Posse Incitatus

Who's afraid of the peace movement?

The modern peace movement is an interesting creature.  Ostensibly about creating greater harmony and improving the world, it almost invariably finds itself taking the side of the most brutal regimes on the planet – usually dictators who owe their power almost entirely the use of brute force.

This article in City Journal (via the hated Instapundit) outlines some of these contradictions, but I think it fails on two major points:

1. It is entirely too overwrought.  After six years of ANSWER and other Stalinist organizations holding rallies for “peace” and shamelessly taking bribes from dictators, is the corruption of the movement really news to anyone?

2. It fails to get to the heart of the matter and really discuss what makes these dictator-loving peaceniks tick.

That would be an interesting article.  As it is, Bawer is basically making the same argument as Kevin Baker and pointing out, as Kevin did in the comments, that the Left has tried to seize the "commanding heights" of the media and university to convert the children of the next generation.

The problem with this theory is that the left - which runs the "peace movement" is losing its hold on both of those institutions.  The rise of talk radio broke their stranglehold of the media and the advent of the Internet has resulted in catastrophic losses in media credibility.

Meanwhile, the academy has its own scandals.  This is partly because the left's own dominance of the faculty lounge has left it lazy and intellectually flaccid.  Its supporters can no longer win arguments; instead they bully students into agreeing with them.

No one likes to be bullied.  Most students go along, but as soon as the class is over, they wash their hands of the whole business.  Indeed, modern children are becoming masters of doublethink, able to parrot the party line on demand but secretly remaining true to the beliefs they have grown up with all their lives.

The Posse is living proof of this and we are far from unique.  My goal in raising my children is to give them the intellectual tools to defeat these arguments - and the sense of when to fight their battles.  If going along with the flow is what is needed to get the grade, fine.  Tell them what they want to hear.

This doubtlessly has the effect of making the profs think they are more persuasive and powerful than they are, since hardly any of their students disagree with them - and they do, until they leave the classroom with a diploma in hand.

This is all out there and should be public knowledge.  What I want to know, what interests me (as long time readers of the Posse know) are the motivations of these people.  Why do they prefer despots to their own leaders?  It is a strange situation where pacifists run around effectively asking to be taken hostage and then condemning their rescuers.

How is it that the left went from red-banner-waving fanatics to latte-sipping wimps in the course of a single generation?  There lies the tale.

Drinking ages

We were out biking today and came across a sign that featured a smiling child with the words "She had her first drink at 14."

This was, I guess, supposed to be shocking.  It isn't.

It isn't for two reasons.  In the first place, it is not at all difficult to believe in the current day and age that 14 year olds are drinking alcohol.  If that's all they are doing, it's a good day for the Republic.  I will sleep much better at night if that is the best the scare-mongers can muster.

Moreover, I'm of the opinion that kids should be having their first drink while still teenager.  How else are they going to learn how to do it?  We offer learners permits for driving at 15 for goodness' sake.  In Michigan at least, there is a graduated procedure to allows young drivers to gradually get more responsibility behind the wheel as they grow and mature.  That is how it should be.

Yet with alcohol, we expect that they won't touch Demon Liquor until they turn 21 and that they will immediately have a solid grasp of their limits and its effect on them.  Pure hogwash.

We blog a lot about guns here at the Posse, but I find that as the Junior Posse Members grow up, alcohol is a far thornier issue.  How are we to teach our children to drink responsibly, to understand what hangovers are, what is acceptable and what is not if not during their teenage years?

We'd suggest a graduated drinking law - one can imbibe and posses in parental presence at 16, and purchase beer and liquor at 18.  The fact that we have combat veterans who cannot legally purchase alcohol is utterly insane.

Not all declines are equal

The Posse has been reading several pieces of late about the decline of the West.  Mark Steyn is of course one of the prime movers in this school of thought, but supporting voices can be found at Gates of Vienna.

Without exception, they focus on the falling demographics of the Western nations.  Taken as a whole, the West has basically given up on children.  “Demography is destiny” and all that, and there is a large degree of truth to it. 

As we’ve noted before, a nation whose military is made up of only children – the sole heir to the family name – is not going to be excited about risking them in conflict.

That is why when ancient societies needed warriors for particularly dangerous missions, they chose them from those who had living sons – this way the family line could continue.

We do not dispute the notion that the West is a whole is experiencing a crisis of confidence, however we do have one substantial bone to pick and it is this: not all segments of the West are equally demoralized.

To refine that even further, it is our contention that even within declining societies there are people that retain confidence and vigor and that while society as whole may decline within it, they will grow in power and influence as the years pass.

That is why it is important to note that when these commentators use the term “average births” they are just that – the average.  It is like the old joke about the economist who drowned in the river that averaged only one foot deep – average does not mean equally distributed.

Within the populations of the UK, France, Germany and of course the United States we know that some people are having no children while others are having quite a few.   Steyn and others correctly note the differential between immigrants (particularly Muslims) and natives.  The point is that within the “native” section there are also variations, and this means that the sweeping generalizations may be inappropriate.

We know that within the United States, “Red” America is reproducing faster than “Blue” America.  Partly this is because of James Taranto’s “Roe Effect” :  Those who believe in abortion are likely to practice it whilst those who oppose it will tend not to use it.

The end result: abortion supporters have fewer children than right to life advocates.  Over the long run, popular support for abortion will collapse as its supporters will dwindle and die off.

Some time ago we commented on the One that Survived – a morally hideous tale of a woman who aborted two of her triplets because it seemed like too much trouble.  She didn’t want to have shop at Costco and buy the big jar of mayonnaise – instead she wanted one precious little pampered baby who got everything.

A more religious and socially conservative-minded woman would of course take a multiple birth as a tremendous blessing – not one without clear challenges of course – but it would be something to celebrate.  Of course this would bring some financial and emotional challenges, but this is where family and church groups would come in to help out.

For these people, children are a blessing, and many children is a sign of a special favor – a gift of the Almighty. 

But to the post-modern self-focused elements of the West, it is a financial hardship and a social stigma to have too many kids at once.  So they kill them.

We are already seeing this shift, and it is part of the political realignment of America.  Liberals are losing the next generation because they decided not to have it.

So when one looks at a nation of many millions – be it 300 million in the US or 20-80 million in Europe – it is essential that we keep in mind that the overall birth rate even among the “natives” isn’t uniform.

Europe is defined by class.  Even (or perhaps because of) it socialistic ambitious, it is a fact that who your parents are matters more than who you are in terms of opportunity and career choices.

While the majority of Europeans are childless post-modern narcissists, there remains a “core” of various sizes (depending on the country) that continues to follow the old ways, worship at the village church and hold the Patria sacred.  They are often rural.  As the great die-off begins, they will loom ever-larger and their children will likely continue this trend.

It is worth pointing out that these families also are the ones most likely to produce career military members.

Steyn likes to point out that there is a “tipping point” beyond which no society has ever recovered and he may be correct.  But we must be clear about which society we are talking about. 

The multi-cultural post-modern childless secularist society is at the brink of extinction, but these “core” families are not.  Whether they will stay and fight amidst the rising tide is an open question, and one worth debating.  In larger states, such as Germany, they may while in smaller ones (like the Netherlands) they may opt to move to greener pastures.

It is worth pointing out that the post-World War II migration of the Dutch was effectively a conservative exodus, perhaps responsible for the remaining ones going off the deep end and embracing promiscuity, drugs and multiculturalism.  Western Michigan, where many of these Dutch emigrants settled, remains a bastion of ultra-conservative Dutch Reformed communities – with large families.

This core – if it remains in place – is what will contend with the Muslims for the mastery of the continent.  They are the ones who will lead the “ethnic cleansing” of Europe if it comes down to it.  Again, while your average Frenchman or German may be feminized and interested only in prolonging college until he can collect a government pension, the core natives are the shell-backed capitalists and career military officers and NCOs.  Their ancestors (they note with pride) fought at Blenheim, or Austerlitz or Waterloo and their family has been at it ever since.

Steyn understood this only a few years ago - back when the GOP was sweeping all before it in American politics.  Strange that now that the Dems have a razor-thin majority they are now suddenly representative of overall American demographic decline.

No PAC Left Behind

Let's take a break from talking about Iraq, terrorism and whether Hillary Clinton is trying to be more like a man.

It's mid-August, and soon K-12 schools all over the nation will be back in session.  The same shortcomings and problems we've heard about for years -- Students who are promoted to the next grade despite poor performance; vacuous curricula sorely lacking in fundamentals such as U.S. history, economics, and basic grammar; gangs; drugs; teen pregnancy; and a lack of discipline in the classroom will plague too many of these schools.

Too often, the Left cries for more funding for schools, higher teacher salaries, and more federal mandates.  Too often, liberals get in a tizzy about the lack of integration in our schools and racial disparities in opportunity.  (We'll get to the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling regarding race and classroom diversity in a moment.)

But allow me the opportunity to quote from a longtime liberal who is definitely not brain-dead.  Columnist Richard Cohen of the Washington Post, who certainly is no friend of George W. Bush, wrote this in his July 3 column on a recent  Democratic presidential debate:

"One candidate after another lambasted George Bush, the Republican Party and, of course, the evil justices of the Supreme Court.  But not a one of them even whispered a mild word of outrage about a public school system that spends $13,000 per child -- third highest among big-city school systems -- and produces pupils who score among the lowest in just about any category you can name.  The only area in which the Washington school system is No. 1 is in money spent on administration."

Mr. Cohen, to his credit, doesn't mince words: "The litany of more and more when it comes to money often has little to do with what, in the military, are called facts on the ground: kids and parents.  It does have a lot to do with teachers unions, which are strong supporters of the Democratic Party."

He goes on to note that the Supreme Court ruling in late June that said race could no longer be taken into account to achieve classroom diversity, a ruling that drew much hand-wringing and condemnation among liberals, will have little effect on big-city school systems, because most of them are overwhelmingly black or Hispanic.

The liberals are predictable, if nothing else.  When the 50th anniversary of Brown V. the Board of Education was observed in 2004, we were subjected to a volley of angst-ridden analyses and editorials from the mainstream media decrying the segregation that still exists in so many of today's public schools.

The default assumption is that racism is still alive and well.  Darn those white parents who keep fleeing to the suburbs or shelling out the money to enroll their kids in private schools.  If only they weren't so racist...if only the black schools had more money in their budgets...if only the charter schools didn't siphon money away from public schools...oh, those evil vouchers...

Enough already!

The fact is, untold numbers of black and Hispanic parents have also struggled to pay private school tuition, or moved to suburbs, to escape the maladies of inner city schools.  The desire to flee bad schools has about as much to do with racism as George H.W. Bush's election in 1988 had to do with the WIllie Horton ads.

(Crash course for the uninformed: Bush's impressive resume, eight years as Ronald Reagan's vice president, and Michael Dukakis' ineptitude and ultra-liberalism were why Bush cruised to victory.  But the liberal template, as spouted by the mainstream media, pinned the cause on demagoguery and racism by the Bush camp. i.e., the infamous ads about Willie Horton, a convicted rapist who escaped from a weekend prisoner furlough program in Massachusetts and committed a brutal rape and assault.  And a footnote to a footnote: It was Al Gore who first used the Willie Horton incident against Dukakis during the 1988 Democratic primary.)

But enough digression.

When it comes to the troubled state of public education in America, IT ISN'T ABOUT SKIN COLOR.  It's about quality, opportunity, and choice (or the lack thereof), in so many public schools.  But the race hustlers on the Left keep on playing the pigment card.

Granted, the high illegitimate birth rate among African Americans (about 70 percent) and the breakdown of the family structure are major factors contributing to inner city mayhem, both within and outside of schools.

But the teachers' unions are also largely to blame, due to their obstinate, bull-headed, self-serving ways.  They often oppose competency testing for teachers, merit pay, and greater accountability.  They resist efforts to streamline bureaucracy and trim the number of high-paying administrative jobs that suck up dollars.  And it goes without saying they're dead-set against charter schools, vouchers, or ANY kind of innovation that will upset their apple cart.  The Democrats, who are all about choice when it comes to abortion but rock solid against educational choice, take cash from these unions, and thus are complicit in their destructive ways.

Someone once said, "There is none so blind as he who will not see."  May I paraphrase that to say, "There is none so ignorant as he who WILL NOT LEARN.  The teachers' unions and their Democratic enablers WILL NOT LEARN the lessons of their failed policies.  In their minds, the students exist to serve the system, not the other way around.  The more students there are filling up the public school classrooms, the more money the schools bring in, and the greater the Democratic campaign coffers benefit.

Conversely, the more students who leave for private or charter schools, or home schooling, the less money can be milked from the public education cash cow.

How about if we change the name of the federal education bill to "No PAC Left Behind"?

What rank is that guy?

The Posse has had a lingering question through all of this business with Private Beauchamp: why is he still a private?

By all accounts, he had at least some college.  This tells us that at the very least, he should be a PFC.  We know several people who joined the military after obtaining a degree and they started their service at the pay grade of E-4.

For those that do not know, there are three kinds of private.  There is the plain old private, the private E-2 and the Private 1st Class.

In Milspeak, we believe these are abbreviated PVT, PV2, and PFC respectively.

The update to the Weekly Standard's report contains this quotation:

"An investigation has been completed and the allegations made by PVT Beauchamp were found to be false. His platoon and company were interviewed and no one could substantiate the claims."

PVT seems to indicate the E-1 variety of Private, that is to say, the lowest of the low.  The question then arises as to whether Beauchamp was broken as a result of the investigation, was broken before the investigation, or never managed to get promoted during the entire time he was in the Army.

This isn't a burning issue, probably won't settle much in the controversy, but it does make it wonder.

Though Beauchamp fancies himself a writer, he's proving a fascinating character study in his own right.

300: the DVD

The Posse recently acquired the DVD to the excellent film 300, a movie that drove the left to distraction. 

Having viewed it several times since then, we remain firmly convinced that this is an excellent work of art.  The extras include commentary from Victor Davis Hanson and Bettany Hughes, the British info-babe who hosted the excellent Spartans documentary.  We got a kick out of it, though we agree with many of the Amazon reviewers that they could have included more information, including famous Spartan anecdotes.

The movie is quite violent, and has a bit of graphic sex.  However, we find ourselves thinking that it - like all great stories - is essentially quite simple and if it wasn't so racy, we'd recommend it for our kids.

The concepts of freedom, honor, courage and duty are presented up front and honestly.  For many of the left, they are the punch line to a joke, but in Sparta they took them seriously.  When Queen Gorgo flatly states "Freedom isn't free," we're sure many leftists rolled their eyes, or at best said to themselves "Of course it isn't free; sometime you have to write letters or make nasty posts on the Daily Kos."

But in point of fact, few of these people are willing to sacrifice anything for their vaunted liberty.  The Spartans - whatever their faults - believed that true freedom came from selfless sacrifice, that only by embracing the good of the polis and therefore society as a whole, could people become truly free.

That is why liberal critics and commentators who argue that Athens rather than Sparta should be the subject of epic films are missing the point.  Sparta's legacy is both military and civic. 

The military legacy is that with Sparta, we see the beginning of the professional yet patriotic soldiery, of which our troops today are the true and legitimate heirs.

In the civic sense, it is the Spartan ideals of separation of powers, of checks and balances and the idea that among the citizen class (which then was restricted but now is far more open) there was absolute equality before the law.

If you missed it in the theater, pick it up at the video store.  It is well worth the money.

Redefining accurate reporting

To the New Republic, apparently "accurate reporting" means that glaring inaccuracies have been found, no additional specific proof is available, but the story hasn't been overtly disproved in its entirety.

The problem with this line is that it is completely at variance with the concept of accurate reporting.  Reporters should deal in facts, specifically hard, verifiable facts.

If the Posse was to assert that 2,000 tons of chemical munitions were found at one of Saddam's old palaces, we would not be able to subsequently say "No one has proved that they weren't" and expect to get off with our credibility intact.

Pvt. Beauchamp, as we have noted before, has hoisted himself upon his own petard.  Either his writing is fiction, or he and the men in his unit are going to face serious judicial consequences.  It's looking like the former is true.