Hegseth Slams Scouts’ “Woke Agenda”—Pentagon Ends 100-Year Partnership

Paul Riverbank, 11/26/2025The Pentagon may end its historic partnership with Scouting America, reflecting deep divisions over values, inclusion, and tradition—placing thousands of military families and the next generation of leaders at a crossroads.

The latest chapter began quietly, behind the bureaucratic scenes. Hegseth, no stranger to the culture wars, drafted an internal memo that could reverberate far beyond military bases and jamborees. In the document, still making its way through the Pentagon’s corridors, Hegseth questions whether Scouting America has moved too far from its origins. “Meritocracy” is the word he circles; “boy-friendly spaces” another touchstone for his concerns. He sees an intent, even an agenda, in the group’s focus on diversity and inclusion — one he frames as both a departure and a threat to what the Scouts have stood for in American life.

Plenty of folks, within the military especially, are left scratching their heads. For a long time, few connections seemed more natural. Eagle Scouts routinely showed up at service academies, often bringing not just badges but a knack for leadership, plenty of knots tied, and a certain comfort with khaki. For children of service members, who often bounce from base to base, troop meetings could serve as an anchor, offering structure where life otherwise felt unsettled.

But Hegseth’s proposal, if it moves forward, would put a stop to the Pentagon’s material support at big events like the National Jamboree. Military bases could close their doors to Scout troops, even overseas, cutting off a familiar bulwark for military kids adjusting to new places and new faces. One Army veteran I spoke to, now a parent with three Scouts in tow, said the troop was “the one thing that didn’t change” with every transfer. The notion of losing that stability drew a long sigh.

There is, of course, a legal question lurking in the background. Congress has traditionally required support for the jamboree — medical, logistical, the whole nine yards. But there’s legal leeway too: if the Secretary of Defense believes participation is “detrimental to national security,” support can be withdrawn. Hegseth has seized on this clause, suggesting that pulling troops and gear for the jamboree stretches resources needed elsewhere, especially along America’s borders. Critics, not unreasonably, point out that the timing of this argument, and its cultural framing, seem anything but accidental.

Hegseth doesn’t mince words. “The organization once endorsed by President Theodore Roosevelt no longer supports the future of American boys,” the memo reads. He is blunt about what he sees as the Scouts’ drift — no longer a crucible for “masculine values,” no longer the group he believes America needs.

Meanwhile, Scouting itself has shifted in ways that have left some longtime members quietly proud and others grumbling. Girls have been welcomed in, ranks renamed, and inclusivity promoted. When asked for comment, a Scouting America spokesperson told me, “We have always focused on preparing young people for citizenship and service — not for politics. We’ve worked with every administration, left and right, to serve our members.”

But the reduction in Pentagon-sponsored help, if it comes to pass, could bite deep. Without military medical teams and logistical support at the National Jamboree, and with base access in jeopardy, the day-to-day experience for Scouts from military families would shift quickly and, for many, painfully.

Within the armed forces, some leaders are more measured. Navy Secretary John Phelan, for one, shot a warning across the bow in his own memo, arguing that broader recruiting could take a hit. “As many as a third of our officers in training” — these are his words — “wore the Scout uniform.” Passive support, even just letting troops meet on base and use library space, is “a crucial recruiting and community engagement tool,” he wrote.

Yet the tone is unmistakable: recent Pentagon policies have pivoted away from programs seen as promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion. Last year, Hegseth, still in his days as a Fox News commentator, was unequivocal — “the left didn’t want to improve” the Boy Scouts, he said; “they wanted to destroy it or dilute it into something that stood for nothing.” His own background, it’s worth noting, comes not from Scouts, but a church youth group focused on Bible memorization.

Quiet frustration runs through military families, too. Kenny Green, who spent years in Army greens before retiring, emphasizes the ease of Scout meetings for his kids: “We don’t have to say a word to them; let them go see the other kids, and they’ll be immediately integrated in.” There’s an undeniable community loss in the offing.

In the end, what’s at play stretches past arguments over logistics or even law. This is a contest — sometimes muted, sometimes forceful — over American values and competing visions for how the next generation is shaped. The planning for the next National Jamboree continues, for now at least, even as families are left wondering if this time the bridge between Scouting and the military will finally give way.

Will Congress decide that a century-old friendship should end on grounds of “national security”? Or will the lived reality of America’s military families, and the generations shaped by scouting’s steady guidance, tip the debate back toward common ground? For now, the outcome remains uncertain, the stakes wound tightly around identity, inclusion, and the ever-evolving landscape of American institutions.

For generations, Scouting in America has been more than patches and pinewood cars — it’s been a steady current in the upbringing of countless young Americans, threads stitched tightly to the nation’s military. Yet that historic partnership now stands at a crossroads. A new move out of the Pentagon, pushed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, could bring an abrupt end to over a century of shared purpose.The latest chapter began quietly, behind the bureaucratic scenes. Hegseth, no stranger to the culture wars, drafted an internal memo that could reverberate far beyond military bases and jamborees. In the document, still making its way through the Pentagon’s corridors, Hegseth questions whether Scouting America has moved too far from its origins. “Meritocracy” is the word he circles; “boy-friendly spaces” another touchstone for his concerns. He sees an intent, even an agenda, in the group’s focus on diversity and inclusion — one he frames as both a departure and a threat to what the Scouts have stood for in American life.Plenty of folks, within the military especially, are left scratching their heads. For a long time, few connections seemed more natural. Eagle Scouts routinely showed up at service academies, often bringing not just badges but a knack for leadership, plenty of knots tied, and a certain comfort with khaki. For children of service members, who often bounce from base to base, troop meetings could serve as an anchor, offering structure where life otherwise felt unsettled.But Hegseth’s proposal, if it moves forward, would put a stop to the Pentagon’s material support at big events like the National Jamboree. Military bases could close their doors to Scout troops, even overseas, cutting off a familiar bulwark for military kids adjusting to new places and new faces. One Army veteran I spoke to, now a parent with three Scouts in tow, said the troop was “the one thing that didn’t change” with every transfer. The notion of losing that stability drew a long sigh.There is, of course, a legal question lurking in the background. Congress has traditionally required support for the jamboree — medical, logistical, the whole nine yards. But there’s legal leeway too: if the Secretary of Defense believes participation is “detrimental to national security,” support can be withdrawn. Hegseth has seized on this clause, suggesting that pulling troops and gear for the jamboree stretches resources needed elsewhere, especially along America’s borders. Critics, not unreasonably, point out that the timing of this argument, and its cultural framing, seem anything but accidental.Hegseth doesn’t mince words. “The organization once endorsed by President Theodore Roosevelt no longer supports the future of American boys,” the memo reads. He is blunt about what he sees as the Scouts’ drift — no longer a crucible for “masculine values,” no longer the group he believes America needs.Meanwhile, Scouting itself has shifted in ways that have left some longtime members quietly proud and others grumbling. Girls have been welcomed in, ranks renamed, and inclusivity promoted. When asked for comment, a Scouting America spokesperson told me, “We have always focused on preparing young people for citizenship and service — not for politics. We’ve worked with every administration, left and right, to serve our members.”But the reduction in Pentagon-sponsored help, if it comes to pass, could bite deep. Without military medical teams and logistical support at the National Jamboree, and with base access in jeopardy, the day-to-day experience for Scouts from military families would shift quickly and, for many, painfully.Within the armed forces, some leaders are more measured. Navy Secretary John Phelan, for one, shot a warning across the bow in his own memo, arguing that broader recruiting could take a hit. “As many as a third of our officers in training” — these are his words — “wore the Scout uniform.” Passive support, even just letting troops meet on base and use library space, is “a crucial recruiting and community engagement tool,” he wrote.Yet the tone is unmistakable: recent Pentagon policies have pivoted away from programs seen as promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion. Last year, Hegseth, still in his days as a Fox News commentator, was unequivocal — “the left didn’t want to improve” the Boy Scouts, he said; “they wanted to destroy it or dilute it into something that stood for nothing.” His own background, it’s worth noting, comes not from Scouts, but a church youth group focused on Bible memorization.Quiet frustration runs through military families, too. Kenny Green, who spent years in Army greens before retiring, emphasizes the ease of Scout meetings for his kids: “We don’t have to say a word to them; let them go see the other kids, and they’ll be immediately integrated in.” There’s an undeniable community loss in the offing.In the end, what’s at play stretches past arguments over logistics or even law. This is a contest — sometimes muted, sometimes forceful — over American values and competing visions for how the next generation is shaped. The planning for the next National Jamboree continues, for now at least, even as families are left wondering if this time the bridge between Scouting and the military will finally give way.Will Congress decide that a century-old friendship should end on grounds of “national security”? Or will the lived reality of America’s military families, and the generations shaped by scouting’s steady guidance, tip the debate back toward common ground? For now, the outcome remains uncertain, the stakes wound tightly around identity, inclusion, and the ever-evolving landscape of American institutions.