisions should be based solely on job competence, not on expanding opportunities based on sex or race.
  • Says the focus must return to “the best people for the jobs… directly related to the conduct… of one’s job in the military.”
  • Quote:

    “The only consideration for military personnel... should be job competence and those attributes that are directly related to the... excellent conduct of one's job in the military.”
    (Will Tebow, 21:59)

• Critique of Military Bureaucracy

  • Questions the ballooning number of commands and senior officers vs. WWII; suggests modern bureaucracy serves itself.
  • The current military command structure and the roles of institutions like West Point and Joint Staff are scrutinized for efficiency.
  • Quote:

    “It is almost as if the bureaucracy of the DOD exists for the sake of the bureaucracy of the DOD.”
    (Will Tebow, 24:02)

• Recruiting and the Trump Administration

  • Notes a surge in enlistment since the start of the “second Trump administration,” attributing rise to renewed public trust in military leadership focused on national self-interest.
  • Quote:

    “I think the American people have the confidence that the President will make decisions... only considering... the American people and the American national interest.”
    (Will Tebow, 26:22)

• Sustainability of Trends

  • Predicts continued improvement in recruiting if the military remains distinctive—a place to develop character and serve a higher cause, rather than just another self-actualization institution.
  • Warns that losing its distinctive ethos would return numbers “to mediocre again.”
  • Quote:

    “There has to be something distinctive about the ethos and the values of the military. And our government, through policy, should ensure that it stays that way.”
    (Will Tebow, 27:16)

---

Segment 3: How to Listen To and Appreciate Music

Guest: Dr. Derek Stoff, Associate Professor of Music, Hillsdale College
Timestamps: 31:11 – 52:12

Key Points & Insights

• Active Listening Challenges

  • Many find it hard to stay engaged during long classical performances due to unfamiliarity; “familiarizing yourself with it makes it easier to understand,” much like language immersion.
  • Quote:

    “Familiarizing yourself with it makes it easier to understand. It's not unlike learning a second language... when you're confronted as a newbie... your brain hasn't yet learned to filter those sounds...”
    (Dr. Stoff, 31:28)

• Practical Advice for Attentive Listening

  • Make use of recordings to listen in chunks, not just from the beginning; focus on internal sections to build familiarity.
  • In the past, immersion came from personally making or reading music, not just listening as passive audiences.

• Historical Norms of Listening

  • Historically, music was more participatory and social—people played music or experienced it in less formal settings.
  • Sitting silently for long concerts is a modern invention; even revered composers like Bach wrote music for coffee houses, not silent concert halls.
  • Quote:

    “People don't normally sit down for hours on end and listen to music like this. In the past... the most pleasure you get out of music is in the making.”
    (Dr. Stoff, 36:18)

• It’s Normal to Be Distracted

  • Don’t feel guilty for wandering attention: “Even the best of us... have moments where our attention is flagging in concerts.”
  • Familiarity through casual listening (while gardening, cooking, etc.) can help, even if not fully focused.

• Core Musical Terms Explained

  • Pitch: Frequency of sound; we use terms “high/low” as metaphors.
  • Rhythm: The movement of music through time; even a single note creates rhythm by having a start and end.
  • Meter: Grouping of beats—most commonly in twos and threes.
  • Melody: The main tuneful line formed by connecting pitches and phrases.
  • Harmony: Multiple pitches together, creating chords and depth.
  • Quote:

    “Rhythm... if you had to reduce music to its sort of first principle. It's this idea of moving through time.”
    (Dr. Stoff, 43:59)

• Do You Need Technical Knowledge?

  • Technical labeling is optional; the more valued experience is making personal, aesthetic judgments—“this is beautiful,” “I enjoyed this,” or even “I didn’t like this.”

  • Critics from outside music can bring valuable perspectives, using everyday language.

  • Quote:

    “You can do a lot of criticism of music without knowing a lot about the technical nature of music... sometimes the best critics are people from outside domains, domains outside of music...”
    (Dr. Stoff, 49:50)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Standards and DEI:

  “DEI has upended the essence of what standards mean for the military.”
  (Will Tebow, 18:02)

• On What Makes the Military Distinct:

  “There has to be something distinctive about the ethos and the values of the military.”
  (Will Tebow, 27:16)

• On Technical Music Knowledge:

  “Musicians sometimes have their heads stuck in the sand thinking that musician shop talk is what it means to understand music... But it doesn't necessarily mean that you've really understood the music and know why it's important.”
  (Dr. Derek Stoff, 49:50)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [01:21] – Dr. Charles Steele on Capitalism
• [14:09] – Will Tebow on the military’s mission and DEI
• [18:02] – Effects of DEI on military standards
• [24:02] – Military leadership model and bureaucratic critique
• [26:22] – Change in enlistment under new administration
• [31:11] – Dr. Derek Stoff on listening and appreciating music

---

Episode Takeaways

• The episode critiques DEI through the lens of military readiness, argues for the unique and rigorous nature of military standards, and alludes to recent policy shifts affecting recruitment.
• It also underscores the value of understanding foundational economic and artistic concepts—not only in technical terms, but in their human and moral context.
• Accessible and practical strategies are offered for engaging with both complex economics and classical music, with an emphasis on personal experience and discernment over rote expertise.

---

For more information on the guests and full reports or resources, visit claremont.org and hillsdale.edu.

Transcript

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

From the historic campus of Hillsdale College.

[Scott Bertram]

In Hillsdale, Michigan, where the good, the true and the beautiful are taught, nurtured.

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

And honored, this is the Radio Free.

[Scott Bertram]

Hillsdale Hour, bringing the activity and education.

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

Of the college to listeners across the country.

[Will Tebow]

There also comes with it the natural prescriptions of policy that demands more racially and sexually diverse populations. Majority groups are discriminated against in order to meet diversity outcomes, goals and quotas of any kind.

[Scott Bertram]

This is your host, Scott Bertram. Welcome to the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour. That was Will Tebow, Director of the American Military Project at the Claremont Institute center for the American Way of Life. We'll talk in depth with him later about his recent report on the fatal impact of DEI on US military readiness. First, we're joined by Dr. Charles Steele. He is director of the center for Commerce and Freedom, Associate professor of Economics, and Herman A. And Suzanne S. Detwiler Chair in Economics at Hillsdale College. Dr. Steele, thanks for joining us.

[Dr. Charles Steele]

Well, thank you, Scott. Happy to be here.

[Scott Bertram]

Also your teacher for the new Hillsdale College online course, Understanding Capitalism. And you can find all that information at hillsdale. Edu newcourse N E W C O U R S e hillsdale. Edu newcourse for Understanding Capitalism. And we want to give people an overview of the course and encourage them to sign up today. Dr. Steele so let's start with the big question. Is capitalism simply just rule by capitalists? How should we understand it?

[Dr. Charles Steele]

Well, that's a great, great lead in no, it's not. But maybe it would be useful to say what capitalism is. Capitalism is an economic system. It's not ruled by any particular people. It is an economic system. And the primary prerequisites or the conditions for it are, number one, private property rights, individual rights in the Lockean sense, that would cover a person's each person has a right to his or her own self as well as to his or her own labor and the fruits of that labor when they work, and also to honestly earn property. This means private property, in particular in the means of production. That's essential for capitalism and the ability to accumulate wealth and capital. And so a second part or second prerequisite for capitalism is the freedom to contract, the freedom to act, freedom of action. And that includes contracting and protecting those property rights that are exchanged so that we have an exchange system. And then thirdly, we also need money. It's possible to imagine a system of private property and exchange, but it's a barter system, but with money that permits accounting and permits us to calculate values of Various kinds of options and compare them in ways that you couldn't in a barter system. That's essential for capitalism. So you could say it's a free market system. In the course, I tend not to use terminology like free market because it's really free people that we're talking about, free individuals.

[Scott Bertram]

So how do those core tenets of capitalism and how is capitalism overall best suited to reflect the very nature of human behavior?

[Dr. Charles Steele]

So humans have two, two characteristics that are just a part of human nature. One is that we are self interested. That is something that Adam Smith points out. And he points out that it's actually a good thing. It's necessary because as individuals we couldn't survive if we didn't take care of ourselves. And as he points out, that's why a man is first of all most interested in what concerns him. He's also the one who is most capable of understanding what he needs and what he can contribute to others. There's a second dimension of human nature which is essential. And again, Adam Smith points this out and that's that man is a social animal. We're not like grizzly bears, for example, who live rather isolated lives and for the most part don't like each other. But in essence we are social animals who care a lot about each other. Capitalism makes use of both of those. It really emanates from those characteristics and employs them.

[Scott Bertram]

So why does it work? Why does capitalism work? Why does it lead to prosperity, more and better goods and services for an economy?

[Dr. Charles Steele]

Sure. Capitalism, first of all, it incentivizes people to utilize their capabilities, their capital or their capitals, as Adam Smith puts it, which means their knowledge, their abilities, their property, and, and it rewards them for finding ways to help others, to serve others needs. So that's the first thing that it does. It incentivizes this behavior, but it also gives a feedback or a kind of knowledge. If we earn profit, profit is essential. That's gain. And it shows that one has taken resources or factors of production which are less valuable and converted them to something that is more valuable. If we take factors of production and make something that's less valuable than what we started with, we take losses. That's a signal to stop. And if we don't follow the signal, we go bankrupt. If we earn profit, that's an encouragement. And so that's an ex post signal of whether or not we are operating successfully.

[Scott Bertram]

Talking with Dr. Charles Steele. He is your teacher for the new Hillsdale College online course Understanding Capitalism at hillsdale. Edu Newcourse Hillsdale EDUARDO EDU NEW COURSE There are critiques and criticisms of capitalism. Is it proper, is it even necessary to address what some would call the excesses of capitalism, what some would call corporate greed, or in a different sphere, perhaps crony capitalism? Do we have to address those things inside the system?

[Dr. Charles Steele]

I like that question a lot. I think that it's comes from a misunderstanding of what capitalism is to say that crony capitalism is an example of capitalism gone, you know, gone to an extreme. Crony capitalism was actually what Adam Smith called mercantilism. That's government regulation that is designed to, as Smith put it, to favor some. He said, extraordinary privileges for some, extraordinary restraints on others. That's the use of government to interfere with capitalism. I've studied the Soviet system and if you look at the way a communist system operates, ultimately what it is, despite what they say on paper, what a Soviet or a communist style system is, is truly extraordinary privileges for those in charge and harsh restrictions on everyone else. So that comes a lot closer to what socialism, comes a lot closer to what crony capitalism is in its essence than true capitalism does.

[Scott Bertram]

You have taught undergraduate students in China, in Russia, elsewhere. What generally is an outsider's view of capitalism?

[Dr. Charles Steele]

So I taught, this is about 25 years ago. I taught graduate school in, in a very good school in Ukraine, and I taught undergrads in Russia and in Moscow and in Beijing. So 25 years ago, there was not a student I had, out of all of them, who had any interest in socialism. They wanted to know how a better system would work. They had seen socialism up front. No one thought it was a successful system. And whether that's so now, I don't know. I think that when people become, when the people operate, live in a, in a successful society, they begin to take it for granted and start thinking that there are alternative systems that would make things better. There is not an alternative system to capitalism that would make things better. And it's certainly not socialism, which is my next question.

[Scott Bertram]

There are calls, there are people in this country who would say there needs to be change, and perhaps not outright socialism, but this term that they call democratic socialism, what does that mean? How would that sort of system change the very nature of the country?

[Dr. Charles Steele]

Democratic socialism is socialism. So socialism is an economic system. And whether we voted for it or whether it was imposed by a dictator, it's still socialism and it doesn't work. There's a misunderstanding that we have different economic systems. And it's like picking something off a menu. Which do you prefer? That's not the way it works. Capitalism again creates the incentive and the knowledge of how to create value. If you're not creating value, you're destroying it, you're not growing it, you're not serving people's needs. And socialism has no alternative system that it operates for that. It simply ends up being the fiat of a so called expert who is unable to identify any of these things, no way to identify profit loss.

[Scott Bertram]

There are big picture stories to tell here as well. How does American capitalism help us to tell the story of American history?

[Dr. Charles Steele]

To put it really simply, America has had the freest economy in the world. We went from being 13 colonies that united and were basically rural, agrarian, poor, and became the greatest economy in the world, greatest that humans have ever seen. Modern economic growth comes from capitalism and the development of that. And the United States has embodied that more than any other place. One cannot understand politics, one cannot understand history if one doesn't understand some of that economics.

[Scott Bertram]

Dr. Charles Steele is your teacher for Understanding Capitalism Again. Hillsdale. Edu New course if people go sign up and take the course and hear you lecture, what do you hope that they get out of it?

[Dr. Charles Steele]

I hope that they understand capitalism. It's important that the individuals that Americans understand something about the economic system that we have and in particular that they understand the importance of private property, individual liberty and sound money. These are essential for human flourishing. Capitalism is really the system that permits human flourishing. In the course, one of the things that I try to emphasize is that this has both practical implications, but also that it's a moral system. Both aspects of these are quite important.

[Scott Bertram]

Dr. Charles Steele, director of the center for Commerce and Freedom, Associate professor of Economics and Herman A. And Suzanne S. Detwiler Chair in Economics at Hillsdale College, your teacher for the new Understanding Capitalism online course at Hillsdale. Edu newcourse that's Hillsdale. Edu New course. Dr. Steele, thanks so much for joining us here on the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.

[Dr. Charles Steele]

Thank you. I look forward to some new students.

[Scott Bertram]

Up next, Will Tebow joins us. We'll talk about his recent report on the impact of DEI on US Military readiness. I'm Scott Bertram. This is the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.

[Narrator/Announcer]

Great books, great people, great ideas. Learning about these things is critical to being a well educated human being. And we can help with the Hillsdale dialogues. Each week, Hillsdale College President Larry Arne joins radio veteran Hugh Hewitt to discuss topics of enduring relevance. And from time to time they also talk about current events, but always with an eye toward more fundamental truths. And they want you to tune in to a conversation like no other. The Hillsdale Dialogues are posted every Monday on the Hillsdale College Podcast Network at podcast hillsdale.edu. that's podcast hillsdale edu or listen via Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you find your audio.

[Scott Bertram]

This show is a part of the Hillsdale College Podcast Network. If you like what you hear, please subscribe to your favorite. You'll get brand new episodes of all your favorite shows sent right to your device, and you'll help us know that you're out there listening. Never miss another episode by going to Podcast Hillsdale. Edu Hill subscribe that's Podcast Hillsdale Edu subscribe or click the Follow or Subscribe button on Apple podcasts, Spotify or YouTube. Welcome back to the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour. I'm Scott Bertram. Be sure to find us on X or Hillsdale Radio. For updated show and guest information, we're joined by Will Tebow. He is director of the American Military Project at the center for the American Way of Life at the Claremont institute. [e-mail] Will, thanks so much for joining us.

[Will Tebow]

Yeah, thank you, Scott.

[Scott Bertram]

There is a report [e-mail] that people can find identity in the the Fatal Impact of diversity, equity, and inclusion on US Military Readiness. A lot to walk through in this let's start by defining our goal, which is what is the duty of the US Military? What should we always keep in mind as we discuss these matters?

[Will Tebow]

The military is the only institution that exists exclusively to apply violence at an industrial scale in defense of the American nation. No other institution can and probably should do this. And so it is the military's purview to be able to apply violence with maximum lethality when absolutely necessary.

[Scott Bertram]

Okay, for the military to achieve that goal, or work toward that goal, is it at all necessary that it in some way reflect the makeup of the nation?

[Will Tebow]

It's not necessary. And there are many reasons to believe that if such a reflection is a goal of policymakers or defense officials, the military would inherently lose its focus from its core, unique mission. The military is an inherently hierarchical, conservative, let's say a small C conservative institution in that it depends on a fairly rigid hierarchy, subjugation of personal desire to the greater good, and an absolute adherence to standards that are directly related to the mission of the military and to the individuals who serve within its ranks. This is in direct opposition to the nation it supports. We are in America, even by politically conservative standards, a small l liberal country based on individual rights, even natural rights, but nonetheless individual rights that don't easily conform to an organization like the military. So therefore you should go to great lengths, policymakers should go to great lengths to maintain a strict separation between the values that govern civil society and those that govern the military.

[Scott Bertram]

When people talk about DEI efforts and quotas in military recruiting, what sorts of specific efforts, actions are being referenced, what's being done, or what was being done at least?

[Will Tebow]

The fundamental action arm of DEI is the desire to guarantee proportional representation of the organization, in this case the US military, with the US society writ large and if such representation does not match, to presume injustice when the natural inequality of life manifests itself in the racial composition of the nation. The DEI project with a lot of window dressings and dare I say, distractions. The DEI project is the effort to demand and guarantee equal representation between the races and sexes in the military and in the nation writ large.

[Scott Bertram]

Talking with Will Tebow. He is director of the American Military Project at the center for the American Way of life. [e-mail] what have been the effects of this push, this DEI push inside the military? What did you find?

[Will Tebow]

DEI has upended the essence of what standards mean for the military. I think even today the conventional wisdom holds that standards are a way to determine who is the best and filter out the rest. What DEI does is at every level of the organization, force a consideration of innate characteristics that someone does not choose about themselves in order to influence the ultimate decision about personnel and programs within the military. This is a slow, corrosive, but certainly disastrous effect on our military's effectiveness. And there also comes with it the natural prescriptions of policy that demands more racially and sexually diverse populations, that majority groups are discriminated against in order to meet diversity outcomes, goals and quotas of any kind. And what results, as we saw at the end of the Biden administration, was a crippling lack of manpower and military resources for a nation already stretched thin to protect itself.

[Scott Bertram]

So the military would seem to be the ultimate place of results based results based environment. Who is strongest? Who is the best? Who will help defend the country? When there is this inclusion of another attribute or another factor into who is promoted, who was assigned specific duties, how does that influence the attitudes and the environment around those inside the military?

[Will Tebow]

Well, just like the policy writ large blurs the notion of what the military's purpose is that has trickle down effects to individuals and small units, it is the corrupt notion that there is something wrong if a unit looks a certain way, regardless of the standards, that led to them being composed in that exact manner. You know, one of the. One of the great lies, and really a pernicious one of the DEI left as it relates to the military, is that it's important for, you know, certain percentage of generals to be, let's say, black, so that black soldiers and junior officers can have an example whom they could follow into, you know, longer, longer periods of service. But of course, that demand and that hope is to establish the assumption that a black enlisted man or junior officer could not find inspiration or leadership from anyone unless that senior officer looks. Has the same skin color. And that's a really pervasive idea when these units are built off of cohesion, required to trust each other to the extent that you would be willing to die for the men next to you. And you can't. You can't afford that. You can't afford any drop of that ink. And it's just an example of why any inkling of it should stop.

[Scott Bertram]

There are some who are critical of the removal of DEI from the military, and in one of those arguments would say something like, this doesn't see a place for women in the armed forces for various reasons. How would you respond to that claim?

[Will Tebow]

I suppose it would be to challenge the premise of the question that, again, the military must exist in a very different space. I know our society has the perhaps just mandate that women should have the same exact opportunities as men, but the military must view these kinds of personnel and program decisions through a different lens. The military must view these kinds of decisions based on that which is best for the military profession, collectively and individually. So at no point should the military ponder what if. If women are advantaged by certain policy decisions. What the military should ponder is do the best people for the jobs one could in one in which one could serve in the military. Do the best people serve in them, and are we able to attract them as recruits? And that's it. Now, obviously that, you know, that also means that you shouldn't discriminate racially because you would obviously miss out on capable people qualified to serve. But what it means is that the only consideration for military personnel and programs should be job competence and those attributes that are directly related to the conduct, the excellent conduct of one's job in the military, not the abstract notions of opportunity that are familiar to our society but not necessarily conducive to, to a lethal and ready military.

[Scott Bertram]

Talking with Will Tebow. He's director of the American Military Project at the center for the American Way of Life at the Claremont Institute. Got a bigger picture for a moment. Is the current military leadership model working well to the benefit of the armed forces. So civilian leadership by the Secretary of Defense, branch secretaries, Joint Chiefs, is that still an effective model?

[Will Tebow]

In some ways it is. But we really should ask serious questions about what the military looks like today. You know, it's, it's not just a trite talking point to say that we fought in one World War II with two unified combatant commands and seven four star generals. It is reasonable to ask why the US military needs 19 strategic combatant commands and over 40 four star generals to maintain our security posture when our total fighting force is less than 10%, far less than 10% of who fought, of the size of the fighting force during World War II. It is almost as if the bureaucracy of the DOD exists for the sake of the bureaucracy of the DOD. And I think you could ask questions about the institutions of West Point and the Naval Academy, and you could ask questions about the institution of the Joint Staff. You know, why does a, a body of military leaders, uniformed, contract and civilian, have such influence over all military decisions when their only statutory obligation and job is to provide advice and consent to the President not to control any money or troops in the battlefield? These are reasonable questions to ask. And, you know, frankly though, I think we can all agree that something is wrong. We had over two decades of fraught conflict that bogged our military down when it should have been focused elsewhere. And, you know, the extent to which the military can reasonably prepare for conflict into the 21st century is also in question because of the nature of how the bureaucracy operates. So it's not too much to ask those kinds of questions.

[Scott Bertram]

We've been referencing this report which people can [e-mail] and it was released in the waning days of the Biden administration. We now have a second Trump administration in place, Will. And in the last few months, according to data, the number of enlistment contracts has skyrocketed. What do you credit with having this effect?

[Will Tebow]

I think the American people have the confidence that the President will make decisions about the use of military force only considering whether or not such the application of such force would benefit the American people and the American national interest. I think that trust is something that has been absent from the relationship between the American people and the Commander in Chief for over a decade. And the recovery of that trust or the evidence that such trust is returning is a huge reason why you're seeing an uptick in recruiting numbers. It's undeniable. It's not just correlation. There is a lot of reason to understand this as causation.

[Scott Bertram]

Is it sustainable getting our numbers back to the place where they have to be in the military. So is this a sustainable trend, do you think?

[Will Tebow]

I certainly hope so, but I think we have to continue to earn the American people's trust. If the American military is an institution that is seen as the opportunity and the place to forge masculinity and manhood, that it is the place where boys can become men and that they can do so while serving a great cause, then I think that, that this trend will continue. But if the military, you know, one day, whether, you know, during or after President Trump's term, becomes just another institution of civil society, just another institution of self actualization, then recruiting numbers will, will decline or at least become mediocre again. Because if I'm told that, you know, in the military I can be all I can be just like I can be all I can be at college and, you know, in the entertainment industry or in the media, then what's so distinctive about the military other than a lot of suffering and sacrifice and, and a modest paycheck? There has to be something distinctive about the ethos and the values of the military. And our government, through policy, should ensure that it stays that way.

[Scott Bertram]

Will Tebow is director of the American Military Project at the center for the American Way of Life at the Claremont institute. [e-mail] you could also find his recent report there as well. It is Identity in the the Fatal Impact of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion on US Military Readiness. Will, thank you so much for joining us here on the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.

[Will Tebow]

Thank you, Scott.

[Scott Bertram]

Up next, Dr. Derek Stoff, Associate professor of music at Hillsdale College, gives us tips and suggestions about how to appreciate music. I'm Scott Bertram. This is the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.

[Narrator/Announcer]

Great books, great people, great ideas. Learning about these things is critical to being a well educated human being. And we can help with the Hillsdale Dialogues. Each week, Hillsdale College President Larry Arne joins radio veteran Hugh Hewitt to discuss topics of enduring relevance. And from time to time they also talk about current events, but always with an eye toward more fundamental truths. And they want you to tune in to a conversation like no other. The Hillsdale Dialogues are posted every Monday on the Hillsdale College Podcast Network at Podcast Hillsdale. That's Podcast Hillsdale Edu. Or listen via Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever you find your audio.

[Scott Bertram]

This show is a part of the Hillsdale College Podcast Network. If you like what you hear, please subscribe to your favorite. You'll get brand new episodes of all your favorite shows sent right to your device and you'll help let us know that you're out there listening. Never miss another episode by going to podcast hillsdale.edu subscribe. That's podcast Hillsdale Edu subscribe or click the Follow or Subscribe button on Apple podcasts Spotify or YouTube. Welcome back to the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour. I'm Scott Bertram. Be sure to check out the Hillsdale College Podcast Network and all great audio from Hillsdale College. At Podcast Hillsdale. Edu, we're joined by Dr. Derek Stoff. He is associate professor of music here at Hillsdale College. Dr. Stoff, thanks for joining us.

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

It's a pleasure to be here.

[Scott Bertram]

Wanted to discuss today some suggestions for our listeners about how to listen to how to appreciate music. What does it mean to actively listen to music and how can we train ourselves to listen more attentively?

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

I might focus that question for you in a second, but I feel the potential angst of listeners who want to attend concerts of classical music that might be fairly lengthy and they find themselves flagging in their attention and or potentially dozing off. And I think one of the reasons for this is because you may not be familiar enough with the music and that familiarizing yourself with it makes it easier to understand. And it's not unlike learning a second language in which you're the best solutions are immersion and careful and focused study of it so that when you're confronted as a newbie listening to someone speak in another language, your brain hasn't yet learned to filter those sounds coming into your ears and you don't know what's important and what's secondary and you get overwhelmed. And as a result your attention can flag we kind of know this in at least from these mattering of psychology that I know that in listening to music and this can apply to other phenomena when the information coming at us is so overwhelmingly unfamiliar, we use the expression going over your head, right? It's coming at you and you're not sure what to make of it. And so that that can that can make it hard to pay attention to even if you want to try, because you don't have anything familiar to grasp, grapple with. Sure, you can also lose attention because the thing that you're listening to is so utterly simple and predictable that you no longer have anything interesting to you're also going to be bored just like the kind of music you would play to try to get yourself to sleep at night. If you want to play some kind of really slow moving kind of new age music or something not that, that's what I do. But, but music designed for sleep is designed to like, not let anything sort of disturb you. Unfortunately, I've tried the, to, to listen to this music to see if it would help me to sleep. But as a, as a musician it's very difficult not to.

[Scott Bertram]

Your brain's on still.

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

Exactly.

[Scott Bertram]

So what would you suggest? What are some ways we can get in the right state of mind to get focused for our listening experience?

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

Some of these are very modern ways of doing this that I could never recommend in the age before recording technology. So if you know that something is coming up on a program, the symphony orchestra is going to do a symphony. If you never heard it, you can usually get the recording of it and it helps to listen to it. But one exercise in listening might be to not just start at the beginning and listen as far as you can get without your attention flagging, but to try to start to listen to the component parts of the piece. And in a larger work like a multi movement symphony, you might start with the second or third movement, but you could also start within the music, which is now possible because with digital technology I can just move my computer scroller over. You couldn't do that in, in, in the pre recording technology times of the 19th century. But in those periods people had access to the music in scores that they, if they were literate, they could read and perform at home and therefore familiarize themselves with the music. So that when you get to the concert, everybody's going to pay attention to the very beginning of a piece of. It's where your attention starts to flag in the middle. And maybe if you've listened to parts intensely in the middle of pieces, then maybe you'll get to a part and it'll suddenly become familiar and your attention will be captured. I've recommended that to students who are required in my classes to identify pieces that I play on tests. And I say don't just listen to the first 10 seconds of the piece because I'm not going to play the first 10 seconds. I want you to be familiar with the whole piece. And so I say when you practice listening, sometimes it's a good idea to start later on in the piece and focus on what you're hearing at that moment.

[Scott Bertram]

How has time changed the way that we interact with music, the way that we listen to music, or the circumstances in which we would listen to music?

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

There might be a justifiable reason for people being anxious about listening to lengthy pieces of music. And that's because this is a kind of Historical anomaly. I think people don't normally sit down for hours on end and listen to music like this in the past. I think the most historical norm is for people to make the music themselves. And the most pleasure you get out of music is in the making. That's why I might even argue that the people most enjoying the music at a concert are the performers themselves or the choir at church, who's far more into the music sometimes than the congregation or the audience. And we can see this in all sorts of manifestations when we look at how people respond to music. Normally, when we want to move to music. Or even people who have no ability in music or think they have no ability in music, will still, when they're in the privacy of their home or their shower, start to sing along and people mimicking air guitar. Right. So we want to vicariously participate in the music making. And I would argue that something similar actually happens at classical musical concerts. But instead of the audience jumping around, unless you're a little kid who's been brought to the concert, audiences have learned to sublimate that motion. So, in a sense, your mind is at play in a classical music concert. But again, this is not the historical norm. So I kind of. I'm somewhat ambivalent about this. Whether this kind of intense listening without being particularly involved in moving to the music or playing it yourself is the best way to experience the music. I still think making the music yourself is a far more enriching activity. But it should be, I think, maybe a bit of consolation to those who are nervous about not, quote, unquote, fully understanding the music. Because this mode of listening is so. So new historically. And it means that a lot of the music that we actually listen to in classical music concerts, including Bach, early Beethoven symphonies, and between him, like Mozart, this music was not written to be listened to by a large audience sitting silent and attentively. Bach wrote some of his instrumental music for coffee house concerts. In which people are sipping whatever version of Turkish coffee they have in Leipzig in the 1740s, and their attention is waxing and waning. And people think that there must be something down underneath the music that they're missing. But a lot of the music from the 18th century that we venerate as great masterworks were not even written with the full attention of the audience to be assumed. That idea is an idea that comes into its heyday in the 19th century. And Beethoven is a beneficiary of this new idea. And we take Beethoven's later symphonies seriously as works that we should sit and listen to with care. And there's a. There's a good reason to. To do this. We. It. It's also distracting in a concert if your fellow audience members are moving around chatting and eating and drinking. But I think that's probably the natural inclination for people is to give your attention selectively to the music. And a concert is a kind of social event. And people shouldn't necessarily be essentially paranoid about missing things in music because this is kind of the normal. And even the best of us, sure, including myself, have moments where our attention is flagging in concerts and suddenly we find ourselves at the end of the piece and we've. We've been engrossed in our thoughts and haven't paid attention. This inevitably happens to me when a. I've paid a lot of money to go to the concert and it's music that I really like. But I'm always going to these concerts while I'm at conferences and traveling. And I'm usually tired. Yes. And so here I am sitting to some of the most beautiful music that. That might be performed. And it might be choral music, but it's very easy to tune out to this kind of music. I'm thinking of 16th, 17th century music here that I study because it's so. When it's well done, it's so serene that there's nothing. A poor performance would actually keep me awake because there are foibles about it that I could grasp or that could annoy me and keep my attention.

[Scott Bertram]

Talking with Dr. Derek Stoff from Hillsdale's music department about how to listen and appreciate music. Is it okay if we're distracted? Is it okay if we're trying to listen to music while doing different things?

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

One of the things that I'm not objecting to if you want to essentially practice listening to music, would be to do what I do with audiobooks. I listen to audiobooks while I exercise or while I do gardening or housework. Things that are generally mindless activities where your attention can be relatively focused on what you're hearing. And I don't see a problem with at least familiarizing yourselves with music. Now, there's certain kinds of classical music that don't work for exercise. Audiobooks can work because it's a different medium.

[Scott Bertram]

Right.

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

But when you're cooking or when you're out in the yard working, or if you have a stereo system that's nice in your house while you're sitting around in the living room and doing something fairly mindless, it. It probably is not hurting for you to Listen to something that you know is coming up on a concert and familiarizing yourself beforehand with the work so that when you get there, it's not totally new material that you're listening to. Some people don't like that idea because they want you to be focused on classical music all the time. But you need exercise to do that. And I think that's possibly one simple strategy that doesn't take a lot of extra time out of your busy day.

[Scott Bertram]

Dr. Derek Stoff with us talking about how to listen to how to appreciate music. There are some words used to describe music that people might be familiar with but might not know specifically. I'm thinking of melody, harmony, rhythm, perhaps texture. Are there good definitions for our listeners to understand what they should be listening for, what those terms mean?

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

If you have to think about a kind of thought experiment about what is the sort of minimum requirement for music. Music doesn't have to have a definite pitch because there's all sorts of percussion instruments that are non pitched. The frequencies that they produce are not easily measured in a single pitch. Most music that we hear has pitch, and that's a frequency vibration. And we can measure those. But even the metaphors that we use for pitch are still interesting metaphors. We use the terms high and low for pitches. Frequency. If the frequency is fast, the movement of the waves of sound is fast, we call that high. And then slow is low. And that in itself is a metaphor. And you see this mapped onto musical scores in which the top of the page or the top of the staff is the high notes and the bottom is the low notes. So we're used to thinking about music in these weird metaphorical ways. But back to rhythm. If you had to reduce music to its sort of first principle. It's this idea of moving through time. Even the simplest piece, like a single note piece, which nobody would even count as a piece of music practically, still has to have a beginning where I play the note and then an ending where I stop. And that in itself is a kind of rhythm. We're used to thinking of rhythm as a kind of ordered pattern of sounds and the patterning of sounds. Patterning of sounds can produce a beat, a kind of pulse. And it's from there those pulses our brains group into what we think of as a meter, a grouping of two or three. And our brains are trained to group music generally into groupings of 2 and 3. More complicated groupings do exist in music and are sometimes fun. But beyond a certain point, our brains aren't able to perceive groupings of, say, 11.

[Scott Bertram]

Okay.

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

It's mostly the groupings of twos and threes that we are easily able to, to grasp. But pieces without that particular patterns still have rhythm. All music has rhythm. It's just that sometimes the rhythm is not perceivable. And this can produce music that appears to move extremely slow and in, in seamless ways that don't appear to, to, to be. Have movement at all. And that's because the movement of the change of pitches are, are taking place very slow. And you can also have. You can also have music that has a very clear pulse, but maybe not a clear meter or that meter is constantly changing. And it depends on the kind of music, the kind of style you're listening to.

[Scott Bertram]

And what do we mean when we talk about the melody of a song?

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

Melody, of course, we intuit is this idea of the tune that we hear. And we kind of string together these tones to create a larger section of music, which we describe these in almost grammatical terms as melodies being grouped into phrases or sub phrases and coming to end at a particular point that we call a cadence. And the idea of recognizing a cadence is a complicated thing that's fairly easy to learn and hear. But at moments in the piece, we intuit a kind of caesura or a kind of arrival point, much the same as you hear arrival points in a speech through the tone of the voice. Even when you can't see the punctuation on the page that the speaker is reading, you get a sense from their voice that they've reached the conclusion of an idea. And the same thing happens in music and melodies. We can group these melodies into phrases that are punctuated. When we talk about harmony, we're talking about multiple pitches sounding at the same time. And this is the bulk of what students learn to do in music school when they study music theory. They're studying really essentially how to make harmony, how harmonies can be put together artfully, how you can move from one harmony to the next in skillful ways. And this easily gets beyond what you can explain in words without musical notation and without knowledge of the various elements of music. And it also, I should stress that some of this is very low level labeling that if you're going to a concert and you want to enjoy the music, the first thing to your, the key to, in your enjoyment of this music is not to label. I'm hearing a major chord, I'm hearing the music in minor. Even identifying the instruments that you're hearing playing is a simple act of labeling.

[Scott Bertram]

Dr. Derek Stoff with us from Hillsdale's music department. Would you say then that you need to have some sort of grasp on those fundamental definitions to truly be able to appreciate music?

[Dr. Derek Stoff]

It doesn't really. I like to make a distinction between this kind of labeling, identifying things and putting them in particular boxes that are rather technical and, on the contrary, these aesthetic judgments. And so I think that you can go to a concert and the thing that's more important for you is to recognize that you're hearing something and making a judgment about it. This piece I'm listening to is particularly beautiful. Or I really enjoyed the second movement. It was a lot of fun. Or even, for that matter, like, I didn't like this. This piece left me puzzled. I was confused. Or I thought this wasn't performed the way it should be. The ending left me cold. Those are the kinds of judgments you want to. Essentially, I think those have higher value than just the technical. And to assume that just the technical features and labeling of these, These moments in the music is all there is, or you've reached a sense of. Or you can. Let me. Let me suggest that you can do a lot of criticism of music without knowing a lot about the technical nature of music. And sometimes the best critics are people from outside domains, domains outside of music, who can, in everyday words, tell us why this music is particularly important and valuable and beautiful. And musicians sometimes have their heads stuck in the sand thinking that musician shop talk is what it means to understand music. And shop talk has its place in the classroom and in the composing studio and in the rehearsal room. But it doesn't necessarily mean that you've really understood the music and know why it's important to cultivate and why it's important to continue to value this music. And I think critics of a more literary bent can sometimes be better readers and understanders of music than the musicians themselves.

[Scott Bertram]

Yeah, it's okay to have an opinion, even if you don't know everything about that piece of music or even some music theory. Dr. Derek Stauffe is associate professor of music here at Hillsdale College as we talk about how to listen to how to appreciate music. Dr. Stoff, thanks so much for joining us here on the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour. That will wrap up this edition of the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour. Our thanks to Dr. Charles Steele, your teacher for the new Hillsdale College online course, Understanding Capitalism. Will Tebow from the Claremont center, his recent report on DEI's impact on American military readiness, and Dr. Derek Stoff from Hillsdale's music department. Remember, you can hear new episodes every week on this station. You also can find extended versions of some of our interviews or listen anytime to the podcast. Find it at Podcast Hillsdale, Edu, or wherever you get your audio. Until next week, I'm Scott Bertram, and this has been the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.