Why Our Commanders Look The Other Way During Child Rape

w7044This is important

The revelation that our generals expect Americans solders to allow screaming young boys to be sodomized and not stop it is simply the latest manifestation of the utter moral bankruptcy infecting the senior ranks of the U.S. military.

The problems with America’s military—which has now failed to win three wars in a row against backward fanatics whom the nineteenth-century Brits would have handily dispatched to hell in time for tea—are not merely budgetary. You can’t buy real leaders, leaders with strategic competence and moral courage. Aging equipment, while a problem, is nothing compared to the incompetence and moral cowardice of our military’s senior leaders.

Note the term “moral cowardice.” Many of these generals are decorated combat veterans who would gleefully charge an enemy machine-gun nest. But that physical courage in the face of the enemy does not translate into moral courage in the face of politicians and social justice warriors. It’s disheartening to see officers with Combat Infantryman badges and silver stars sheepishly nodding along with the lies of the coddled liberal elite.

There are fine generals—I served under many. But enough are not that the ranks are demoralized and the best and brightest future leaders are abandoning military careers, not because they don’t want to serve, but because they know it will be difficult to succeed unless they likewise abandon the principles that propelled them toward service in the first place.

You Can’t Just Blame Obama

It would be too easy to blame Barack Obama. As commander in chief, he is responsible for everything those under his command do or fail to do, and his political agendas and bizarre social engineering priorities, enacted by the eager band of loyalists he has promoted into the senior ranks over more capable warriors, have little to do with fighting and winning. Without a media interested in holding him to account for the dreadful performance of the military since his inauguration, Obama has a free ride.

Source: Why Our Commanders Look The Other Way During Child Rape

That follows from one of the themes we have always spoken of here: personal responsibility.

But, lest you think I’m simply enunciating a diatribe against the top echelon of our officer corp, I’m not. It’s endemic in our society. It applies to every electrician who says “it’s in the plan”, to every person who says “it’s not my job”, to every person who sees a problem and walks away. It’s the reason we have safety rules that protect idiots while making the actual job nearly impossible.

In business we call it careerism, it’s what happens when we look at a problem and decide it might mess up our promotion, if we try to fix a problem, or horrors, someone might accuse us of political incorrectness. You know like saying women are not the same as men (not inferior, they’re not, just different). Political correctness is very often the enemy of common sense. The important thing to remember is that common sense once was common because it is objectively correct, even if it hurts someone’s feelings.

In the church, it’s often called clericalism, and it is both pernicious and corrosive. Trying to live correctly according to God’s will is difficult enough with good guidance from the clergy, it’s nearly impossible if said clergy is trying above all to keep their job, not doing their job.

When I was young and around some military guys, they called it “seeing stars in your eyes” (and on your shoulders). From what they said it most often happened to colonels (and sadly even more often to those colonel’s wives). It did not, let us say, contribute to good order and discipline, for all the reasons that Kurt and I have both said. The difference in the military is that it literally can (and often does) cost lives. it seems to me that it has moved up the rank structure now, it seems to be a persistent infection of the flag ranks, which is also true in business. I’m not saying there is no reason for it, one merely needs to look at Brendan Eich to understand that.

But in our system, it is too important to leave untreated, in any area, and we are not treating it; in the military, in business, in the church, or academia, or anywhere, really.

And until we do, we will not progress. And think about this, as well, as you start to think about who you support for president, in either party. Much of the cure is always leadership, there are good people out there, but they can easily run on the rocks in a culture that usually denigrates telling it like it is, rather than what we wish it was.

Character is destiny

w7041Classical education has been growing inside the United States for several decades.

Common Core’s entrance has only accelerated the trend.

This is how you educate men, and women, fit for use as men and women. That it is also the original Western, English, and American model is a bonus. What we have now is a model designed by the Prussians to create an obedient workforce, and soldiery, it does that well, be depriving them of a sense of morality, right or wrong, or a sense of things beyond the horizon. let alone the ability to interpret causally, based on our experience, both personal and as a civilization.

Read on and enjoy, by Joy Pullmann of The Federalist.

[…]‘Classical education is the means to freedom, the sine qua non of a free people.’

In the Common Core era, many parents have taken to classical education for respite, opening new schools public and private and flocking to homeschooling organizations such as Classical Conversations (disclosure: my son attends a CC co-op, and my husband ran one for two years). Catholics, Lutherans, Eastern Orthodox, and evangelicals have in recent years started and expanded societies for classical learning that offer teacher training, curriculum, publications, and seminars. “Classical Education,” the book, succinctly details its subject’s prominent expressions.

“Classical education is always inclined, by nature, toward decentralization, toward localism, towards connecting authority with responsibility,” said the book’s coauthor, Andrew Kern, the founder of the CiRCE Institute, which publishes curriculum and holds seminars for classical educators. It, too, is growing. “You’re not self-governing if you can’t rule yourself. Classical education is the means to freedom, the sine qua non of a free people, because it trains people in self-governance, in perceiving and living with the truth.”

Nothing Like Common Core

Classical education leaders like Kern, Anderson, and Moore draw sharp divisions between them and progressive education, the kind that has ruled U.S. schools since the 1900s and manifests itself today most prominently in Common Core. Common Core aims entirely at job preparation—see its motto, “college- and career-readiness,” which Congress has even endorsed by making it the defining characteristic of federally acceptable state K-12 goals in pending bills to reauthorize No Child Left Behind.

‘It is impossible for [most public] schools to succeed, because the people making the decisions don’t have to live with the consequences.’

Like America’s founders, classical enthusiasts hope their students achieve far more than entry-level job skills. They intend for their students to also exhibit the public and private virtues necessary to cultivate and preserve America’s unique form of constitutional, limited government.

“We don’t know what [students] are going to be—lawyer, garbage man,” Anderson says, with a characteristically direct look. “But you will be an American, and can determine our fate through voting. They will all be humans. Se we want them to be good at it.”

Source: In The Common Core Era, Families Flock To Its Opposite

“There Are Only Two Conceptions of Human Ethics” | Strange Herring

1346040046573-cachedBusiness as usual, sadly.

I am rereading Darkness at Noon, Arthur Koestler’s masterwork limning the psychology of Soviet totalitarianism, and realized you can justify anything if you believe you are on the right side of History. Kill babies, sell off the parts, then lie about it? That’s amateur night.

Here is a portion of the classic colloquy between Ivanov, a veteran of the civil war and an Old Bolshevik, and Rubashov, legendary former member of the Central Committee, erstwhile Commissar of the People, about to be purged for his sentimental ideas about the brutal tactics employed by the Revolution.

Ivanov: “There are only two conceptions of human ethics, and they are at opposite poles. One of them is Christian and humane, declares the individual to be sacrosanct, and asserts that the rules of arithmetic are not to be applied to human units. The other starts from the basic principle that a collective aim justifies all means, and not only allows, but demands, that the individual should in every way be subordinated and sacrificed to the community—which may dispose of it as an experimentation rabbit or a sacrificial lamb. The first conception could be called anti-vivisection morality, the second, vivisection morality.

Source: “There Are Only Two Conceptions of Human Ethics” | Strange Herring

“On Point” with Tomi Lahren

I thought this went up yesterday, but my files say different. So here it is!

Well, this may or may not be the way to win friends and influence people. But it is an excellent example of the use of a declarative sentence.

I couldn’t agree more with her

Courage: The Mother of the Virtues

8338172361_4e2a776cc8_k-998x661Tocqueville wrote this:

There are countries in Europe where the native considers himself as a kind of settler, indifferent to the fate of the spot which he inhabits. The greatest changes are effected there without his concurrence, and (unless chance may have apprised him of the event) without his knowledge; nay, more, the condition of his village, the police of his street, the repairs of the church or the parsonage, do not concern him; for he looks upon all these things as unconnected with himself and as the property of a powerful stranger whom he calls the government. He has only a life-interest in these possessions, without the spirit of ownership or any ideas of improvement. This want of interest in his own affairs goes so far that if his own safety or that of his children is at last endangered, instead of trying to avert the peril, he will fold his arms and wait till the whole nation comes to his aid.

I was reminded of it the other day when a car dull of passengers watched an 18-year-old stab a 24-year-old to death, without taking any action whatsoever. In fact, they apparently thought they did the right thing, one of them saying this:

What I don’t wish is that I had somehow tried to attack the assailant. I am a little bit larger than he was, but I would not have won. It’s scary, because if we had been sitting closer and had seen the attack start I probably would have tried to help, and would have been stabbed.

By the way, the perpetrator was huge: 5 foot five and a 125 lbs. 20 or so passengers couldn’t possibly have taken him! The story reminded me of something else. Remember Drummer Lee Rigby, butchered on the street a few yards from his duty station, in London, a few years ago? A the time we had a robust debate on Jess’ site about it, which is here. If one reads that article, one will find a dichotomy. Passivity and dependence on the police by everyone from the UK, and uniform incredulousness at such nonsense from the Americans, who uniformly advocated taking care of business. That’s hardly unusual is it. We, as Americans, have always been that way. Tocqueville also said this:

… in no country does crime more rarely elude punishment. The reason is that everyone conceives himself to be interested in furnishing evidence of the crime and in seizing the delinquent. During my stay in the United States I witnessed the spontaneous formation of committees in a county for the pursuit and prosecution of a man who had committed a great crime. In Europe a criminal is an unhappy man who is struggling for his life against the agents of power, while the people are merely a spectator of the conflict; in America he is looked upon as an enemy of the human race, and the whole of mankind is against him.

It looks to me, and to others as well, as the nanny state is turning us into passive children like the Europeans, or as some say beta males. John Daniel Davidson reminds us:

[…] The main reason I don’t regard it as important is that this was not the answer to some sort of metaphysical mystery. It was not a moment that revealed what I would really do in a crisis, because I was never in that much doubt about how I would act—or at least, how I should act. It’s not that I had a specific plan or some special training that gave me confidence. It was simply that I knew it is possible to act when action is needed, and I expected it of myself.

That’s what’s really disturbing about the reaction to this case: that this expectation of courage is totally disappearing. Courage is now viewed as exotic and unusual and unproven and unknowable—rather than a normal and expected part of being a man.

Or consider the account of a woman who was abused and threatened over a long period of time by two belligerent girls on a Metro car, while 30 other passengers averted their eyes and pretended not to notice. Yet she concludes, “I don’t know if I would have helped me.” Really?

This is about way more than whether you’re good in a brawl. Physical courage is just one form of courage, and when we give up on it, we’re giving up on other forms of courage that we need just as much—particularly moral courage and intellectual courage.

Ironically, the same people now making excuses for cowardice are the kind who engage in exaggerated Kabuki theater displays about how evil slavery was and how terrible the Confederate flag is and how much they furiously oppose them—150 years after it took any courage to do so. But how do they think slavery was defeated? Who do they think took down that flag the first time around? By their own admission, they would have been the ones averting their eyes when they saw a master beating a slave. They would have been the ones to make compromises and concessions every time John Calhoun thundered.

Courage: The Mother of the Virtues.

Incidentally, that same day, in Colorado, a woman, costumed as a wench at a Renaissance Festival, put a man in a headlock after he stole a jouster’s sword. Colorado is not DC, at least yet. :)

C.S. Lewis said, “Courage is not just one of the virtues but the form of every virtue at the testing point.”

Cultural Tyrants

I wrote last week about how proud I am to be fellow citizens with the admirable citizens of Charleston, that post is here. Their reaction is pretty much what one would expect of American citizens and/or Christians, traditionally the same thing white or black. That anybody was surprised, says more about our current culture (very bad things) than anything else. Writing for The American Spectator magazine, Scott McKay has some thought as well.

Following the nine killed by 21-year-old ninth grade dropout and troglodyte Dylann Roof at the Mother Emanuel AME Church last week, the people of that venerable South Carolina city have given the nation one of our more inspiring spectacles — thousands gathering in prayer and demonstrating for unity and civility. Had the reaction of Charleston been the major story, the massacre — disgusting and tragic as it was — would have told us something good about the basic character of the American people.

Your author will go so far as to say Charleston’s reaction has told us something true, as well — about most of us, at least.

Unfortunately, most of us are not represented by our betters in politics, media and the cultural elite. Our ruling class missed the unity and healing in Charleston completely — so anxious were they to make Roof the epitome of the knuckle-dragging white Southerner (and Republican, at that, though there is no evidence of his membership in the GOP) and present a “teachable moment” to the American people who foolishly believe despite the presence of a black president that America has not fundamentally advanced on race since the bad old days of Jim Crow.

The left, including the President, instantly tried one more time their narrative on gun control, when America yawned in boredom in their faces, they decided that the Battle Flag of one of the most revered American armies, North or South, would be a more viable target. It is, mostly because that flag was defiled after the war and again in the 1960s for the racist purposes of the Democratic Party, and the founder of its terrorist arm, as well as some of it’s more modern members. there is a reason, why the left wants us to forget our history after all, and it is largely because of their place in it. But because it has been misused institutionally that flag is vulnerable, through no fault of its own. The same can validly be said for American history.

The Battle Flag is likely a poor choice for us to occupy that last trench, and yet at some point we are going to have to push back, or we will lose our America, its idealism, its history of trying to do the right thing, its belief that freedom is always better, and yes, its eternal optimism. So if not the Battle Flag, What? If not us, Who? If not now, When? America can never be defeated by an external enemy, neither can Christianity, both can be destroyed by a cancerous rot, and it appears to be metastasizing. To continue with Scott:

The preservation of Southern history, heritage, and culture might not seem like much of a cause to many of our readers, and that’s fine. But the same crowd howling about the racist rednecks in South Carolina and Mississippi is also demanding that students at UCLA not be taught that America is the land of opportunity, for that is also racist and thus offensive. At Cal-Berkeley, traditional American mantras about meritocracy or our country as a melting pot are now unacceptable. At Cal-Irvine the American flag itself is offensive. So are crosses on display in public places, or dogs or the smell of pork in Dearborn and Minneapolis. Or churches wishing to specialize in intersex weddings. Or “manspreading” males on New York subway trains.

This isn’t stopping at the Confederate flag. It accelerates with each victory the cultural Left achieves. And never, ever is there a price paid for its aggression.

At some point, the rest of us are going to have to exact that price. The stars and bars can go, and if Bedford Forrest, who may have been a singular cavalry officer but did, after all, serve as first Grand Wizard of the Democratic Party’s 19th-century terrorist arm, goes with it that’s not an unbearable loss to anyone’s heritage. But while we’re scrubbing the bad baggage from our culture, can we have a merciful end to the painfully stupid leftist obsession with cop-killing racists such as Mumia Abu Jamal, communist terrorists like Bill Ayers, and psychopathic Marxist white supremacists like Che Guevara? How about, as Victor Davis Hanson suggested, an end to racist Leftist institutions like the Congressional Black Caucus and La Raza? If we’re to crack down on the cultural cachet of the Old South, can we conduct a similar purge of the New Black Panthers?

Perhaps as a small token of exchange we could see a prosecution of Al Sharpton for his well-known tax evasion? Is that so awful a price?

A price must be exacted. The Left cannot be allowed its double standards and guilty pleasures on the way to unquestioned cultural dominance. If traditional America must perish under Alinsky’s Rule #4 (“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules”), then so must the Left.

Continue reading: Cultural Tyrants | The American Spectator.

The time for the backlash is, I fear, drawing very near, and as we did on that construct of the Democratic Party, the Confederate States of America, it is likely that we will wreak a terrible vengeance on those who would destroy the very idea of America, or the dream that is America will end. And von Clausewitz did teach us, after all, that war is simply politics by another name.

%d bloggers like this: