November 29, 2005

Because He Could
Dick Morris – ISBN 0060792138

As with his book redirecting and challenging Hillary’s book Living History, Morris undertakes to confront and correct Bill Clinton’s book My Life. I have enjoyed and recommend both because of his insights originating in his having advised the Clintons for two decades.

“Most political leaders draw on the reservoir of their own life experience to shape their understanding of problems and their ideas for solutions.” Bill Clinton has no experience in life outside of politics. He’s never owned a house, and has never been without the largess of his offices: chauffeurs, nannies, entertainment budgets, Air Force One, etc. He doesn’t understand what it is like to be responsible for those things we take for granted..

Clinton’s childhood is explained differently. It bears little resemblance to the reporting in either The Man from Hope, or My Life. He moved from Hope at age one, to a 400 acre farm and later to a two story, five bedroom house with a four stall garage on a hilltop in Hot Springs. The son of a successful nurse anesthetist, and step-son of a comfortably well off Buick dealer, he did not experience the difficulties implied in his descriptions of living in a place in the boon-docks with an outhouse.

“Factoids” aside, however, Morris discusses Clinton’s marital relationship, presidency, interactions with political cronies and adversaries in detail, giving credit where it is due and correcting the record when it is not. He offers detailed insights into how Clinton’s mind works, information I found both helpful and interesting.

He uses humor—or at least candor—as he observes that Bill Clinton “learns from his mistakes [while] Hillary doesn’t make any.”

I learned more about Clinton and his presidency from this book than all of the other things I have read on the subject, have a greater appreciation of it, and have altered my opinion more than a little. What he accomplished was overwritten by his personal gaffes and inadequacies . . . not to mention his prevarication and obfuscation.

I cannot improve on the summary on the back of the cover: “Full of compelling insider anecdotes . . . [this] is a probing portrait of one of the most fascinating and polarizing figures of our time.” Those who approve of Clinton will not be offended by this book. Indeed, they might learn something. And those who loathe him really ought to read it.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 9:53 AM | TrackBack

October 24, 2007

The World is Flat
A Brief History of the 21st Century
Thomas L. Friedman – ISBN – 9780312425074

O.K. . . . I’m sorry !!! A customer recently made the innocent inquiry: “Have you read The World is Flat?” My rejoinder was a little surly, even for me. Ever since Friedman became a raving liberal lunatic I wouldn’t trust anything he said, so I had not read it, nor did I plan to. But a friend loaned me his copy and insisted that I at least skim it. I did, and I’m glad. It was worthwhile.

Being Friedman, he spends far too much time dropping names of his contacts around the planet to let us know how important he is and all of the places he’s been. Being a world recognized Pulitzer Prize winning journalist would have been sufficient for most of us.

He’s loquacious, and his style here reminds one of a conversation not a book. He does a first-rate job of documenting statistically what every reasonably well informed person already knows, and his “gotcha games” with the great powers were to me offensive.

A good editor—permitted--could eliminate half the book without omitting anything of importance. With those caveats, however, he is masterful in explaining his observations and conclusions.

My grandkids often use the button on the VCR to “fast forward thru the boring parts.” Do the same; it is a good book to skim.

He makes the point that recent technology has made it necessary to view the world as an integral unit. Flat is the term he uses; thus modern tools are flattening the world. (He reassures us that he doesn’t really believe the world is flat. Thanks, Tom, we were worried.)

Global crossing, while bankrupting itself laying cable all around the world, set the stage for universal digital communications at affordable prices. Consequentially the modern web is capable of incredible feats and has encouraged the genius of myriad individuals who have authored numberless programs to facilitate the organization and movement of the information which Google and Yahoo direct us to.

Entire libraries and archives are being digitized by high quality, low cost labor in India and other places which would be impossible without this technology. Banks, hospitals and others can outsource bookkeeping, data entry and management around the world, providing inexpensive services and lower prices while creating wealth in these developing countries.

Information on UPS services is fascinating, as are collaborative efforts of Papa John’s, Nike and Jockey. Large and small companies outsource to professionals whose primary function is niche management or marketing. “Smalls” can thus compete globally with “Bigs,” and nobody even knows.

He emphasizes that many jobs are not going “over there.” Rather, they are being eliminated by new technology. China, India and the Asian Tigers are not racing the U.S. and Europe to the bottom with low wage labor; they are racing us to the top with effort and ingenuity. Now even they are outsourcing to lower wage countries. If we don’t soon recognize and correct this they will win!

The U.S. still has many of the finest schools, but a majority of the relevant advanced degrees are being earned here by foreigners. Worse, technology now permits them to return home on completion to societies which they prefer. Immigration is no longer necessary. Further, some of their schools are improving such that they will soon be as good as ours. As a nation we are losing high-tech skills because of societal sloth. All of us are aware that our educational systems are bad. Learn here more about just how bad.

The man has a lot to say, and a lot of it is right, but he seems to ignore the politics of the situation. Sure it takes leadership, but the current environment has prevented handling social security, immigration, education, and more. He ends, as liberals always do, with a heaping portion of pious pabulum piled on a paper plate. We have to be nice, play fair, have dreams, eliminate fear, trust everyone, etc. Bah! Humbug.

Using the information provided, along with common sense, we have to get off our butts, discipline and educate our kids and encourage people to educate themselves in useful endeavors. For those incapable or uninterested in that life course we have to emphasize and provide training in manual jobs which cannot be outsourced, and control immigration so that the wages paid to those on the lower rungs are able to live well.

I well remember an old saw from my youth. There’s very little difference between people. But that little difference makes a big difference. The little difference is attitude; the big difference is whether it’s good or bad. We currently have a bad attitude about lots of things, married to an over-aching sense of superiority and entitlement. For the past century we have been unchallenged. No longer, and we are increasingly behind the curve.

While this is a dissertation on business and globalization he does include some of the societal impact—good and bad. He also omits a number, a few of which I mentioned above.

He does point up many factors which are cogent, and a few are endearing. A selection of these:

• By furthering education we move a larger portion of the population up a notch into a higher wage group, which leaves fewer in the bottom portion, thus raising wages there as well, but only if we control immigration! (A liberal who supports immigration control . . . wow!)

• Leadership positions in China are primarily filled by engineers. In America "leadership" is overwhelmed by lawyers. That is a problem!

• Economic stability in this flat world is not going to happen. Get used to it.

• Everyone wants economic growth, but no one wants to change.

And my favorite:

• In China today Bill Gates is Britney Spears. In America Britney is Britney Spears—that is a serious problem!

And finally he reminds that Will Rogers once said: “Even if you’re on the right track you’ll get run over if you just sit there.”

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 1:02 PM

January 7, 2007

1491

New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus
Charles C. Mann – ISBN – 9781400032051

This “sweeping portrait” of human life long before Columbus found (?) the New World catalogues and explores a wealth of information in one volume. For two or three decades I have been reading such materials, and most of that information is included in this volume. Twenty years ago some of these data were not accepted by archaeologists. Even now some of it is not, along with several (in my opinion) glaring omissions.

In 1491 the Incas ruled an empire far more vast than Ming China, Ivan’s Russia, the Ottoman Empire, and the Aztec empire which was itself larger than any European state: “a thriving, stunningly diverse place, a tumult of languages, trade and culture.” All ended with Columbus, most without any contact with the old world invaders.

Over a thousand years ago there were cities in the Americas which dwarfed the population centers of Europe, and probably Asia. Very sophisticated cultures existed which often depended upon sciences and farming techniques which have yet to be explored, explained or understood. For instance, hundreds of thousands, and perhaps several million people lived in South America’s tropical rain forests, sustained by sophisticated agriculture in an area that now can barely support groups of 50 "aboriginals." These folk are obviously descended from them, but have no idea of prior cultures or their technologies. Neither do we!

It is estimated that at least 9 of 10 people in the Americas died within little more than a century of discovery . . . the vast majority from European diseases. Indeed, DeSoto described the Mississippi region as teeming with cities. A century later, with the first re-exploration by whites, they were met by . . . nothing! Only wilderness with a few scattered troops of natives.

I recommend this read because of its inclusion of volumes of information, well written and organized. However, I have several issues with the author.

• One is his fawning interpretation of the freedoms “learned” by the colonists, accustomed to the "overarching tyranny” of European elites—he alleges—which colonists were able to “get away” from their masters, having observed how liberated were the Amerinds. He appears to be one of those who honestly believe that American society was founded upon the principles of the Iroquois nation, overlooking English history from well before the Magna Carta, and totally eliminating the Celts from consideration.

• Another is his knee-jerk acceptance of the about to be overturned notion that the Amerinds all arrived via the Bering Strait, failing as it does to account for primitive remains in California, and even southern South America which predate the land route between the glaciers by 20,000 to as much as 100,000 years.

• As well, he avoids the suggestion that at least one ancient dig off the California coast is felt by some to exceed 500,000 years . . . and may even represent the site of origin of Homo Sapiens, rather than Africa. I find the latter issue particularly interesting, inasmuch as the so called "Clovis Points" found in New Mexico are not only identical to those found amongst the Cro-Magnons in Spain but predate them by over 25,000 years!! Cro-Magnon is considered to be the first modern homosapien to appear on the continent after the ice age, and no one knows where he came from!

I wonder . . . do you?

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 1:01 PM

January 7, 2008

1776

David McCullough – ISBN – 9780743226721

This masterful book is by McCullough. What more needs be said? It chronicles the year 1776, detailing the initiation of the American Revolution with his expected, colorfully accurate and riveting descriptions of the times, the people and the events.

He deals adroitly with the principals: Washington, Greene, Knox, etal, as well as the British commanders. The drama unfolds with descriptions of the combatants: farmers, schoolteachers, shoemakers, ne’er-do-wells, and the “Red Coats,” of course. The events are graphically depicted, from the (sort of) battle for Fort Ticonderoga and subsequent movement of the cannon over impossible terrain, thru the evacuation of New York, to the brilliant battle for Trenton--the paramount victory of that year.

Trevelyan, a British Statesman, later wrote of the small band of men and their leader (at Trenton): “It may be doubted whether so small a number of men ever employed so short a space of time with greater and more lasting effects upon the history of the world.” In the end, while support from the French and the Dutch played a part in the outcome, it was Washington and the army that won the war for American independence.

His descriptions of George Washington are inspiring, and make the case that the battle could not have been enjoined, forget won, without this most important man of the era: first, best, and justifiably worshipped patriot; General, first President, . . . and honorable gentleman! What he and his followers endured is all but unimaginable. Yet they did, and they prevailed. Because of that we have a country!

Writes McCullough: “The Continental Army was the key to victory, and it was Washington who held the army together and gave it ‘spirit’ through the most desperate times. . . . Washington never forgot what was at stake, and he never gave up.”

I was especially struck by report of the handling of Lord Howe, commander of British forces. He had been dispatched by King George III to--and only to--grant pardons. Washington’s retorted that he had come to the wrong place. He had no faith in any peace overtures made by the British. And there is this memorable quote of July 2nd, 1776: “The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army.” Ahoy there unattached secularists and members of the ACLU, note and ponder that “under God” part!

The conundrum for the British is marvelously elaborated, with the factions detailed and explained: those who supported a separate peace and those who favored humiliating the Americans by defeating them. Recall that Ben Franklin wanted to be a part of the empire; he did not, initially, favor independence.

Even then, as with the world in modern times, the English were struck by the affluence of the colonies, which achievement they attributed to America’s parasitic existence at the expense of Great Britain. The old zero sum game has quite a lineage!

Fellow citizens, I encourage you to reflect upon that revolutionary time, inasmuch as it is unapparent for just how long we will have this wonderful country if we do not--and soon--seriously consider our present situation, its gravity, and our approach to it. As was WWII, this is another war for survival . . . and the independence we claim to value.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 3:08 PM

January 29, 2006

1968: The Year That Rocked the World

Mark Kurlansky - ISBN - 0345455827

Kurlansky, author of both Salt and Cod does it again, so to speak. He covers the year of 1968 in extraordinary detail, reminding of just how seminal that year was in the history of the 20th century. It was the year of the assassinations of MKL and Robert Kennedy, the Chicago Seven, Prague Spring, the founding of “Black Power” and a myriad other events.

Those of us who lived thru them will hark back to those times, and get a fresh new look thru the eyes of Kurlansky. Indeed, while he “files” an appropriate disclaimer in his introduction, his liberal bias (and distortion) of some of the events was a little over the top and off base. (Not least is his assertion that centralization results in the dictatorship of Communism, as capitalism is the dictatorship of the rich. Neither is reformable and both are evil—while he’s not quite so blunt.) Still the revisit is engaging and worthwhile.

He explores happenings from all over the globe, their short and long-term impact, and does so in spellbinding detail having researched the many events quite carefully. Included are a host of events from youth and music to politics and war, economics, the media, the Black Panthers and Richard Nixon.

Overall a good read for those of us old enough to remember and a good history for those who are not.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 2:53 PM | TrackBack

April 17, 2005

The Death of Right and Wrong

(An exposition of the Left’s chilling assault on our culture and values.)
Tammy Bruce - ISBN – 1400052947

(For those who do not know Tammy, she is a lesbian feminist, former director of the Los Angeles chapter of NOW, who has come to understand the left, and now attacks its agenda. She is a lucid writer who is “right on.” She’s been there, done that, and understands the Left, its agenda, and how it all works.)

The thrust is the Left’s degeneracy and its absence of moral clarity. In an enlightened, self-deprecating, auto-analytic realization she notes that: “I created [for myself] a worldview replete with moral relativism, paranoia and cynicism which kept me from looking at politics, the people with whom I dealt, and other parts of life with no values-based perspective. When your life dos not incorporate these things . . . you do not seek them out or to expect them from others. I was forced to change.”

She uses the metaphor of Carroll’s “looking glass” (Alice in Wonderland) in exposing the warped world view of the Left, noting that their world is one “without judgment, conclusions, morality, rules or personal responsibility.” Neither guilt nor innocence exists. To achieve this draconian world, restriction of individual freedom of thought and deed is required, in order to destroy any concept of judgment, and to undermine near universal notions of right and wrong.

The left has been very successful in causing an acceptance of diversity, but--still unhappy--it continues to push on the boundaries of what is considered right . . . there are to be no boundaries at all. The result is a philosophy devoid of values, and since no one outside any specific interest group can understand or appreciate the specific dilemma there exists no right to judge.

“Murder, lying, cheating, betrayal—who can argue with the admonition that these things are bad? Yet we as a society are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with making judgments about issues as obvious as these. Everything, you see, is relative.” The commonly accepted cardinal virtues require effort beyond us and serious consideration of others. This aspect of reality threatens the concept which drives the left-wing “intellectuals.”

Using Serrano (the “artist” of “Piss Christ”) she exposes the “dead heart” of the Left Elite, emphasizing the moral vacuum in which they function. She catalogues the freedom enjoyed by women in America, noting that nowhere else on the planet, at this or any other time, have such freedoms existed. She adds a challenge: “How dare the so-called feminists still claim that ours is a ‘patriarchal, oppressive society’” when it is largely due to the actions of men that women have the freedom and equity women enjoy today.

She discusses the depravity of having gender altering surgery, noting that it simply victimizes the mentally ill. For this, she coins the expression “malignant narcissism.” She also relates an incident wherein AIDS-positive gay EMT volunteers lie about their HIV status. To admit HIV positivity would result in their being removed “unfairly,” and they cannot then continue their “good works.” Will they not understand the documented risk to the people they claim to wish to help? Can they really be that crass? YES!

Thru her looking glass Tammy notes that 97% of college students are confident that their college studies have prepared them to behave ethically in their lives, yet these same students believe that their professors are teaching that there are no real ethical standards. Still these same Leftist intellectuals make a plea for more money for better education, which they do not deliver. Almost nowhere in the academy are American history, values, or even the basics of judgment still taught: nothing of beneficence or iniquity. Compare Pol Pot to Winston Churchill and you can readily understand evil and good. But: “The complete picture of history obliterates the lies of the Left about the goodness, for all its flaws, of the Western world.” Hence it isn’t taught. “As long as the university is in the hands of the malignant narcissists of the Left, the truth of history will be the enemy, to be suppressed at all costs. History . . . rewritten, heroes . . . killed . . . the truth [is to be] kept dead.”

As for lawyers, “trials are no longer about freeing the innocent, punishing the guilty, and making restitution to the injured. They have devolved into a contest over who will win. The legal system is now filled with people who will not discriminate between right and wrong. “Vigorous defense” includes lying to, and deliberate misleading of, juries. For an attorney to deliberately go into a courtroom and lie to a jury to gain acquittal is quite simply and clearly wrong. Still, attorneys are rarely held personally responsible for their clearly unethical tactics. After all, they make the rules.

Finally, we have arrived at the point where we are discussing the permissibility, even the advantage, of inter-generational sex. This modern euphemism replaces terms like statutory rape, pedophilia and ephebophilia. Since other cultures think sex with kids is o.k., we are obliged to agree? Nothing good can come from this!

Is the legacy of the Left to be the right to molest children? And does the expectation of a modicum of decency and morality in one’s life really qualify someone as a Neanderthal remnant?

This is a challenging book—to all, and especially to the Left, which ought to be humbled and detached from its hubris. It should really be read in its entirety by anyone interested in civilization as we know it. It is a coherent, “pleasantly unpleasant” read which ought to challenge all who do care to get up off of their A—es and do something about it. The Left might learn just how damaging is their agenda--assuming that they care--and the rest of us might again recall that: The absence of righteous anger is devastating to our culture!

I also recommend her prior book, The New Thought Police. It is equally devastating in demonstrating the malignancy of the Leftist/Feminist movement. Both are available in paperback.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 10:54 AM | TrackBack

April 12, 2008

A Bound Man

Why We Are Excited About Obama And Why He Can’t Win
Shelby Steele – ISBN – 9781416559177

This essay is in keeping with, and a specific expansion upon his book White Guilt (published in 2006, a review of which is available on this site.)

Here Steele elaborates upon those same observations, but applies them specifically to Barack Obama in his quest for “blackness” and the presidency. The pair might have been published together with the title “Black vs. White in America, Fostering Greater Understanding.”

He notes that in order to advantageously position themselves in America blacks have had two options: challenging (currently Jackson or Sharpton, and previously the Panthers: Newton, Carmichael & Brown), or bargaining (Winfrey or Obama, and previously Poitier or Cosby). With the former there are implicit threats to--and demands upon—whites; the latter accept and trust that fair treatment will be accorded in exchange for mutual pleasantries pursuant the negotiation. Challengers get no gratitude, but do achieve power and money; bargainers gain affection and love, and commonly money as well as power, albeit of a different sort. Moreover, they are likely to be acknowledged as equals. A person can be one or the other persona but not both.

As an example he observes that for years Cosby was a bargainer, but his recent change is viewed by other blacks as hostile. He has become a challenger, and worse, since he challenges blacks. He now voices the rational societal rules which require discipline and responsibility for success, insisting that blacks have to improve themselves instead of depending upon whites to alleviate their problems. Now he is seen as being in the enemy camp, no longer a hero to his race.

Obama risks black wrath when bargaining, which is necessary to gain white acceptance, as he risks white rejection if he challenges. He cannot do both. Like Prometheus he is bound (hence the title.)

Barack has largely rejected his manifest ability to join mainstream society in questing to be black, and seems to be attempting to be in both camps, as he attempts to be all to everyone.

Steele sights numerous quotations from Obama’s prior writing to support that observation. Amongst myriad others, an early love of his life, also of mixed race, challenged Barack to explain why she had to choose to be black, noting:

• “It’s not white people who are making me choose. Maybe it used to be that way, but now they’re willing to treat me like a person. No—it’s black people who always have to make everything racial. They’re the ones making me choose. They’re the ones who are telling me I can’t be who I am.”

• “The chance to be yourself, racial self-acceptance—is not with blackness; it is in the same American mainstream [from whence you came.]”

She emphasized her trust in mainstream America more than black America to respect her for who she is and wishes to be.

Barack, intent on establishing his black “credentials” has chosen to disassociate himself from this mainstream position, diligently working to fit within black society and radical bastions, making it virtually impossible for him to be a bridge candidate and a healer of divisions. He has become just another liberal politician. Indeed, the most liberal in the Senate. While potentially an Icon, he is squandering his real potential as a candidate, and denying himself the opportunity to be who he really is—or is capable of being.

The rest you’ll have to read . . . and you definitely should, since it is as much about the black dilemma in America as it is about Obama himself.

It is enlightening, expository, insightful, and extremely well written.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 4:13 PM

March 15, 2006

A Question of Loyalty

(the court-martial of Billy Mitchell)
Douglas Wallar - ISBN # 0060505478

Published in late 2004, this book--as interesting as it might have been in 1923--is further enhanced by the predictions of this legendary figure. It is adequately comprehensive, entirely balanced, and a breezy read which never bores, and will captivate anyone interested in air power from the time of WW I to the present.

Thruout, Waller laces the narrative with “thumbnails” of Mitchell’s life outside of his military career, but dedicates most of the book to the court-martial itself.

For those of you unfamiliar with Gen’l Mitchell, he was a decorated combat pilot/leader in the early air services of the military who grated on the governmental powers of the era, both military and civilian, because he was dedicated to, and convinced that, air power was to be the principal determinant in future combat. Most notably, he proved that air-power could support ground troops, sink battleships (which brought the Admirals to tears, literally), and predicted that Pearl Harbor would be attacked from the air, by the Japanese (18 years before they did!), that planes would ferry men who would jump from them into combat. As well, that planes would fly trans-continentally, carry passengers and military ordinance across vast oceans—in mere hours--and fly faster than the speed of sound. All of this was considered irrational, at best, by most of the command structure of the military, and the public as well.

While his crystal ball wasn’t always as accurate or retrospectively intriguing, he has been proven forward-looking, if not comprehensively clairvoyant, by history, as we all know now.

The personalities of the participants of the court-martial are well described, as well as the attitudes of the prosecution, defense and the jury. Again, it is a completely fair appraisal of all sides and participants. The trial of nearly five weeks was riveting, involved the entire country, and was covered in detail by all of the newspapers of the era. The public was, with unusual exception, favorable to Billy, considered him a hero (which in fact he was), and respected his abrasive bravado as much as the military disdained it. Today he is as respected in most quarters, including the military, as he was at the time. The debate is about whether he assisted or retarded the recognition and implementation of the potential of aircraft.

“He deserves a place in history. [His personal flaws notwithstanding] he was a brilliant and innovative officer . . . a brave and daring commander . . . an inspiration to his men . . . [and] a visionary willing to challenge the status quo. [An opportunist, perhaps, but one who in the end, laid] his military career and his reputation on the line for what he believed in. He had the courage of his convictions.”

In the end he was judged guilty of insubordination, severely chastened, and resigned from the Army shortly after the court-martial. All were results which he anticipated, yet he proceeded in order to expose the dismal state of the aerial combat strength (or, rather, the lack thereof) of the U.S. military.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 12:28 PM | TrackBack

July 6, 2007

A Thousand Splendid Suns

Khaled Hosseini – 9781594489501

The long awaited second novel by the author of The Kite Runner is here; a year later than planned, it arrives to broad acclimation.

I admit that it is as beautifully crafted as was “Runner,” which I recommended as the best book of its kind which I had read in 5 years, but this one is so exhausting with its inexorable gloom that even the relatively--and implicitly transient--upbeat climax doesn’t rescue it.

It accurately portrays the horrors of Afghanistan (and for that matter the Middle East) almost from time immemorial, and especially since the Russian invasion and the takeover by the warlords, then displaced by the Taliban. It emphasizes some of the majesty of humanity, occasional reason, friendship and love in the face of absolute evil, but it is so-o-o-o raw that it remorselessly buries the reader. Whereas I could not put his first novel down, I had to force myself repeatedly to pick this one up! I kept hoping for a tiny flicker of redemption. It never arrived.

I am no apologist for radical Islam, or for Islam itself, as those of you who read my entries with any regularity. While often sordid and troublesome, even these people--most at least--have many redeeming qualities which are hardly mentioned. Maybe I missed it, but I don't think so. It seems that this obviously displaced, upper-class Afghani Muslim is on his own special rant.

The plot wanders thru a web of human sorrow and destruction, trust and friendship . . . with a certain grandeur in the face of overwhelming odds, yet each time there is an ephemeral flash of light or hope he promptly razes it with a sadistic or tragic event—sometimes both—which deflates the reader all over again. He’s basically observing that that’s the way it is in that part of the world! It brings to mind Thomas Hobbes memorable quote that "war of every man against every man [creates life which is] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”

What it demonstrates to this reader is the unrelenting savagery in the wholly irrational world of the murderous, patriarchal Middle East with its Muslim religion and its masochistic, misogynistic beliefs; a circumstance from which there is absolutely no deliverance without a total cultural change . . . one which at least approaches civilization as we in the West understand and define it.

If they just left the rest of the world alone--stayed miserable in their own place on earth--it would be insupportable and unacceptable, but not menacing. Since this is what they plan to impose on the rest of us it is objectionable in the extreme. It must be defeated, or at least humbled and pushed back into its own wretched corner of the planet.

For that reason alone I would recommend—nay, would oblige if I could--the tolerant and understanding multiculturalist souls amongst us read this manuscript, in concert with any three or four of the following: The Kite Runner, The Bookseller of Kabul, Infidel, Because They Hate, Why I Am Not a Muslim, The Rage and the Pride, Londonistan, The Sword of the Prophet, The Caged Virgin, and What Went Wrong, in no particular order.

Perhaps in the performance of this mission those who do not believe would finally and fully understand that this is not a war between civilizations. It is a war about civilization! They prefer the medieval, barbaric 7th century. We (at least I hope it is we) prefer the relatively enlightened 21st.

For those who do understand, and have already achieved a morally justifiable intellectual intolerance, I’d recommend spending your time and money reading one of the many (almost any) other book in print which you think you might enjoy.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 12:30 PM

January 5, 2007

A War Like No Other

How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War
Victor Davis Hanson – 9780812969702

In classical literature/history this is the most studied war of all time . . . not least because it is the oldest and most famous in the ancient Western world. Thucydides and others amongst the ancients, and Strauss and others amongst the current, have reported in detail on the war and/or individual battles therein, but in this narrative Dr. Hanson undertakes the discussion in an altogether new fashion, integrating the war as fought on sea and land, city and countryside noting, chronologically, the relevance (or lack there of) of various battles within the war and their impact upon Greek civilization of the era.

He describes the civilization of the time, the logic behind and the manner in which battles were fought, the changing alliances within the adversarial camps. As well, he integrates the impact of various concomitant occurrences such as the plague epidemic early in the war, why it happened, and the carnage it wrought. A Gestaltist approach, you might say.

Pericles died of the plague, which certainly affected the war’s outcome. Most of the noble families of Athens were devastated by the war, a majority of them perishing in combat or of the plague, leaving Athens without a ruling coterie, and which resulted in the ultimate destruction of Athens while setting the stage for conquest of all of Greece by Alexander.

Adjusting for population at the time, he observes that a similar ration of deaths would require that 40 million Americans perish in WWII, including the majority of its leaders and prominent citizens. In this vein he comments how different war is now than at the time, conceptually and destructively. He contemporizes that war with current war making.

This is a monumental and unique work which lends itself to a more comprehensive understanding of the West’s first battle of all against all, and well worth a read. Whatever you have read about this conflict . . . is different.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 3:24 PM

July 23, 2007

Alexander Hamilton, American

Richard Brookhiser – ISBN – 9780684839196

This book is a stunning achievement. In little more than 200 pages Brookhiser chronicles the life and contributions of Hamilton, ranking him amongst the most important of the founding fathers. Oft overlooked and unappreciated, the author undertakes to correct that, and does it very well.

More than any of his contemporaries Hamilton was responsible for the emergence of the country as the most important economic and military power on the globe. As well, he contributed to the abolition of slavery. Without a doubt his life’s contributions would have been greater had he not been killed in a duel, and perhaps his reputation and contributions would have been better recognized.

In recent years a number of biographies have been written. I believe this to be one of the best because it is succinct, well drawn, and complete with interpretations which help the reader to know and appreciate Hamilton.

His greatness was much related to the plainness of his ideation. He was, of course, brilliant. “Madison’s thoughts at their best [were] brilliant constructs. Jefferson’s [were] visions.” Madison was a well schooled man, Jefferson an autodidact. “Hamilton was driven by problems. Madison by theories.” Both were dazzling politicians and orators.

One of the better sections of the monograph is Brookhiser’s discussion of Hamilton’s brilliance exhibited in the founding of America’s first bank as well as the thoughtful construction managing the Revolutionary War’s debts. Functioning as the first Secretary of the Treasury these were his most important contributions.

Hamilton was adamant about honor (which is what got him killed), and of honoring debt fully. He almost single-handedly created modern entrepreneurial capitalism, though it was not then known as such. Being creative himself he recognized that in a community of individuals it was proper, possible and appropriate for each individual to find his element, and to “call into activity the whole vigor of his nature.” No one need necessarily be plugged into a trade or activity he loathed, or for which he was unsuited. Options were encouraged.

Though having grown up in one of the world’s most beautiful spots (the Island of Nevus in the Caribbean), Hamilton was surrounded by abject poverty. This caused him to seriously consider alternative approaches to prosperity. Having raised himself from poverty he never forgot that economies are about the people who work in them. Being the spawn of a ne’er do well he recognized that men were shaped by their environment and could easily drift into obscurity and mediocrity. This promulgated his thoughts about labor and industry which were more dynamic, detailed and creative.

His misgivings about the French Revolution are explored, along with his activities in our own revolution; especially interesting is how they demonstrate his character development. Principally, he was a successful lawyer who argued many important cases. Many helped shape the laws in this country. In these endeavors he was anything but moderate. He worked at being an American, and better defined what he thought that to be than many others, and throughout his life he remained an idealist.

Three cheers and twenty-one guns for Alex. I encourage you to read this rewarding and brief bio.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 1:07 PM

March 7, 2007

America Alone

The End of the World as We Know It
Mark Steyn – ISBN – 9780895260789

Perhaps the most telling comment about this book is that made by Prince Turki al-Faisal, long-time ambassador to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia: “The arrogance of Mark Steyn knows no bounds.”

Or perhaps you’d prefer Michelle Malkin: “His new book provides a powerful, abrasive, high-velocity assault on . . . the threat of Islamic imperialism. Do we in the West have the will to prevail? Steyn strips away intellectual rust and PC rot to uncover the writing on the wall. America Alone will open your eyes. You can’t afford to look away.” Hard improve on that!

Now the best known, busiest “conservative” commentator on the planet, writing for myriad sources, Steyn delivers a razor sharp commentary with a wit unequaled by anyone writing regularly today. The book is equal parts enlightening and frightening, with humor and horror; an oft anamnestic peroration on our cultural amnesia.

P.J. O’Rourke is similarly amusing, and Florence King equally lacerating, but Steyn combines the two in this often droll dissertation. It is the West’s wake-up call . . . is anyone listening? Matt Parris, writing for the (U.K.) Spectator, observed that, in the end it will be America against the rest of the world, then asked: “whose side will you be on?”

The U.S. is the “who’s on first” position. She’s vital. When the world has a problem it dials 1-800-UNCLESAM. Problems in Darfur? The Balkins? Kuwait, maybe? That’s the number. Problems in a hospital in Oakland? Call the CDC! (That would be the Centers for Disease Control, in Atlanta.) Same for hospitals in Toronto, Delhi, Beijing or Stockholm for that matter. Call the WHO (World Health Organization) and they fast forward the call to the CDC.

So, who will they call if we lose? And why are our compatriots not supportive—or even understanding—of the mistakenly named “War on Terror?” Most of the West demands that the U.S. “join the real world.” Wouldn’t it be more appropriate if they did?

Demographically he shows that Muslims are rapidly colonizing Europe. With them comes Islam--and with that, Wahhabist radical Islam. Remember the van Gogh murder a couple of years ago? And the Dutch cartoon brouhaha or the conflagrations in the bidonvilles of France last year? Here’s the partial answer:

While it may or may not be true that the Muslim population of France is “only 10%,” there are cities in France which are already 45% Muslim, and I’ve read that in Marseilles it is 75%. Further, in the under-20 subset of French residents over 30% are Muslim. The Europeans are under-breeding themselves out of existence with averages of 1.14 children per female in Italy to 1.89 in France, where 1/3 of them are Muslims, not Europeans. Every generation of continentals is little over half of the prior, with the Muslims nearly doubling their cadre. How long will this go on before they are the majority? And, do they really need to be the majority to sway the populations of Italy, Germany, France, Sweden and the low countries? Or England? Certainly they impacted Spain, Denmark and Holland where Muslim immigrants are less numerous.

While Europe decays Russia is dying at a much faster rate. There appears to be a question as to which Muslim country will be first to get the bomb? Will it be Iran? . . . or Russia? . . . or France? Muslims refuse to integrate, preferring their own to Western culture. Islam and Jihad are political forces in ways that Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism never were. Denish D’Souza, an American conservative intellectual (from India) once observed that: “It is impossible to ‘practice’ Islam within a secular framework.” While the Inquisition wasn’t exactly a Christmas Party, it was responsible for fewer deaths in 150 years than Islamic Jihad is annually

There’s much, much more. All of it fascinating and well presented. I can only plead with you to read it. It isn’t about politics, per se. Liberal or conservative, left or right, it’s about learning that it won’t matter if we don’t survive. Some once thought it’d be better Red than Dead. It’s that kind of question. Western multiculturalists parrot that all cultures are equal, but find me one who would choose to live anywhere outside the West. When France falls some can move to Canada or the U.S. The Dutch are already moving to New Zealand and Australia or the U.S.

But where will they move if we fail? And where shall we in the U.S. move?

And we can fail !!

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 1:40 PM

November 7, 2006

American Courage

(True stories of gallant people who have made this country great.)
Herbert W. Warden III – ISBN 9780060782405

An interesting book, this; what I generally refer to as a “bathroom read.” There are 46 stories, each a few pages long, each reported by participants and/or researched by the author, covering snapshots of our history from the Mayflower landing to the present.

All are about uncommon valor under trying--even devastating circumstances. All are well told. There are vignettes from King Phillips war and the carnage in little towns like Deerfield, MA; Washington’s victories at Trenton and Princeton (noted by Fredrick the Great as “the most brilliant campaign of the century”), Davy Crockett and the Alamo, the 49ers, Pickett’s Charge, the San Francisco Quake, Sergeant York, D-Day, Vietnam, Moon landings, and finally Flight 93 on 9/11.

I was not aware that the Boston Tea Party was a quite pacific affair, uneventful except for the outcome, and I was particularly taken by the loquacity, elegance and sophistication of the writings of Daniel Boone—always considered, by me at least, to be quite a rustic.

It is a remarkable and captivating book best read in short, quiet times to better absorb and enjoy the recanting of one or two of the events which helped make us who we are, and of the heroic people in our history.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 3:58 PM

April 18, 2006

American Genesis

Jeffrey Goodman, Ph.D. ISBN – 0425051730

It's time to review an old book again; one which might well interest you. This one is no longer in print, but can be found online for a dollar or two.

It is a seminal treatise, both concise and comprehensive in that Goodman discusses the subject in lay terms, with brevity and interest, without encumbering the dialog with myriad and confusing details.

His hypothesis, as well documented as possible, is that Homo sapiens sapiens actually evolved in the Americas—probably California—and spread around the globe from there. Further, he indicates that our species is much older than is generally supposed, and supports this conclusion by itemizing “digs” in the Americas which have been documented to be 40,000 to 150,000 years old, with some considered to be 250,000 years, and suspect of being as much as 500,000 years in age. All of which suggests that we may be over 1,000,000 years old as a species, not the 100,000 years or less which is commonly supposed. And we didn’t come from Africa. That seems certain.

This is breathtaking in light of the fact that man is “widely known” to have evolved in Africa and came here across the Bering Strait 12,000 years ago. He is bemused by how unrelenting the “experts” are in denying that man might have moved the other way across the Bering Strait. Apparently it was the world’s first one way street! It reminds of the now defeated argument that no European came to the Americas before Columbus . . . N(body)B(efore)C(olumbus) as the acronym reads. Now, of course, we know that Norsemen were here, and there is strong belief that others came in earlier times. But that’s another story.

His arguments are solid, and the “establishment” is reluctantly coming to agree that just maybe the old conclusions are wrong.

Most interesting is the datum offered that Cro-Magnon had very exquisite and distinctive flint points and other tools when they appeared suddenly, from nowhere, in Spain at the end of the last ice age. “No one knows from whence they came.” That’s gospel. Strange that points and tools have been found in the American Southwest which are identical to those of Cro-Magnon, and 35-70,000 years older. As well, Cro-Magnon skeletons look a lot like modern day Southwestern Indians!

Another fascinating discussion is Hopi Indian legend involving their three past worlds, destroyed first by fire (volcanos), they by ice (glaciers) and finally by water (flooding); strangely consistent with what now appears to be worth serious consideration. The scenario is, however, geologically impossible if their civilization is not at least 250,000 years old. Their legend also states that they came from afar, from a land in the Pacific which is now submerged. Huh?

The most interesting discussions by far deal with the domestication of animals, the development of agriculture, and their advanced medical skills. Much derided until recently, the Amerinds now appear clearly to have been grinding grain (which one presumes they cultivated) at least 100,000 years ago, hybridized maize (corn) so long ago that no natural related plant now exists, freeze dried vegetables tens of thousands of years before this was done in Eurasia, rode horses before they became extinct in the Americas (10,000 years ago,) and practiced holistic medicine which included antibiotics for infections, digitalis for heart disease, quinine for malaria, Vitamin C for scurvy, aspirin for pain, cocaine for hypesthesia, splinted fractures, performed trephination, removed cataracts, and even practiced psychiatry, after a fashion, by recognizing and treating psychosomatic illnesses.

I found especially remarkable the fact that they had hybridized amaranth, and grew it in sufficient quantities to feed hundreds of thousands of people before the Spanish made them quit. Recently we have rediscovered this cereal grain and it offers the possibility of resolving malnutrition worldwide. It is hardy, drought resistant, grows nearly everywhere, and has just about all of the things humans need to stay healthy. It is especially interesting to me because Indians in the South American rainforests are only recently known to have developed elevated farm plots in these miserable soils. They are not yet understood, but they involved "charcoaling" certain plants with fire, which, when mixed with the soils, retains nutrients for a century. These vast acreages also supported millions of people where only a few now eke out an existence--because it is a forgotten technology.

Apparently when the Conquistadors discovered these Amerinds, they annihilated them with battle, disease, etc., and their technological mastery disappeared with them. We are just about to learn how millions of “savages” worked out a survival plan for jungle life . . . perhaps tens of thousands of year ago!

Read the book . . . it is brief, captivating, informative, and well worth the time.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 3:00 PM | TrackBack

September 7, 2006

America’s Victories

(Why the U.S. wins wars and will win the war on terror)
Larry Schweikart – ISBN - 978-1595230218

Co-author of A Patriot’s History of the United States, Schweikart now explains his premise included in the title: historic review of activities and attitudes of the U.S. military thruout it’s 230 years. He, like many on the right, strongly favors the war in Iraq. His attitude might bother some, but it is not a reason to avoid this historically significant and interesting book, written for the average reader.

He begins by reviewing not only the attitudes of our military, but their origins, and further emphasizes that our armies have always reflected our population, as do its casualties. This is contrary to popular mythology and altogether unlike the rest of the world’s armies, past or present. Even Northeast sent its best to war until the 20th century, and Hollywood sent its best until Viet Nam.

Our military’s views are shaped by our Judeo-Christian heritage. Life, charity and human worth are represented differently than in most. We never trade the lives of our military for positive press. We do our best to avoid “collateral damage.” We never leave casualties behind on the battlefield. We rescue our POW’s when possible. Did you know (I didn’t!) that we invaded the Philippines solely free the Philippine and American prisoners--as a matter of honor? The Philippines were insignificant militarily.

He reviews the Vietnam and Iraq wars quite differently than you will read most places, and opines that we could, and should have won in Viet Nam. Even with our departure the South Vietnamese could have prevailed had congress not defunded them. That’s now worth remembering. That and what happened in Viet Nam and Cambodia after we abandoned them.

The despised and mistrusted “Military-Industrial Complex” is explored as he demonstrates the major role of the private sector in providing the physical means by which we win wars: R&D, high technology, with more and better weapons. The book is full of vignettes of battle which explain the value of our sophisticated weaponry as well as the training, skill and independence (private enterprise) of the men who use them.

He is harsh on the anti-war demonstrators, noting that their violence is hardly pacific, and observes that this carping drives our military to be even more cautious, more lethal, and more protective of ourselves and innocent life on the other side; precisely the opposite of the intention.

As for the “brutality” of the American troops, he compares ladies underpants on the head of a terrorist to videotaped beheadings. Of course there is some cruelty. It is, after all, war, and every war includes some. The difference is that we prosecute those who violate our rules while our adversaries don’t. In fact, they have no rules to break and are held to no visible standard. Barbarism is accepted. In the “shame and honor” culture of our current opponents, even simple supervision by a female is humiliating. Still, if you were a prisoner would you rather be beheaded, or held on a leash by a female Non-Com? Ironically it is apparent that they prefer beheading. Death before dishonor has a peculiar, non-Western ring amongst Muslims.

His critique of the opposition to the “Star Wars” missile defense is withering. He demolishes the Left by documenting that the Soviets feared it above all else. They were confident that we would succeed, and since the best weapon is the one you never have to use, Star Wars reigns supreme in that it was a technology which hadn’t even been deployed!

Determinate attitudes of Americans which prohibit losing wars are explicated. We abhor war, want it to be over quickly, value all human life, and are prepared to do what we must to win . . . as quickly as possible. Ernie Pyle wrote that “[most] of us wanted terribly, [if] only academically, for the war to be over. The front line soldier wanted it to be terminated by the physical process of his destroying enough Germans to end it. He was truly at war.”

“It took a warrior ethos of courage and decisiveness to invade Iraq . . . [and] it will take even greater heroism to defeat Iran and Syria and crush Islamofascist fundamentalism once and for all.” That comment will mystify some and anger others, but the military is ready and willing . . . and more than able! Are we?

Eisenhower once commented that Hitler should be wary of an enraged democracy. We did not muster a response to the bombings in Beirut, the Trade Center in 1993, the African embassies or the attack on the USS Cole. It took 9/11 to get our attention. Now we seem to have forgotten. He feels it will require another attack far more deadly than 9/11 to unleash our willingness and alloy it to our ability.

But, we will do it, and we will win, once we have decided we’ve had enough.

I sincerely hope that he is correct. I am not confident that the West has the will to validate itself, thus to prevail. The collective we is insufficiently vocal about the value of our culture, and increasingly irresolute recently. That has to change before we can rise to our defense.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 9:00 AM

America’s Victories

(Why the U.S. wins wars and will win the war on terror)
Larry Schweikart – ISBN - 978-1595230218

Co-author of A Patriot’s History of the United States, Schweikart now explains his premise included in the title: historic review of activities and attitudes of the U.S. military thruout it’s 230 years. He, like many on the right, strongly favors the war in Iraq. His attitude might bother some, but it is not a reason to avoid this historically significant and interesting book, written for the average reader.

He begins by reviewing not only the attitudes of our military, but their origins, and further emphasizes that our armies have always reflected our population, as do its casualties. This is contrary to popular mythology and altogether unlike the rest of the world’s armies, past or present. Even Northeast sent its best to war until the 20th century, and Hollywood sent its best until Viet Nam.

Our military’s views are shaped by our Judeo-Christian heritage. Life, charity and human worth are represented differently than in most. We never trade the lives of our military for positive press. We do our best to avoid “collateral damage.” We never leave casualties behind on the battlefield. We rescue our POW’s when possible. Did you know (I didn’t!) that we invaded the Philippines solely free the Philippine and American prisoners--as a matter of honor? The Philippines were insignificant militarily.

He reviews the Vietnam and Iraq wars quite differently than you will read most places, and opines that we could, and should have won in Viet Nam. Even with our departure the South Vietnamese could have prevailed had congress not defunded them. That’s now worth remembering. That and what happened in Viet Nam and Cambodia after we abandoned them.

The despised and mistrusted “Military-Industrial Complex” is explored as he demonstrates the major role of the private sector in providing the physical means by which we win wars: R&D, high technology, with more and better weapons. The book is full of vignettes of battle which explain the value of our sophisticated weaponry as well as the training, skill and independence (private enterprise) of the men who use them.

He is harsh on the anti-war demonstrators, noting that their violence is hardly pacific, and observes that this carping drives our military to be even more cautious, more lethal, and more protective of ourselves and innocent life on the other side; precisely the opposite of the intention.

As for the “brutality” of the American troops, he compares ladies underpants on the head of a terrorist to videotaped beheadings. Of course there is some cruelty. It is, after all, war, and every war includes some. The difference is that we prosecute those who violate our rules while our adversaries don’t. In fact, they have no rules to break and are held to no visible standard. Barbarism is accepted. In the “shame and honor” culture of our current opponents, even simple supervision by a female is humiliating. Still, if you were a prisoner would you rather be beheaded, or held on a leash by a female Non-Com? Ironically it is apparent that they prefer beheading. Death before dishonor has a peculiar, non-Western ring amongst Muslims.

His critique of the opposition to the “Star Wars” missile defense is withering. He demolishes the Left by documenting that the Soviets feared it above all else. They were confident that we would succeed, and since the best weapon is the one you never have to use, Star Wars reigns supreme in that it was a technology which hadn’t even been deployed!

Determinate attitudes of Americans which prohibit losing wars are explicated. We abhor war, want it to be over quickly, value all human life, and are prepared to do what we must to win . . . as quickly as possible. Ernie Pyle wrote that “[most] of us wanted terribly, [if] only academically, for the war to be over. The front line soldier wanted it to be terminated by the physical process of his destroying enough Germans to end it. He was truly at war.”

“It took a warrior ethos of courage and decisiveness to invade Iraq . . . [and] it will take even greater heroism to defeat Iran and Syria and crush Islamofascist fundamentalism once and for all.” That comment will mystify some and anger others, but the military is ready and willing . . . and more than able! Are we?

Eisenhower once commented that Hitler should be wary of an enraged democracy. We did not muster a response to the bombings in Beirut, the Trade Center in 1993, the African embassies or the attack on the USS Cole. It took 9/11 to get our attention. Now we seem to have forgotten. He feels it will require another attack far more deadly than 9/11 to unleash our willingness and alloy it to our ability.

But, we will do it, and we will win, once we have decided we’ve had enough.

I sincerely hope that he is correct. I am not confident that the West has the will to validate itself, thus to prevail. The collective we is insufficiently vocal about the value of our culture, and increasingly irresolute recently. That has to change before we can rise to our defense.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 9:00 AM

April 4, 2005

Anti Americanism

Jean Francois Revel - ISBN # 1-893554-856

A wonderfully written (all of Revel’s works are) and enlightening book which all Americans, ought to read . . . and send copies to the Europeans in order that they might understand themselves. G-d it’s great to be an American. Don’t believe it, just ask Revel !

For those who question just how the French can “sometimes be so unreasonable,” I offer you this review . . . but highly recommend that you read the entire book. At a little over 150 pages, even a lengthy report would still fail to cover much of the ground. And who better to explain the French to an American than an enlightened Frenchman who loves America?

He begins: “The mystery of anti-Americanism is not the disinformation—reliable information on the United States has always been easy to obtain—but people’s willingness to be disinformed.” Europeans want to believe that the U.S. is vile and devious, so they do.

The continental conviction of inherent French (and European) sophistication and superiority is vigorously debunked as he emphasizes that the evil, criminal ideologies of the 20th century were all invented entirely within Europe, and required the U.S. to intervene twice in less than 40 years to stop the carnage. He reminds that: “America largely owes her unique superpower status today to Europe’s mistakes.”As Europeans recoil at America’s world markets and influence, they completely overlook the fact that European capital, technology, language (and people) spread over the entire globe long before America was a power. . . . Oh, well . . . !

French political activists have become: “Revolutionaries without a revolution. . . . By yelling slogans, they afford themselves the illusion of thought, and by trashing cities and striving to stymie international gatherings, they provide themselves with the illusion of action.” Long years ago French intellectuals were convinced that the U.S. was more dangerous than the Nazis or the Communists, and Revel emphasizes that such “clever minds” as these are the ones now advocating negotiation with Saddam and Bin Laden. Unfortunately, much of the American Left agrees!

A lengthy discussion of the situation with Islamic terror, and its relevance to his subject is included in this book. He summarizes the opinions of numerous authorities who repudiate the myth of moderate Islam, and goes on to point out that the bulk of Muslims approve of terrorism. Recall with him Salman Rushdie’s book and the furor in England over it. Muslim support for the fatwa was near universal, even in Britain and France.

The day after 9/11 all of the free world was “American”, which changed promptly, however, and especially in France. They believe, for the most part, that the attack was deserved because of America’s “unilateralism.” The relevant question ought to have been whether the destruction of the tallest American skyscrapers was the proper response to this allegation.

Also included is a rather amusing anecdotal discussion of how the French refuse to incorporate proven American methods to control crime because they don’t want to “act American.” To them it is unacceptable: “[the French] do well, it seems, in rejecting the American model, even if [the] choice leads to shipwreck.” While crime in France is “worse than in America,” the French are pleased above all that their approach isn’t American. Americans are well outside of their mainstream, but one might question how can anyone outside of al-Qa’ida can be that irrational?

In the 19th century “[the French] alternately described American society as a mass of rootless, isolated individuals struggling against each other in Darwinian competition . . . [and simultaneously] as a conformist, easily led herd, where the individual can neither think nor act for himself.” Notice any contradiction? They seem not to.

All cultures are equal, it seems, but France is the appropriate source and model for the world. As in The Animal Farm, they are more equal than others. (And anticipating becoming the pigs?)
The European inability to formulate a strategy to fight explains their attitudes about American unilateralism. They believe that democracies, rightfully, can neither criticize nor contain totalitarian regimes. These same sophists refuse to accept that this is a battle for civilization, and will not acknowledge the inherent superiority of Western civilization.

Pummeling the U.S. is a favorite sport of the French intelligentsia. As they identify America to be barbaric, they refuse to recognize billions of dollars spent on universities, research, libraries and other cultural entities, all the while vitriolic about American “cultural imperialism.” “Americans can never be right, no matter what they do.”

Revel offers a litany of “really nutty” French ideas and actions to reinforce his declaration that such attitudes disqualify them from serious geopolitical debate. By refusing to deal with reality the Continentals leave the U.S. with no choice but to undertake necessary actions unilaterally, and then grouse about our unilaterality.
Americans have been--and are today--useful to Europe as a calming explication of its failures. The belief that America always does less well than they do is comforting to them. And, of course, whatever goes wrong over there is America’s fault. Always!

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 10:50 AM | TrackBack

June 20, 2007

Because They Hate

A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America
Brigitte Gabriel – ISBN – 9780312358372

This exquisitely compelling first person account is written by a Lebanese Christian whose country was overtaken by Islam when she was ten. She lived thru the Muslim conquest of her country . . . the first subjugated by Islam in modern history. After having been buried alive by the authoring shots of that war she and her family lived in a claustrophobic dugout bomb shelter with no amenities for 7 years, sometimes eating boiled grass to survive.

“As a Maronite [Christian] growing up in once predominantly Christian Lebanon, I witnessed the genocide of my people by the Palestinians and the rest of the Muslim community, who came from all over the Muslim world to fight the Christians.”

Now she shares the experience . . . LISTEN UP !!

Lebanon, she reminds, was a beneficent and beautiful place; peaceful, westernized and multi-cultural with a well balanced democratic government divided between Christians and the several Islamic sects. Beirut was considered Paris in the Middle-East. Eventually, however, the Islamic sects joined together for their version of the holocaust. Those Christians who survived were driven to emigrate. What’s left is the disaster which represents “modern,” Islamic Lebanon, which is now broaching civil war between these several Islamic sects.

As an American, now, she points up the parallels and insists that it is clear that we are next . . . or at least high on the list. A commonly expressed Arabic adage: “First comes Saturday then comes Sunday;” Saturday being the Sabbath of Israel, and Sunday being that of the Christians—meaning us. They are aware than when America falls, so will the Western world.

Only the willfully blind can disagree. How can one be so sure? Just take them at their word. Disabuse yourself of logic and the liberal propensity to believe that no one can be that evil! They can . . . and they are.

She lists the areas of Islamic terror from “A-Z” (literally, Algeria to Zaire) and reviews the current activities around the world, all sponsored by Al Qaeda and its affiliates, financed primarily by Iran and the Saudis (Shias and Sunnis.) Once these enemies succeed they’ll have their own war for dominance! Iraq, anyone? Iran?

She documents the fact that CAIR (foremost amongst the American Muslim “civil rights” groups) vigorously supports and encourages terrorist activities. Their counter-claim is that they abhor violence, but when was the last CAIR sponsored million Muslim march to protest terror? And why does the chairman openly state that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

More curiously, why does he get by with this? Why is he never challenged; always excused and/or explained? Connecting the dots isn’t that difficult. (Maybe if Bush and the liberals read this book they’d change their mind? Doubt it, but maybe.)

A particularly intense chapter is that titled Societies are Not Created Equal. Here, and throughout the book, she goes to extraordinary lengths to emphasize reality.

• While much of the world advances, Arabic culture has been declining for centuries.
• While they have enormous wealth from oil, the GNP of all 22 Arabic countries (population over 300 million) is approximately that of Spain (population 40 million) and the GNP of the Muslim world (population 1 billion) is approximately half Germany’s 2.5 trillion (population 90 million.)
• If you eliminated oil--not incidentally discovered, developed and used primarily by the West--the major export of Arab countries is “grief, suicide bombers and terrorism”
• Illiteracy in the Arab world . . . is higher most developing countries. They invest little in real schools, and almost nothing into industry. Most of the money is in the hands of the royal families and their cronies. What they don’t squander they invest around the world, avoiding their own back yards, and their countrymen.
• “The Middle East is lagging behind not because Arab Muslims are not created equal as human beings . . . [but] because of social and religious values.”
• In her opinion (and mine, if it matters), the problem is Islam. It kills self-expression, self-improvement, and empowerment, eliminates 51% of the population from consideration, and demands that Islam be the center of one’s life and existence by dictating how to live . . . indeed how to be.
• As a result of lies, obtuse thinking (if it qualifies as thought), and repetitious anti-Jewish and anti-American diatribes, there exists “a generation of Arab youth incapable of thinking in a civilized manner.” A white lie to them is a permissible prevarication which fosters their ultimate goal of conquest, and terror a legitimate approach.
• Virtually all terror around the world in the past half-century has been perpetrated by Muslims.
• Wahhabi Islam is not the only extreme form of Islam. Suicide bombers include Egyptians, Lebanese, Palestinians, Syrians, Iraqis and Iranians. “The common thread [is the Koran]. They are simply practicing Muslims. They are not the extreme, they are the mainstream.” Gabriel shares Oriana Fallaci’s belief there is neither moderate nor radical Islam . . . there is only Islam!
• Finally, “if Muslims are unwilling to relinquish the right to lie and kill in the name of Allah, how can they be considered moderate?” By whom and for what reason?

The use of political correctness is now so abused that anyone expressing a contrary opinion is labeled as a racist and/or a bigot. “How handy for the Islamo-facists, the American-hating, Jew-killing, Israel-destroying, women-abusing, multi-religious-intolerant Muslims. Oh! Excuse me, did I say something not quite PC?”

And finally she notes that if Arabs would accept Israel’s right to exist, “Israel would help them make their deserts bloom. Instead, the Arab world has chosen to fertilize the land with the blood of Israeli children. Could anything be more barbaric and depraved?”

Well, as a matter of fact . . . yes !! “First the Palestinians gave their children stones to throw. Now they wrap their children in dynamite and nails and send them to blow themselves up.”

Why isn’t everyone in the West ready to say that enough is enough?

Read this book. In past years I have recommended The Sword of the Prophet as the single best book to read on the subject. With the appearance of this offering I have changed my recommendation.

As a foil I recommend Three Cups of Tea, recently reviewed. That book demonstrates that modern education is mandatory if the West is to survive and prevail. This book graphically demonstrates that we must first defeat, or at least severely compromise them before they can be meaningfully educated on a mass scale.

When I was in the army during the Viet Nam war, the 7th Psychological Operations Group motto was: “You can’t kill them all. You have to convert some of them.” In debates with its commander I usually insisted that you first had to kill a bunch of them, including their leaders, to get the attention of the rest. I still believe that!

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 1:01 PM

October 27, 2005

Benjamin Franklin (Bio.)

Edmund S. Morgan – 0300101627

This little book is brilliantly and lovingly written, and a light while informative work which everyone ought to read.

While biographical, it deals more heavily with the latter years of Dr. Franklin’s life: the period of decades when he was, in effect, ambassador to the European Western world, molder of opinions about America, and chief financier of the Revolutionary War. There is sufficient detail about his activities (pre-and post-revolutionary) to inform the reader of just how pivotal he was, and it offers sufficient personal information about him in order for the reader to become familiar with Franklin, the man: his nature, scientific proclivities, love of people and camaraderie, thoughts, concepts of the country he loved and served, and the evolution of his attitudes toward revolution.

I, for one, was not aware of how much Franklin believed in the British Empire, how much he felt himself to be a “British American”, and how hard he tried to influence the English parliament to accede to American requests for autonomy within the empire, before finally concluding that revolution was the only answer . . . at which time he worked mightily to support and finance it, and later to contribute to the founding of the American democratic republic. Also interesting are the unfulfilled ideas which Franklin had about how the union ought to be: a union of the people, not just of the states, and one more oriented to the general welfare, albeit within a capitalist system. (e.g.: he usually gave his inventions over to public domain, without patenting them, for their general use.)

I’m certain there are more voluminous and comprehensive biographies of Franklin—or at least tomes which are much longer--but it is difficult for me to imagine one which is more wonderfully crafted and pleasurable to read.

One of America’s most distinguished historians has indeed written one of the best books on the greatest statesman of his—or any--age.

“Superb. . . . The best short biography of Franklin ever written.” Gordon Wood, New York Review of Books.

‘Nough said. Read it!! It is well worth the several hours it will require.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 11:45 AM | TrackBack

July 31, 2006

Black Rednecks and White Liberals

Thomas Sowell – ISBN – 1594031436\

Sowell is beyond all doubt my favorite living philosopher/scholar/author/columnist. He is highly regarded by most everyone (except the Library Journal), including most of his adversaries. He writes knowledgeably, with incredible clarity—not to mention wisdom and wit.

This volume is a panoply of his breadth and skill, and recalls in part writings in others of his books. In the chapter “Are Jews Generic” one is reminded of portions of Migrations and Cultures wherein he describes varieties of culture and attitudes transplanted globally, noting that the middle-man culture is the same whether Chinese, Jewish, Ibo or Armenian. Identical approaches, which propel them to success in adopted cultures, make then anathema in all. It isn’t the race or culture, but the function and successes which others disapprove of and envy, even though the “others” would be unable to get along without them. Similarly so the chapter on “Germans and History.”

Another chapter, “Black Education,” recalls Education: Assumptions vs. History, in which he dispels the myth that black education is necessarily second rate. Numerous examples in historic times and places are recanted wherein blacks have not only succeeded but excelled in black schools--even in Washington D.C—but in another time (e.g.: Dunbar High School, then as now a ghetto school.) That was before liberals took over the establishment and began making damaging changes while offering ridiculous excuses. At one time Dunbar graduates were not required to take entrance examinations at Dartmouth, Harvard and other selective colleges.

A study done in 1970 demonstrated that of all PhD’s held by blacks at that time, more of them had graduated from Dunbar than any other black high school in the country. The first black graduate of Annapolis and the first black enlisted man to rise to a commissioned officer also came from Dunbar as did the first black female PhD, the first black full professor at a major American university, the first black federal judge, the first black general, the first black Cabinet member, the first black senator, the doctor who pioneered the use of plasma, historian Carter Woodson, author/poet Sterling Brown, musician Duke Ellington, etc. These are stunning data which liberals succeed in burying as information regarding the historic success of (some) black institutions. It can be done. It has been done! But the rules were “old fashioned” and quite different; values were instilled and success was expected, along with hard, disciplined work.

In “The Real History of Slavery” he dispels the notion that those nasty Southern gentlemen (Washington, Jefferson, etal.) were cavalier about it. In fact, they were opposed, and struggled with the conundrum of how to rid the U.S. of slavery without producing myriad other problems. What to do, for instance, with four million unemployed, illiterate blacks with few survival skills and nothing to sustain them if they were suddenly “free”? (overlooking homeless!) Should slave owners be compensated; if so, by whom? Could the two races live together compatibly? Emigration was a consideration but should it be voluntary or mandatory?

Slavery was a centuries old wrong which could not easily be righted. Numerous tangents are considered. He enquires into the rather bizarre fact that moral questions about slavery are almost exclusively Western moral questions, yet the West is always the one savaged because of their history of slavery. Non-Western societies had (and still have) little moral concern about slavery. He emphasizes that it was Western imperialism which suppressed slavery around the world.

“History vs. Visions” reminds of A Conflict of Visions, The Search for Cosmic Justice, and The Vision of the Anointed, in which he masterfully refutes the prevailing liberal myths. Things are not always as they seem, nor can they always be as you wish, and “visions” usually defy the facts on the ground. There are those omnipresent little problems, such as human nature . . . and reality; things which the liberally inclined always overlook whilst fantasizing and fashioning the “ideal society” of their visions.

Finally (best for last), the first chapter, “Black Rednecks and White Liberals” attacks the myth of black culture, demonstrating that what we now consider black culture is the cracker culture. From time immemorial it has been backward, dismissive of education, prone to violence, sexually permissive, improvident, drunken, reckless and totally lacking in entrepreneurship. If you doubt, or offended by these observations, read the book! He confirms this in spades!

What liberals wish to encourage and sustain in modern blacks is, in fact, indigenous white culture imported into the South from Europe, and which had existed for centuries before their migration. Even the terms “redneck” and “cracker” came over on the boat. “The disparities found between Southern whites and Northern whites in the past are today taken as proof of racial discrimination. [These disparities are now] found between the black and white populations of the country. [Some] have taken such disparities as signs of genetic deficiencies. Yet clearly neither racial discrimination nor racial inferiority can explain similar differences between whites in the North and the South in earlier centuries . . . which should at least raise questions about such explanations when applied to blacks of a later era who inherited the culture of white Southerners.”

The questions are not raised, of course, since they would challenge the liberal vision.

This is a fascinating tome and a great introduction to Thomas Sowell for those of you unfamiliar with genius of this man (who, by the way, is black and completely self-made.)

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 12:03 PM

June 24, 2007

Blink

The power of thinking without thinking.
Malcolm Gladwell – ISBN 9780316010665
(author of Tipping Point, previously reviewed.)

This is a particularly fascinating book; better, I think, and most certainly different from Tipping Point.

As the title suggests, he elaborates upon the things we do--in the blink of an eye, so to speak--which are based upon experience rather than thought. He calls those based upon thoughtful consideration paralysis by analysis. As a consequence of too much data we often confuse information with understanding. “The key to good decision making is not knowledge [or data] . . . but understanding.” There are times when haste does not make waste, when snap judgments and first impressions can offer a better means of making sense of the world. Judgment is often better than cautious deliberation. There are times when we demand an explanation when it really isn’t possible.

He reviews the activities of a brilliant General of the Marine Corps charged with leading the “Red Team” (always the adversary of the good guys on the “Blue Team.”) Ostensibly staged as a war game based in the Middle East, he went way outside what was expected by the Blue’s, and walloped them severely. As in an episode of JAG, and Kelsey Grammer’s movie spoof, those in command of the Pentagon demanded that the game be rerun because the Red leader hadn’t “played by the rules” (as if there are rules in war.) That it is precisely what got us into trouble in the Middle East!!!

For example: When you study a chessboard there isn’t anything you can’t see . . . except what the other guy is thinking! “More and more, commanders want to know everything and they get imprisoned by that idea. . . . [But] you can never know everything.” As in Gulliver’s Travels, the big guy gets tied down by the little rules and the little guys run around doing exactly as they wish.

I have had similar experiences in medicine, wherein too much information is brought to bear upon a problem. Confusion, indecision and error result. Frequently the true expert notices not just what is happening, but more importantly what is not! Been there too. Indeed, I was once derisively accused (I was flattered!) by an academic colleague of “being the most right, the most often, with the least amount of knowledge.” I was pleased to emphasize that being right is what matters.

He demonstrates that the true expert at reading body language can often determine things the subject is trying to hide. This section of the book is particularly absorbing. The expression on your face is more than a signal of what’s going in your mind. It is what is going on in your mind, and completely involuntary. “Whenever we experience a basic emotion, that emotion is automatically expressed by the muscles of the face.”

He reviews what is known of autism, noting that such individuals have no insight into themselves or others. To them everything is an object. In times of crisis normal people are programmed to objectify risks. He terms this “temporary autism,” and gives examples of how it works.

A truly brilliant discussion follows, using the Dialo case, in which the NYPD officers shot and killed an innocent black immigrant. He describes what a “heightened awareness of threat” does to the mind, which focuses only on those things necessary for survival and shuts out all other input. It fosters survival, but is dangerous if permitted to apply in situations where it shouldn’t. One can learn to avoid such errant, dangerous behavior.

He then reviews symphony orchestral auditions. In recent years the performer sits behind a screen, forcing the auditors to listen to the performance. Before this was instituted, fewer than 5% of orchestra members were women. (Male musicians just knew that women simply weren’t as good.) Now the distribution is 50/50!

I love his observations in that regard: Before screens, what might we have proposed for women in the musical world?

“I think we would have talked about awareness programs for gender bias, and how to teach female musicians to be more assertive in making the case for their own ability. We would have had long discussions about social discrimination. . . . Our suggestions for change would have been fairly global and long term. . . . [and] at the end of long days of meetings we would have thrown up our hands and said that we would just have to wait until the current generation of [irredeemably bigoted] maestros . . . was replaced by a younger and more open-minded set of conductors.” Instead, the context was examined; screens were put up and the problem was resolved then and there. Philosophy free!

In summary he observes that following the acquisitions of a lifetime of learning we acquire judgment. With the knowledge accrued, and knowing how the mind works, we should then be able to act responsibly. He heartily recommends that we do so.

If we combined all of the little things we know, making appropriate changes based upon knowledge and insight, the world would be different and better. He has a point, and makes it very well.

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 10:07 AM

May 27, 2007

Blood and Fire

Gettysburg
Joshua L. Chamberlain – ISBN – 1879664178

This little monograph (29 narrative pp and another 30 pp of pictures and copies of Chamberlain’s notes) is one of the best little-known “secrets” on the Civil War. For those who require a reminder, Chamberlain was the professor become soldier whose regiment, the 20th Maine, shouldered the defense of Little Round Top on the second day of the battle at Gettysburg.

He achieved the rank of General, was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for his activities there, and was at Appomattox to accept the surrender of the Southern Army under Robert E. Lee, in which situation he was both heroic and noble, having his troops salute those surrendering, while his band play “Dixie.” He encouraged the “Rebs” to maintain their dignity in defeat . . . and permitted it!

This is his description of the brilliant battle for Little Round Top, the indisputable turning point of the Civil War.

It is brief, gripping—indeed exhilarating—and well worth the few minutes it takes to read. For the buffs there is no need to describe the battle, though it is worth reading in the first person, and for the uninitiated it is a brief and definitive treatise on the subject. As such it ought to be read.

Read it!

Posted by The Curmudgeon at 12:07 PM