| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Lurid Crime Tales- |
| As The Nation So Goes The Military? - USNA At-Large reader comments |
| 2019-07-27 |
| The raison d'être of USNA-At-Large is to provide USNA-related news quickly and reliably to Graduates and Friends of the United States Naval Academy. (The graphic to the right/above illustrates some dynamic related to Trade School life and is rotated on a frequent basis.) These comments reflect reader thoughts on the recent arrests of military personnel involved in human trafficking and other criminal activity. Sam: If we harken back to the days of the Vietnam War and the time it took to recover from the cultural tumult of the 1960's and early 70's, I think we can see there's a good deal of truth in saying "as the nation, so goes the military". It took years to recover from that period, and some might say we never fully recovered. I would. A new Establishment was empowered after Watergate and it persists. Though the Mueller hearings seem to have dealt a near mortal blow to this regime, the culture wars aren't fought solely in the halls of Congress. The ballot box has something to do with it, I imagine. As much as I'd like to think that we're about to set America on a new, more stable and moral course, looking back over the decades and centuries makes me wonder if this is possible. Are we close to being out of the woods of cultural "malaise", or is it just another clearing like the one that we wandered into during the Reagan administration? Guy: I am one of those who don't agree that we've recovered from the cultural tumult of the '70's. That was my generation, and I'm sad to say that a significant number of them were and remain spoiled, self-indulgent narcissists (into which category I would assign Al Gore and John Kerry among many others). The flower children of the '70's grew into adults completely unwilling to comply with a set of ethics. They believed and still believe that "if it feels good, do it" and "if it doesn't hurt anyone, there's nothing wrong with it." It feels really good to eat and drink to excess – to enjoy the flavor of things. That leads us to the situation we face now where almost half of all adults are obese and looking at other people to pay for their medical treatment, crying, all the while, that it's immoral to just let them die. I am of the mind that they chose to get obese, they can deal with from their own resources, and if they can't then it's just to bad. That sounds terribly harsh, but it's the rule by which Australopethicus Afarensis (or one of them precursors of homo sapiens) evolved in the direction of a high level of intelligence. Let "Darwin" continue to cull the herd. No one has the right to force me to pay for their decisions and their folly ‐ although (and here's why I don't think we're out of the woods), all the candidates for the Democratic nomination for president all tout Medicare for All. They're proposing to use the lethal force of government to compel me to pay for the lifestyle choices made by a bunch of narcissists and hedonists. There is no such thing as any activity that does not affect someone else. We're all tied together on spaceship earth. A person who abuses alcohol or drug or who cheats on their spouse is harming others. It may be a small harm, but it is a harm. My generation is unwilling to accept that. We insist that whatever I do in private does not affect others, and therefore I am not bound by traditional morality. Further, my peers (I use the term loosely) have bought into the idea that Each of us deserves to be liked and embraced for whatever characteristic we choose publicize ‐ "I deserve to be liked because I'm gay, trans, fat, Swedish, whatever." That's nonsense. Every person deserves to be accorded the respect due to a fellow human being by default ‐ until they demonstrate that they are undeserving of that respect. My generation rejected conventional morality fifty years ago and continue to do so (at least some significant fraction of us do). The rejection of that morality brings us to right where we are today, in a world in which we reject God as a myth but insist on a higher power which we invest as the government. So rather than believe that an omnipotent and omniscient God cares for us, we prefer to believe that a government made up of inherently fallible humans, invested in their own well being, can care for each of us individually. Sort of like the Politburo took care of the average Russian, but that's not how Bernie et al see it. The point of my rant here is that society isn't going to find its way out of the woods until individuals assume responsibility for their own behavior and (this is important) reject the unacceptable behavior of others. I think the theological perspective is, "Hate the sin but love the sinner." Ron: I concur. Three adds: First, Nietzsche published Die fröhliche Wissenschaft in 1882. The book's title was first translated into English as The Joyful Wisdom; but, in the 1960s, Walter Kaufmann updated the title as The Gay Science, which remains the common version in use today. It was in this book that Nietzsche was credited for the "God is dead" revelation (even though later in the book Nietzsche explains that God is dead because we killed Him). It is the mantra that fuels today's secular humanism. Second, the Watergate folklore . . .. My Chinese family informs me that China is blocking out of its history any mention of the Tienanmen Square incident. What America's leftist intellectuals and politicians want us to know about Watergate has been grossly distorted. Silent Coup by Len Colodny paints a different and much more documented picture. The left's distorted picture is critical for justifying many of today's actions to take out a president. Third, does good character matter? Last week, I had an opportunity to conduct a seminar with USAFA basics on the honor code. The week before, my brother-in-law who was a senior member employed by a major defense contractor warned me that the younger generation brings a different set of values to the work place and that the sooner we understood those values, the sooner they could make accommodations to be congruent with their values. I told him the session I was about to engage in was considerably different from his experience. I was about to teach the cadets the importance of honor and duty such that they could understand how they related to our oath to support and defend the Constitution and the values it represents. We do not make accommodations for values that are incongruent with these. The cadets have an opportunity to become acculturated into this lifestyle or they can leave the Academy. The difference between my brother-in-law's experience and teaching honor and duty is similar to the difference in Nietzsche's book title versions. Wisdom is derived and once accepted can lead to a joyful life. Science on the other hand is a journey. The Latin root verb, "scio," means "to know." Thus, science is a journey in pursuit of knowledge. Even knowledge can be abstract and theoretical. Practice or experience is more concrete. Wisdom flows more from experiencing reality. This also explains how science has become politicized, and often contrary to wisdom, to accommodate the narcissistic "gayness" of today's culture. Thanks for getting this started, Sam. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |