When pondering the hot mess police response in Uvalde, Texas, one of my sons said something damning. He said the kids in the school were braver than the adults in uniform. We then discussed why. We concluded there was a time when the natural fearlessness of children was formed and shaped into bravery, sacrifice, honor, duty and loyalty. Not always perfectly, but that was the goal.
Today, that natural fearlessness of children is formed and shaped by Wall Street, Hollywood, our schools and universities and even many of our churches into cowardliness, narcissism, nihilism, hedonism and decadence. Had those poor children been outside their school, I feel they would have charged forth blindly to save their classmates. It took growing up and being weaned in our post-modern nation to get the response from adults that we witnessed. Though the bravery of those who did act shows that, like old teaching, the new hedonism doesn't always stick either.
I thought of that when I saw the below speech. It's from a Harvard undergrad. According to John C. Wright, it was met with stunned silence. Because she is spot on. And we all know it. And those who have surrendered and consigned future generations to tyranny and oppression and squalor know it, too.
Kudos young woman. You are a credit to those who waded ashore at Normandy and in every other conflict that was waged to keep us free. You're better than the schools, culture, corporations and even religious traditions that raised you.
Were those Cops really cowards? Or were they just following orders? Their superiors may have just been overly cautious.
ReplyDeleteI would put that under 'not acceptable sir' responses. There are times when you disobey orders, like knowing there are children being killed in a school and there might still be a shooter inside. You might lose your job, but you'll be a hero of the year.
DeleteYou might also lose your life while saving children, but will experience eternal life.
DeleteUnless your superior has information you don't have. There might be a logic to the order based on context that the lower ranks aren't aware of.
DeleteIt hasn't been revealed what the logic was. What does seem to be the overwhelming evidence is that the hesitation and the action of law enforcement cost the lives of children. That's just tough to square with the sacrificial duty of a police officer.
DeleteOn that case it's the supervisor at fault, not the lower ranks
DeleteIf the supervisor was in error, it was absolutely his fault. With that said, police standing by while children are being murdered is one of those 'think outside the box' moments that often defines the difference between the celebrated hero and the not celebrated anything.
DeleteFailing to think outside the box is a sign of low intelligence, not necessarily cowardice or lack of morals.
DeleteIt could be. But these are supposed to be trained professionals who pledge to put their lives behind the innocent. It's not me standing there being confused. It's them, trained, pledged, knowing that children have either been shot, or are being shot, and not going in. That strikes many as a major, epic fail on their part, and beyond mere procedural inadequacy. Out of all that, someone should have said once more unto the breach. And had they done so earlier, there may have been more children saved. And many can't help but think it might just be that ours is no longer a 'we band of brothers' generation. As they say, great nations make great men. On the other hand, well, you know.
DeleteThey probably thought their supervisors had a plan. It's not uncommon for leaders to withhold tactical information from the grunts. The last thing you want is some low-ranking cop trying to play the hero and ironically making things worse due to some factor he wasn't aware of.
DeleteA young woman aspiring to be another talking head in the GOP, really. The true mark of a free citizen in a free country is not being a ninny, scared that any trace of wrongdoing must be eliminated from the national record.
ReplyDeleteThat is true, but to be a single voice speaking out against the majority - and a zealously intolerant one at that - isn't a bad way to show you're on path to be what is the mark of a free citizen. I think she more than fits the bill.
DeleteDave, It's not a ''single voice''. Just as those on the left, the majority of these so-called voiced are entirely fake and fabricated. If i had the instinct of a grifter and I was a US citizen, I'd know EXACTLY what to say and to whom. I'd only have to decide which side is more profitable at
Delete.. is more profitable at a given time. As for me, I think both the ''rara freedom shinig city'' crowd and the ''all of US history is evil racism'' crowd are beneath contempt. Intellectually dishonest moral midgets, the lot of them.
DeleteI'll give a nod to the one raraing freedom. After all, there is an obvious push to recalibrate our priorities, including just how important freedom is or isn't. So if you've gone through a DEI course, it's hard not to see the way the wind is blowing. When a slide says in big, bold font that equality was always unjust and unfair, owing to the inherently racist and oppressive nature of our country, so it's time to replace that with equity (meaning opportunity or not based on group identity), I'm for the rara freedom gang.
DeleteI'm all for saying the "Ra Ra freedom gang," is the lesser of two evils, however that's different from accepting their propaganda without criticism. The "Ra Ra Freedom," mentality is part of why the Communist Folks are having such an easy time these days. The propaganda they pumped into our society during the 50s and 60s was low-hanging fruit for the Reds to pick. So many kids raised on the "Shinning City which the World Envies (just don't ask Guatemala)" have been lost. "Ra Ra Freedom," and "Burn the Flag," seemed to be the only two options. They associated the romanticized virsion of America with the concept of Patriotism, thus when the "City on a Hill," stuff turned out to be less clear cut than they were lead to believe, it also killed their patriotism. I've seen this phenomenon play out in real time. It almost happened to me.
Delete(Tom New Poster)
DeleteDonald and the rest: (To paraphrase Puddleglum), I'd rather live in the world where "ra-ra" was the ideal even if unrealized than the world were "burn the flag" was the ideal. I'd rather fight alongside the imperfectly good than the diabolically evil.
The issue I have with this aspirant grifter is not that she is pushing back against a leftist ''inherently racist and oppressive country since forever'' rhetoric. By all means, have at them, I say. What I think is dumb, devoid of a sense of reality, and in the end detrimental to the welllbeing of a country, is the false sense of ''we are the MOST free, last stand bla bla bla country. Even IF you don't subscribe to things like economical freedom, the USA is NOT the most free country in the world. It also didn't make the best cars in the world for a long time. If everything the conservatives have to offer is this kind of fake patriotism, I'm glad I don't have to live there, just like I'm glad I'm not living in Russia, though I'm sure they're all very happy to know they too live in the envy of the word, with their top class military and economy after all. Sweet dreams.
DeleteHere's my point. There is nothing wrong in what she said and she was courageous to say it. Remember, there are colleges today that will send a prof packing for saying what she said. Was it purely 'America the beautiful'? Sure. It wasn't a course lesson on American history. But it refutes the dominant leftwing narrative of America as 400 year old genocidal, racist Nazi state. It calls out the left's push to make white Europeans and American the prime source of suffering in the world, hence we can take principles and values from that source and jettison them. See DEI's insistence that equality is bad and unfair because of course it is, which is why we need equity instead (that is, privilege or not based on group identity). I find that is one reason the Left wins, because those who may lament where the Left is taking us will never miss a chance to shoot the legs out from under someone trying to stop it over point of order. Something you'll notice that this thing we call the Left never does.
DeleteDave,
ReplyDeleteThere is a LOT wrong with what she said, and i mean factually wrong. The USA is not ''the'' nation where blablabla, it is ''a'' nation where etc. You also didn't save the world from catastrophe three times in the last century, unless you count the ''we also attended'' participation trophies. But pointing out facts is all pointless, isn't it Dave? Facts are fun, because you can use them against the left, who, let there be no doubt about it, live in la la land, just another la la land than the one you live in. Facts are also annoying, because they tend to wake you up from your nap, just while you were snoozing away dreaming of D-day.
But I get it. Americans now come in two varieties, both simultaneously senile and juvenile. The only way to separate these silly ducks from one another is the sound of their quacking. One species always replies with ''but the MAGA cult'', while the other can only say ''But the progressive left''
If you insist on saying there are only two kinds of Americans, then chances are you will make sure everyone fits into one of those two groups. Could we quibble about the details of her brief speech that was not a doctoral dissertation on American political interventions in the 20th Century? Sure. We can do that and not accept the 'America bumbling about and meaning nothing positive to the world' narrative just as easily, because the details will point more to her version than that one. But in a brief presentation, her task was to challenge a narrative promoted by almost every major institution in our nation today (and beyond our nation). I'm sure in a master's thesis she can bring more to the table. But if you're looking for a dissertation defense in a grad speech, you'll likely be disappointed every time. Especially if you forget that history is often open to interpretation, and it's not just about those cold, hard facts that always happen to point to your point of view. But again, if you have already concluded there are and can only be two types of Americans, then sadly you will make sure no matter what anyone says, they will have to end up being in one of those two categories. But remember, the problem with insisting there are only two bad groups is that those who say so inevitably insist they are not part of any group, they just happen to be indisputably correct.
DeleteDave,
DeleteI have often remarked to my American friends that many countries in the world see you with a mixture of envy and hatred, and that, oddly enough, this matches very well with how the two sides of your political spectrum see the USA, either as God's gift to the world and a source of envy, or as an accursed nation, only worthy of hatred.
This is not what you'll get from me, not on a personal level, nor on the level of international relations. We pesky Europeans offer you a mix of 90% genuine friendship and 10% snooty condescension. I suggest you take the offer. It's a bloody good one.
My experience with friends from around the world is as you say, though both extremes can also be found. I had two friends from Nigeria who demonstrated those extremes. One, Steve, could barely squeeze the slightest compliment about America out of his mouth, while the other, Joseph (RIP), loved our country more than most conservatives I know.
DeleteLikewise, all is not Commie/Maga. Most Magas I know, for example, are not particularly conservative socially. Some even accept the 'once a racist sexist handmaid's tale' approach to our past. They like Trump because strength vs. the world, money, a fighter, and loose morals. Most Evangelicals I know who supported him, on the other hand, did so with nose in clothespins. With some not voting at all, but still agreeing with some of his priorities.
Likewise I know liberals who are very unhappy with the new push to sex up kids in schools for instance, or are bothered by the increasing rise in non-white white hate. Heck, I've met some who didn't rejoice in the extermination of Bob E. Lee. It's far more than this or that.
What this young woman did was in a brief talk push back at the dominant narrative being hoisted by the main power players in our country. It isn't that the extreme left is worse than the extreme right. It's that the extreme left is represented in mass media, Hollywood, corporate America and even a growing number of churches and religious traditions. With the goal to paint non-conformity as the same as white supremacy. If she had to lay it on simplistically, she only had a few minutes to do against what is done 24/7 in a thousand outlets around the clock through every week of the year on behalf of that radical leftwing narrative.
The question of how effective America's involvement with any particular war is complicated. The issues of Military Strategy, Tactics, Logistics etc.... are extremely complex. My big issue is the idea that a German Victory in WWI would be a "catastrophe," as if the Kaiser's Empire was some kind of exceptionally evil empire. Or the idea that a German Victory in WWII would be a "global," catastrophe, thus buying into the whole "if Hitler wins WWII the whole planet becomes Facist nonsense. I'm assuming the Cold War is the third "averted catastrophe," or her list. As far as I can tell, the Cold War was NATO, the USSR and China pretentiously lecturing each other while competing over who could burn the third world down quickest. The whole thing was already a disaster, with NATO being the lesser of the various evils, but not much more.
DeleteWell, I'd have to disagree on several points. Again, hers was a brief speech, not a published volume on US history. But in each case you list, it's fair to say the US did bring a significant degree of influence, and a positive influence at that. Does that mean the US has clean hands or NATO? No more than a single person would. Does it mean the US singlehandedly saved the world each time with no help from its friends? Again, no. But the idea that NATO or the USSR is barely different would be refuted by most I know who grew up beyond the Iron Curtain. The same with German (and the lesser referenced Imperial Japan). Setting aside that they could have exercised serious disadvantages on a world dominated by their vast empires, it simply isn't feasible that we stand back and allow nations to sweep over people and subject them to terror and death by the millions and do nothing. We can't police the whole world, but there are limits. Granted, WWI is far more complex, but even then, most acknowledge that even though the tides were finally shifting against Germany, it was the US entry that pushed it over the line. Again, the simplistic propaganda and Hollywood portrayals aside, it's difficult to find a war that more defines Just War than WWII. And those who lived in nations behind the Iron Curtain are more than happy that it turned out the way it did. As a friend of mine from Hungary has said, the only US president that Hungarians typically like is Reagan. Until him, the US was content with letting the USSR have what it had. It was Reagan who began to push to put an end to 'we'll just have to live with nukes pointed at each other.' And those who suffered under Soviet rule are typically the first ones to approve that message.
DeleteThose who suffered under the Dictatorships we helped install and/or propped up in Guatemala, The Congo, Chilie, Brazil, Argentina and Indonesia would probably question your views on the Cold War. Iran is under an Islamic Theocracy today mainly because the CIA overthrew their Democraticly elected Government in the 1950s.
DeleteThat litany of bad turnouts is well known. How people in those countries see such things is likely parallel to how people in America see things. Some see America glass half full, others half empty. No doubt there are reasons that people see things differently, but they do. The ones who see it half full typically subscribe to the idea that countries are like people, you can't demand perfection. But they understand the difference between the Stars and Stripes and the Swastika. Something the glass half empty gang seem increasingly unable to do.
DeleteMaybe that list is known to you, but I was never taught about any of that growing up. When I learned about those events, I was shocked and nearly became a Commie. By portraying the US as a Gondor-like, heroic fortress which did little to no wrong while holding back the Mordor-like USSR, my parents unintentionally set me up for potential recruitment into the Communist camp. I was lucky to be able to avoid falling into that trap. Not everyone has been so fortunate.
DeleteCan't imagine what school you went to. When the Iran hostage situation came to an end, I was in high school, and we were specifically taught that we laid an egg with that one, having set us up for that. Plus in current events, our actions in Central America were a major topic of discussion. These things were also mentioned in my sons' textbooks when they were in school (2000s), because I remember talking to them about them. But yes, the USSR was that Mordor compared to us. The modern 'Eh, it wasn't so bad' exists because it's been three decades since you could watch people risk their lives to try to escape, thus challenging the growing pop culture portrayal of the Soviets as the cool kids on the block. Find some people who grew up behind the Iron Curtain and ask them to speak to the 'USSR, USA, was there a difference?' school of thought. You'll find it's a bit like talking to someone who is Jewish and asking if they're sure the Nazis were really all that bad.
DeleteEverything you say about the Iron Curtain could just as easily apply to Latin America, but with the US and USSR swapped out.
DeleteAlso, I'm not trying to glorify the USSR.
DeleteAs for what school I went to, I was homeschooled.
I don't get the comparison between life in Hungary or Poland during the Cold War as it relates to the USSR and life in Brazil or Nicaragua during the Cold War as it relates to the USA. There is no real comparison there. The idea that the big difference between the USA and the USSR is that one has an extra letter relies on a level of credulity I can't muster, not to mention questioning those friends and colleagues I've met from the former Iron Curtain as well as Latin America. Nothing they have said suggests attempting to level out the two countries onto the same plane is a realistic appraisal of their histories. Even when I consider those I know who are mighty critical of the US. Of course being homeschooled allows for a broad range of approaches to the subject, that's for sure.
Delete