This article was featured in the One Story to Read Today newsletter. Sign up for it here.

For a few hours, Pete Hegseths nomination as secretary of defense was the most disturbing act of Donald Trumps presidential transition. Surely the Senate wouldnt confirm an angry Fox News talking head with no serious managerial experience, best known for publicly defending war criminals, to run the largest department in the federal government. Then, in rapid succession, Trump announced appointments for Matt Gaetz, Tulsi Gabbard, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The appearance of these newer and even more aberrant characters, like a television show introducing a more villainous heel in its second season, muted the indignation over Hegseth.

Obscured in this flurry of shocking appointments is the fact that Hegseths drawbacks are not limited to his light rsum or to the sexual-assault allegation made against him. Inexperienced though he may be at managing bureaucracies, Hegseth has devoted a great deal of time to documenting his worldview, including three books published in the past four years. I spent the previous week reading them: The man who emerges from the page appears to have sunk deeply into conspiracy theories that are bizarre even by contemporary Republican standards but that have attracted strangely little attention. He considers himself to be at war with basically everybody to Trumps left, and it is by no means clear that he means war metaphorically. He may be no less nutty than any of Trumps more controversial nominees. And given the power he is likely to holdcommand over 2 million American military personnelhe is almost certainly far more dangerous than any of them.

Hegseth began his involvement in conservative-movement politics as a Princeton undergraduate. He then joined the Army and quickly developed a profile, when not on active duty, as a budding Republican spokesperson. He testified against Elena Kagans appointment to the Supreme Court (on the grounds that, while dean of Harvard Law School, she had blocked military recruiters from campus in protest of Dont Ask, Dont Tell) and lobbied in favor of the Bush administrations Iraq policy. As the Republican Partys foreign-policy orientation changed radically under Trump, Hegseths positions changed with it. But his devotion to the party remained constant. After stints running the advocacy groups Vets for Freedom and Concerned Veterans for America, and a failed Senate campaign, he finally settled at Fox News, where he joined a chorus in support of Trump.

Along the way, Hegseth has written five books. The first, extolling Theodore Roosevelts legacy, revolves around ideas that Hegseth has since renounced, after converting to Trumpism. Another is simply a collection of war stories. The other three, all published in the past four yearsAmerican Crusade (2020), Battle for the American Mind (2022), and The War on Warriors (2024)lay out his worldview in florid, explicit, and often terrifying detail.

A foundational tenet of Hegseths philosophy, apparently carrying over from his Roosevelt-worshipping era, is a belief in the traditional masculine virtues and the potential for war to inculcate them. Hegseth maintains that boys require discipline and must aspire to strength, resilience, and bravery. His preferred archetype for these virtues appears to be Pete Hegseth, whose manful exploits on either the basketball court (he played for Princeton) or the battlefield are featured in all three books.

David A. Graham: The perverse logic of Trumps nomination circus

Hegseth complains that society no longer gives veterans like him their proper measure of deference. Being a veteran no longer demands respect of the coastal elites or reverence from large swaths of the public, he writesan observation that will sound strange to anybody who has ever attended a football game or listened to a speech by a politician from either party. In previous generations, men had to find ways to salvage their honor if they didnt get to fight in a war. (The single strongest piece of evidence for Hegseths thesisthe popularity of the lifelong coastal elitist, proud war-avoider, and POW-mocker Donald Trumpgoes unmentioned).

Hegseths demand for greater respect grows out of his belief that he personally succeeded in the face of forbidding odds. I had been an underdog my whole life, he writes. I persisted. I worked my ass off. But the woke military, he complains, doesnt reward that kind of individual merit and grit. Instead, it has grown so obsessed with diversity that it promotes unqualified minorities and allows women in combat, reducing its effectiveness and alienating hard-working, meritorious soldiers such as, well, him. He also frets that the inclusion of women in combat erodes traditional gender norms. How do you treat women in a combat situation, he asks, without eroding the basic instinct of civilization and the treatment of women in the society at large?

(The treatment of women by Hegseth specifically happens to be the subject of a recently disclosed police report detailing an alleged sexual assault of a woman at a 2017 political conference. Hegseth denies the allegation and says that the encounter, which took place while he was transitioning between his second and third wives, was consensual. He paid the alleged victim an undisclosed sum in return for her signing a nondisclosure agreement.)

One episode looms especially large in Hegseths mind as the embodiment of the wokification of the military and its abandonment of traditional merit. In 2021, Hegseth, an active National Guard member, wished to join the Washington, D.C., unit protecting incoming President Joe Bidens inauguration. The National Guard, however, excluded him from the detail because he was deemed a security risk on account of a bicep tattoo of the Deus vult symbola reference to the Crusades that is popular with some far-right activists.

The logic of the snub was straightforward. Bidens inauguration took place in the immediate aftermath of an insurrection attempt that had included many members of the armed forces, some operating within far-right networks. But to Hegsethwho protests that the Deus vult tattoo is simply an expression of his Christian faith, not a white-nationalist symbolthe decision was an unforgivable personal affront.

He expresses indignation at the notion that he could even be suspected of harboring radical ideas. I fought religious extremists for over twenty years in uniform, he writes. Then I was accused of being one. This is not as paradoxical as Hegseth makes it sound. Many of the people most eager to fight against extremists of one religion are extremist adherents of another religion. An example of this would be the Crusades, an episode that Hegseth highlights in American Crusade as a model to emulate.

In any case, evidence of Hegseths extremism does not need to be deduced by interpreting his tattoos. The proof is lying in plain sight. In his three most recent books, Hegseth puts forward a wide range of familiarly misguided ideas: vaccines are poisonous; climate change is a hoax (they used to warn about global cooling, you know); George Floyd died of a drug overdose and was not murdered; the Holocaust was perpetrated by German socialists.

Where Hegseths thinking begins venturing into truly odd territory is his argument, developed in Battle for the American Mind, that the entire basic design of the U.S. public education system is the product of a century-long, totally successful communist plot. Hegseth is not just hyperventilating about the 1619 Project, Howard Zinn, or other left-wing fads, as conservatives often do. Instead he argues that the systems design is a Marxist scheme with roots going back to the founding of the republic. The deist heresies of Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, he writes, laid the groundwork to implant communist thought into the school system. Then, American Progressives in the late 1800s blended the idea of Marxist government with aspects from the Social Gospel and the belief in an American national destiny in order to mae Marxism more palatable to Americans.

The nefarious plan to turn America communist involves steps that appear anodyne to the untrained eye. Yes, our modern social scienceslike political science, previously known as politics, and social studies, previously known as individual disciplines like history, economics, geography, and philosophyare byproducts of Marxist philosophy, he writes. Let that sink in: the manner in which we study politics, history, and economics in American schoolspublic and privatetoday is the product of Marxists. That was always the plan, and it worked. Hegseth will no longer sit back and allow communist indoctrination to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids.

The Marxist conspiracy has also, according to Hegseth, begun creeping into the U.S. military, the institution he is now poised to run. His most recent book calls for a straightforward political purge of military brass who had the gall to obey Democratic administrations: Fire any general who has carried water for Obama and Bidens extraconstitutional and agenda-driven transformation of our military. Trump appears to be thinking along similar lines. He is reportedly working on an executive order that will fast-track the removal of officers lacking in requisite leadership qualities and compiling a list of officers involved in the Afghanistan retreat, who will likewise be shoved out.

To what end? Trump has already signaled his interest in two revolutionary changes to the Defense Departments orientation. One is to legalize war crimes, or at least cease enforcement of the rules of war. The president-elect has enthusiastically endorsed the use of illegal military methods and has pardoned American soldiers who committed atrocities against detainees and unarmed civilians, following a loud campaign by Hegseth on Fox News.

Graeme Wood: War crimes are not difficult to discern

In The War on Warriors, Hegseth makes plain that he considers the very idea of rules of war just more woke nonsense. Modern war-fighters fight lawyers as much as we fight bad guys, he writes. Our enemies should get bullets, not attorneys. He repeatedly disparages Army lawyers (jagoffs), even claiming that their pointless rules are why America hasnt won a war since World War II. (Ideally, the secretary of defense would be familiar with historical episodes such as the Gulf War.)

Writing about his time guarding prisoners at Guantnamo Baywhere, as even the Bush administration eventually admitted, most detainees were innocent men swept up by American forcesHegseth describes calls for due process as a stab in the back of brave soldiers like him. The nation was dealing with legal issues (mostly led by weak-kneed, America-hating ACLU types) concerning enemy combatants, international rights of illegal combatants, and the beginnings of extrajudicial drone attacks, he writes. Not to mention the debate about the rights of assholes (I mean, detainees) at Gitmo.

Trumps second and even more disturbing interest in having a loyalist run the department is his enthusiasm for deploying troops to curtail and, if necessary, shoot domestic protesters. His first-term defense secretaries blanched at these demands. Hegseth displays every sign of sharing Trumps impulses, but in a more theorized form.

The clearest through line of all three books is the application of Hegseths wartime mentality to his struggle against domestic opponents. American Crusade calls for the categorical defeat of the Left, with the goal of utter annihilation, without which America cannot, and will not, survive. Are the Crusades just a metaphor? Sort of, but not really: Our American Crusade is not about literal swords, and our fight is not with guns. Yet. (Emphasisgulphis.)

Battle for the American Mind likewise imagines the struggle against the communist educational plot as a military problem: We are pinned down, caught in an enemy near ambush. The enemy has the high ground, and is shooting from concealed and fortified positions.

And The War on Warriors repeatedly urges readers to treat the American left exactly like foreign combatants. Describing the militarys responsibility to the nation, Hegseth writes, The expectation is that we will defend it against all enemiesboth foreign and domestic. Not political opponents, but real enemies. (Yes, Marxists are our enemies.) The Marxist exception swallows the not political opponents rule because pretty much all of his political opponents turn out to be Marxists. These include, but are not limited to, diversity advocates (They are Marxists You know what they are? Theyre traitors), newspapers (the communist Star Tribune), and, as noted, almost anybody involved in public education.

Lest there be any ambiguity, Hegseth incessantly equates the left to wartime enemies. They do not respect cease-fires, do not abide by the rules of warfare, and do not respect anything except total defeat of their enemyand then total control, he writes at one point. At another, he argues, We should be in panic mode. Almost desperate. Willing to do anything to defeat the fundamental transformation of the American military and end the war on our warriors.

Hegseths idea of illegitimate behavior by the domestic enemy is quite expansive. Consider this passage, recalling his time advocating for the Iraq War: While I debated these things in good faith, the Left mobilized. Electing Obama, railroading the military, pushing women in combatreadiness be damned. The Left has never fought fair. The most remarkable phrase there is electing Obama. Hegseths notion of unfair tactics used by the left includes not only enacting administrative policies that he disagrees with, but the basic act of voting for Democrats. The inability or unwillingness to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate political opposition likely endeared Hegseth to Trump, who shares the trait.

A defense secretary with a tenuous grip on reality, who cant differentiate foreign enemies from domestic political opponents, and who seems to exist in a state of permanent hysteria is a problem that the United States has never had to survive. The main question I was looking to answer when I started reading Hegseths collected works was whether he would follow a Trump command to shoot peaceful protesters. After having read them, I dont think he would even wait for the order.