Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Thomas Sowell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Where is the West?
by Thomas Sowell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Is President Obama's Afghanistan plan a step in the right direction?


European nations protesting Saddam Hussein's death sentence, as they protested against forcing secrets out of captured terrorists, should tell us all we need to know about the internal degeneration of western society, where so many confuse squeamishness with morality.

Two generations of being insulated from the reality of the international jungle, of not having to defend their own survival because they have been living under the protection of the American nuclear umbrella, have allowed too many Europeans to grow soft and indulge themselves in illusions about brutal realities and dangers.

The very means of their salvation have been demonized for decades in anti-nuclear movements and protesters calling themselves "anti-war." But there is a huge difference between being anti-war in words and being anti-war in deeds.

How many times, in its thousands of years of history, has Europe gone 60 years without a major war, as it has since World War II? That peace has been due to American nuclear weapons, which was all that could deter the Soviet Union's armies from marching right across Europe to the Atlantic Ocean.

Having overwhelming military force on your side, and letting your enemies know that you have the guts to use it, is being genuinely anti-war. Chamberlain's appeasement brought on World War II and Reagan's military buildup ended the Cold War.

The famous Roman peace of ancient times did not come from negotiations, cease-fires, or pretty talk. It came from the Roman Empire's crushing defeat and annihilation of Carthage, which served as a warning to anyone else who might have had any bright ideas about messing with Rome.

Only after the Roman Empire began to lose its own internal cohesion, patriotism and fighting spirit over the centuries did it begin to succumb to its external enemies and finally collapse.

That seems to be where western civilization is heading today.

Internal cohesion? Not only does much of today's generation in western societies have a "do your own thing" attitude, defying rules and flouting authority are glorified and Balkanization through "multiculturalism" has become dogma.

Patriotism? Not only is patriotism disdained, the very basis for pride in one's country and culture is systematically undermined in our educational institutions at all levels.

The achievements of western civilization are buried in histories that portray every human sin found here as if they were peculiarities of the west.

The classic example is slavery, which existed all over the world for thousands of years and yet is incessantly depicted as if it was a peculiarity of Europeans enslaving Africans. Barbary pirates alone brought twice as many enslaved Europeans to North Africa as there were Africans brought in bondage to the United States and the American colonies from which it was formed.

How many schools and colleges are going to teach that, going against political correctness and undermining white guilt?

How many people have any inkling that it was precisely western civilization which eventually turned against slavery and began stamping it out when non-western societies still saw nothing wrong with it?

How can a generation be expected to fight for the survival of a culture or a civilization that has been trashed in its own institutions, taught to tolerate even the intolerance of other cultures brought into its own midst, and conditioned to regard any instinct to fight for its own survival as being a "cowboy"?

Western nations that show any signs of standing up for self-preservation are rare exceptions. The United States and Israel are the only western nations which have no choice but to rely on self-defense -- and both are demonized, not only by our enemies but also by many in other western nations.

Australia recently told its Muslim population that, if they want to live under Islamic law, then they should leave Australia. That makes three western nations that have not yet completely succumbed to the corrosive and suicidal trends of our times.

If and when we all succumb, will the epitaph of western civilization say that we had the power to annihilate our enemies but were so paralyzed by confusion that we ended up being annihilated ourselves?

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Where is the West?
Great article!! I couldn't read all the way through at first-my blood pressure started to rise because of the stupidity of the left-but I finished it.It's must reading.Thanks Mr. Sowell.

The Return of the Cowboy?
This article made my day! Thomas Sowell is 100% on the mark. Western Europe is a sick, weak and decaying society that has nothing in common with the United States (at least Red-state America). Red-state America has nothing in common anymore with Western Europe in terms of basic values, and Western Europeans have already shown their true colors by appeasing the new fascists while allowing NATO to become the latest T-Rex skeleton in the museum. The U.S. is in serious danger in terms of becoming just like Western Europe in thought and deed. The Western Europeans, like all summer grasshoppers, can mock our "Cowboy" President today. But they will be begging for our "Cowboy" President and "Cowboy" Military to save them in the future when their chocolate shops and 6-week vacation lifestyles are imperiled by Muslim conquerors. Will the U.S. still have the cowboy mentality to do the job we did in WWII? Or will our country have become "Pelosi's Amerika", a socialist appeasing force for nothing?

the epitaph
The last line in the final "History of the United States" will be, "What went wrong?"

Again Mr. Sowell, I salute you!
It is so true that anyone who is anti-war today does not apparently understand what polital power can do for us. It keeps up out of wars if other countries are shaking in their sandals. The only way to do that is to occasionally pony up the resources to overthrow some crazed dictator like Saddam Hussein, and let the country he butchered, try him. I applaud IRAQ's trial and findings. Yes he was a brutal murderer, and deserves hanging.
I am also glad to hear someone reference slavery prior to the United States use of it. I do not condone slavery at all, but I also remember from the Bible, who the children of Israel were enslaved in Egypt for over 400 years, and how they were enslaved in Babylon for many years as well. The US did not invent slavery as the lib historians like to pretend.
Now that the Pansy Party is in power, I fear for the security of our country.
Something that really burns me is that I lesten to smooth Jazz at work as it keeps me calm when things are hectic. Apparently the smooth Jazz stations assume that most of their listeners are African American and stauchly democratic. I heard many, many ads for democrat candidates and nothing was said, but when a conservative commercial was played or when a GOP candidate ad came on they made sure to state "the views on this commercial do not necessarily reflect the views or opoinions of the management" Before and after the commercial. I was completely insulted by this obvious support of the Dems and undercutting of conservatives and I let the stations know it too! I feel that the democrats take the African Amercian vote for granted. I just wish they would be wrong for once.

Good points, but ...
Mr. Sowell makes some good points, but it wasn't "Chamberlain's appeasement" that "brought on World War II," but rather the false promises made by England to come to Poland's defense should push come to shove, so that England would have a pretext for attacking Germany. This incredibly stupid alliance encouraged Poland's leaders to act in a bellicose manner toward Germany. That the alliance was merely a pretext for war can be seen in the fact that after the war, Poland was in Soviet hands, this after millions had died supposedly to guarantee Poland's freedom! If England had had nukes by 1939, it might have used them on Germany, alright, but not to save Poland, but rather to prevent Germany from competing against the hegemony of the British Empire, which by the way, also did not survive the war.

Where is the west?
Just face north and look left. It’s over there. Seriously, this is just another example of Sowell’s complete misunderstanding of history.

There was undoubtedly some altruism in our military protection of Western Europe, but that is not why we were there. All our efforts were to counter the Soviet threat to us.

Europe has gone 60 years with out a major war many times. The current ‘peace’ is because the ones in power have different and more efficient ways of settling economic disagreements.

The “Roman Peace” came at its own cost. The empire lost its ‘internal cohesion, patriotism and fighting spirit’ because of that cost. If the self serving leaders of Rome looked to economic influence over military power, the history of Europe would have been different.

This is NOT where western civilization is heading. Western civilization has survived all of Sowell’s concerns and will continue to survive. Sowell is confusing western civilization with an odd form of nationalism.

A classic example of this is slavery. While what Sowell writes is true, it misses the point entirely. Western culture claims a much deserved moral superiority to people like the Barbary pirates. Therefore, when is it displays the behavior, it becomes doubly wrong. This is not a national issue, it’s a cultural one. The US, for example, once declared that all men were created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights. That was the result of the growth and spread of western culture, not just some uniquely American idealism. The tragedy was that it was written by a slave holder and published during a time of slavery.

We will not annihilate ourselves no matter how much the ideology of Sowell hur

Whither the West?
Several things affect the outcome of a conflict: superior numbers, will to fight, effective strategies, and superior weaponry. Where weapons are equal, superior numbers usually prevail - usually, because strategy can have a big impact. Rome had superior weaponry and strategy, and at least initially, a strong will to fight. Near the end, history reports that a Roman army was essentially conscripts from non-Romans. Not much incentive to fight. Guess who lost.

Superior numbers is the game in the modern world, where voting is more important than fighting. Consider birth rates by identifiable cultural groups within our country. Because Socialists/Democrats produce more children per fertile woman than Conservatives, the outcome for the West is as predictable as it is inevitable.

With his recent stance on our southern border control, President Bush alienated a powerful group in the USA, who just happen to have a high birth rate. Hispanics. Examine the heritage of those elected to power in California, Texas, and Florida, three of the fastest-growing states. The end of Conservatives in positions of power just occurred. November 7, 2006. Mark it.

What About Cultural Marxism?
Mr. Sowell has given us an excellent analysis, but he has omitted one of the principal factors behind it, namely cultural Marxism, which seeks to destroy Western civilization in order to pave the way for a socialist utopia. Daniel J. Flynn provides a good short summary in “Intellectual Morons.”

What? This is just Wrong
"Consider birth rates by identifiable cultural groups within our country. Because Socialists/Democrats produce more children per fertile woman than Conservatives, the outcome for the West is as predictable as it is inevitable."

This is just factually wrong. It's conservatives that have big families in America, and libs that have the one designer baby in their late thirties. It's conservatives that keep the baby and libs that abort them. For a look at demographics, try Mark Steyn's Book, "America Alone". It's the muslim population that is exploding, not white liberals.

Ark
That was a good book. The twisted Marxism of the Marcuse school of thought has really come to fruition, hasn't it?

MikeR posted that . . .
"Europe has gone 60 years with out a major war many times. The current ‘peace’ is because the ones in power have different and more efficient ways of settling economic disagreements."

Sure, back about 2500 years ago. Certainly not in the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th or 20th centuries.

The USSR would have overrun western Europe except for the US Army stationed in Germany and Italy. We had nuclear missile deterrence in Turkey until a Democrat decided to remove them.

After WW II ended in 1945, the USSR was contained and could only use proxies like North Korea and North Vietnam to fight the west.

When the USSR invaded northern Iran in 1946, the USA threatened to use nukes if the soviets didn't withdraw. They withdrew.

MikeR, I don't know your background, but I think it's something other than history.

Scottie
The Hispanic group has the large families. Nearly 100 percent vote Democrat. I am not referring to Anglo liberal females who abort their children over and over, or elect to have one spoiled/neurotic child after age 35. If you have doubts, stop by any photographer's studio in a Hispanic neighborhood in Texas, Florida, or California. Count the number of bridesmaids and groomsmen in the photos on display. Those are family members. And Democratic voters.

You have things backwards
The Europeans have routinely been the ones to use torture along with many Asian and other regions around the world and we have been the ones protesting such extremes and trying to uphold higher moral standards. The French used torture against the Algerians in their revolution for Independence and the Algerians used terror such as setting off bombs in cafes, killing women and children so that has nothing changed. The Europeans are not squeamish. They have been slaughtering each other for centuries and the goings on in the former Yugoslavia show that European brutality is alive and well. The biggest difference between our type of government and the Islamic Republics like Iran whom we are opposing is we have freedoms they don't have of religion and speech and most important of all "Due Process of Law." We also have in our constitution the prohibition of "Cruel and Unusual Punishment." The recent bill condoned by Senator McCain who was a stalwart against the use of torture, dispenses with Habeus Corpus and thus rescinds Due Process for so called enemy combantants. This can only be done Constitutionally in time of Invasion and Rebellion and neither are happening now so that the law go against the Constitution. I have a friend whom I chat with in Iran on a chat program. He is very much against his government and he loves America, but by talking to someone in Iran the FBI can deem that I am aiding a terrorist and I can be picked up without being charged and without recourse to a lawyer and I would simply disappear and no one would ever hear from me again. This can happen to anyone. this can happen to you under this new law. People disappearing happened in Argentina. It happened in the Soviet Union. It is not supposed to be a part of our Democracy. We can defeat Islamic Terrorism without dismantling our own Democracy.

Where is the West?
"Only after the Roman Empire began to lose its own internal cohesion, patriotism and fighting spirit over the centuries did it begin to succumb to its external enemies and finally collapse. That seems to be where western civilization is heading today."

I agree with this. Oswald Spengler's "Decline of the West", written during the First World War and published in its immediate aftermath, is in my estimation the most convincing exposition, historically and philosophically, of this worldview.


Greg Raven
Poland's "bellicose manner" was just an excuse. Hitler was bent on domination, and any excuse would do.

Fuzzy logic...


Like most in the 'values' community, Sowell is totally incapable of understanding that killing has everything to with revenge and little or nothing to do with justice.

DavidMac
The reference is to major European wars. What major war took place between the Napoleonic Wars and the Franco-Prussian War? Or between the 30 Years War and the Great Northern War? Or between the Religion wars and the 30 Years War? Yes, there was plenty of strife between the fall of the Roman Empire and the 20th century with major warfare in every century of that period; but it is incorrect to characterize Europe as not experiencing any peaceful periods during that same stretch of time.

Your other comments are not out of character with what I said. I don’t deny that these events took place. I claim that the bulk of our motivation for each was self interest not some altruistic love of Europe. This is my complaint with Sowell. In my initial comment I said that what he wrote was true, but that he misinterpreted the significance.

Sowell is very popular, but that popularity is based on him telling people what they want to hear. He strokes the ego by indirectly telling one how right they are. That makes some people blind to the poor construction of thought in too many of his articles.

The election
History is a nation's best teacher. Here in the West however, there were enough who tossed out the baby with the bath water to give us a Democratic Congress. We will suffer for it in the future with less security etc.

Some people will never learn the obvious. To see former combat personal (regardless of military affilation) call for immediate withdrawel is sickening. Staying the course (winning the war) is not in a liberal's upbringing or backbone. Many who served have forgotten their oath, a lifetime commitment. They have grown soft and the rest of us must pay with our blood, again.

So, fellow cowboys, the time will come for us to rise again.

Buy early, buy often and avoid the rush and I'm not speaking of broom handles.

Perfectionism
MikeR writes, "The US, for example, once declared that all men were created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights. That was the result of the growth and spread of western culture, not just some uniquely American idealism. The tragedy was that it was written by a slave holder and published during a time of slavery."

The error here is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. A good idea, proffered forth by someone less than perfect, is not therefore a tainted idea unworthy of implementation. Many of the ideas of Locke, Montesquieu, and Mill were at least acted on by imperfect people when our Republic was formed. To be sure, there was a lamentable 100 year gap between the Emancipation Proclamation and actually doing something about it. The power of the proclamation is not diminished, however, by the inability of imperfect people trying somehow to live up to the ideals. Without the ideals, we arrive at no place in particular, save what a benevolent despot may be able to accomplish.

We may have a quaint tendency to "air our dirty laundry" for all to see, and tongue clucking from both sides of the ocean always seems to be the "order of the day," but it's their dirty laundry that historians have to uncover that provides the "odor of the day."

Profblog
You are quite right in your point but not in the context in which I offered that statement. Review Sowell’s original statement and place mine in the context in which it was offered. Sowell is suggesting that slavery was common throughout history in many cultures but that we are suffering to this day because special and undue emphasis is being placed on the involvement of western countries in the slave trade. In of itself, that is not wrong but as it is being offered as a ‘classic’ example where western accomplishments are being buried by western sin, he is wrong. It is not an example of the decline of the west and the flaws of modern education. Some teacher for vain and selfish reasons may be teaching only the darker side of our history, but that is an anomaly which is just as bad as never teaching our failings. My point is that we in the west put more emphasis on our own shortcomings over others’ because we are superior to pirates and as such derecognize where we were wrong as well as were we were right. As I said, all Sowell offers is food for the conservative ego, not critical historical analysis.

Greg Raven
While Poland was bellicose, it was really pretty irrelevant to the entire discussion. Hitler was bound and determined to get as much as he could prior to war and the "Peace in Our Time" folks rolled over and went the appeasement route. A thorough discussion of this can be found in the Telford book: "Munich, the Price of Peace"

ProfGene is wrong
The bill passed by the Congress doesn't give the federal government the power to come pick him up for chatting on IM with a person in Iran. That bill only applies to "enemy combantants", which doesn't included American citizens, unless the American citizens is captured somewhere out of the US fighting against US forces.

ProfGene is being very disengenious about his analogy. His conversations with someone in Iran may be monitored, but he isn't going to get hauled off to the gulag.

Dr. Sowell is right on the mark again!
Is there anyone better than Dr. Sowell? He's like old wine, he just keeps getting better and better. Great article.

We need more people to read your work. Especially in our Universities.

Tannabear is right!
The President of the United States has to stand in front of the world and speak the words. Once "it" is spoken others will free enough to speak the truth; Britain, Germany, France. Bush is supposed to be the leader-then he should lead!!

Sharia Law will not be tolerated in our country, and from this point forward any sharia state will no longer be able to travel freely to the US.

No foreign entity is allowed to fund religious institutions in our country.

Donations to places of worship and their charitable agencies or affiliates within the US can only be recieved from US citizens, or legal residents.

Students will be exchanged on a 1 to 1 basis; this includes any and all academics.

Embassies(sp) will also be staffed on a 1 to 1 basis to include dependents.

All weapons transactions to said countries will first have to be reviewed by the state dept.

I am sure I have missed something feel free to add your own.

11h


mike r
Yes, Mike R, Sowell is preaching to those of us who share his thoughts, ideas and interpretations of history. This still does not diminish his genius (in my humble opinion). If only for that damned main stream media!! If only Sowell could get the word out to the brain-dead portion of the populace. . .

Mike
You really do not believe this do you...

"Some teacher for vain and selfish reasons may be teaching only the darker side of our history, but that is an anomaly which is just as bad as never teaching our failings."

Anomoly my foot!! I just went back to school in my 40's and believe me (if you like), every single instructor I had for 2 years did nothing (during their asides to the curriculum) but slam our country. It was pretty pathetic and I am outside chicago, like middle america.

I was never taught about the barbary pirates enslaving europeans at all, let alone in greater numbers than the west enslaved black africans. That makes a huge difference if you teach both of those facts side by side for proportion, and context to shape the world view of a high school kid.

It does matter! and the example was right on!

11h

Texas Engr
Hispanics don't vote 100 % Dumocrat. Where did you get that idea? The statistics from the 2004 election show that approximately 40% of Hispanics voted for President Bush. That is 4 times the number of blacks that voted for the Dumocrat. Hispanics, IMHO, are a lot smarter than blacks politically. They are not a monolistic bloc of voters who don't think about what party will best represent their values. I don't know who in the Hispanic community you have spoken to, but I speak with them all the time in Spanish and have even had them ask me if I vote for the Republican candidate that they supported. Those Hispanics who remain faithful to the Catholic faith are more likely to vote for Dumocrats because they are used to having people tell them how to live their lives and they are already brainwashed to accept the propaganda fed to them without questioning it.

Texas Engr
I meant the voted for the Republican not the Dumocrat. They voted en masse for the Dumocrats.

tanabear
The "neo-con P.C." can probably be summed up something like this:
Given a choice of liberty instead of enslavement, most humans will choose the former. They might even fight for it, and appreciate any help offered.

Someone likened Iraq to the following: most baseball teams are only a few players from a pennant... Mickey Mantle, Joe Dimaggio, Roger Clemens.
Likewise, Iraq is only a few players from a functioning, free democracy... a George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Ben Franklin.

You think that it's absurd. Perhaps Iraq's "founding fathers" will be able to step up to the plate if given some help, much like France helped our struggling colonies resist George III.

Your leap of logic, from the unstated assumption that helping Iraq is foolishness because they are somehow less worthy or too stupid to choose freedom, to then asserting that such "neo-con ideology" and confidence in the hearts of an oppressed people wanting to be free, will bring down the West and America, is specious at best.


tanabear
Excellent point! The Islamic world is NOT like the Western world.

MikeR
You offered:
"My point is that we in the west put more emphasis on our own shortcomings over others’ because we are superior to pirates and as such derecognize where we were wrong as well as were we were right."

What I understand you to be asserting is that we may be offering a false humility to mask our superiority complex. Is that what you meant to say?
Do you mean to say that any admission of our shortcomings to live up to our ideals is disingenuous?

11hotel points out a disturbing tendency in academe to disparage anything understood to be good, right and true about much of our past. I, as a faculty member on a campus, can corroborate much of what he asserts. We are actually swimming in the "anomalies" you spoke of.

Sowell rightly sounds the alarm that we tolerate, in the name of not wanting to appear intolerant, those who would destroy us. This anomaly is easily understood by looking at how the "embodiment of peace itself" the U.N. welcomes to the table its current "leaders" of the commission on human rights. Without right principles, defended by "flawed" but principled leaders, Western civilization is clearly at risk. Sowell's thesis stands.

11hotel
Yes, I stand by that statement. Most teachers are good people who strive to educate in a fair and honest way. I don’t doubt your statement, but has been my experience that if I made a comment about one legged, blue eyed, German speaking Eskimos, someone would suddenly claim to be one, related to one or know several. Bashing education is a sport around here and it’s an injustice that Sowell tolerates. If the system is so bad, how is it that the young commenters and contributors do so well? Sowell is saying in essence, ‘sure, what we did was bad but others did worse’. Not only is that a poor excuse it ignores the bigger concept. The Barbary Pirates were worse, but how did you expect them to act? Far from making claims of enlightenment, they made boasts of their wickedness. In the face of that, Sowell’s use of them as a reference is actually rather juvenile. I can’t answer for your education, but I knew about the Barbary Pirates enslaving Europeans. They were thwarted by a swashbuckling Errol Flynn.

Profblog
You make a very good point, but surly you are not alone in being an honest educator. I admit that anomaly was the wrong word because it suggests far less than there really are. Remember the excessive ranting on the left and in the media over the Foley scandal? It was wrong. Yet the threads of TH were filled mostly with how others have done worse. That is no excuse. In fact, it’s worse. When one makes a habit of referring to the opposition as amoral hedonists and you’re self as being an example of moralist, then the fall from grace is that much further. I feel Sowell is doing the same thing. Furthermore, I refuse to accept that western civilization is falling.

The world needs more men like Mr. Sowell
Absolutly great article. I would give it 6 stars if I had the option. These thought provoking articles are what we need more of at Townhall and in the media in general. It is so nice to not open another article that is just GOP (latly DNC as well) talking points.

The depth of this subject just goes to show what we really need to do to get things back on track and what will happen if we do not. I am going to forward this to everyone I know as I think every person alive should read this... and really take a long hard look at what is going on.

truthbetold
I am totally confused. Who do the Hispanic Catholics vote for? Demos or Republicans?

La Reina
They vote for the Dumocrats because they are used to believing the propaganda put forth by the Catholics.

Hispanic voters
In 2004, Bush had not yet betrayed Hispanics... he wooed them instead. Bush's recent signing of the border fence law, without amnesty, angered the Hispanics with a vested interest in keeping the border open for more immigration from the south.

Truthbetold: my statement was NOT 100 percent vote for Democrats. Even if we accept your 40 percent figure for Bush in 2004, the majority voted Democrat. The figure is nearer 100 than 60 this time around.

My point is this: America is in for a long period of Conservatives being the minority in the House and Senate.

Our crucial job as Conservatives is to win as many from Dems to Repub as possible. Dr. Sowell's books make wonderful Christmas gifts (and birthdays, graduations, etc.) Controversial Essays gets little press, but is one of his best. Cannot argue with the facts he advances.

La Reina
When Hispanics acually begin to study the Holy Bible for themselves and read where the Holy Bible says that "For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of WORKS lest anyone should boast", they begin to see that they have been fed propaganda for years. After that they start thinking for themselves and realize that the Dumocrats don't want people who THINK for themselves. Thus, they begin to vote for Republicans.

Anything you DO in order to receive salvation is a WORK. The only requirement for salvation is FAITH in Jesus Christ and his death and bodily resurrection, according to the Holy Bible.

Survival and the desire for it thereof
One of our nuclear subs has enough nukes on board to wipe Syria and Iran from the face of the earth. They are not worried because world opinion is against us nuking them out of existence. This comes down to the point of Sowell's article: how badly do we want to survive? Will we go quiety, our nuclear armaments rusting away, or will we pay the price to stay alive?
Don't ask a college student to answer this question.

The BrainDead Populace
Responds only to fear. I mean the 5% that voted for the Dems that voted for us in 2004.

Texas Engr
I'm sorry that I mistakenly said you said 100% when you acually said nearly 100%. You may be closer to correct for 2006, but I don't believe that breakdown has been published yet, so I referred to the last election for which we already have the figures. That being said, 60% is not nearly 100%. The 90% black vote for Dumocrats is most closer to nearly 100% than is 60% unless you have a different concept of mathematics than ordinary people have. Of course, since you are an engr, maybe you have an unusual mathematics system. Maybe you use a metrics or base two system.

MacZed & Tanabear
MacZed
I hope you have not spoken too soon.
This is a collection of short videos by the NRA.
A menu is on the left side.
http://www.givethemback.com

______________________________
tanabear
These are the kind of Islamics that frighten me.
http://www.obsessionthemovie.com
Click on the PREVIEW button.

______________________________
Good column as usual. Sowell does good work.

Start a new party?
Maybe those of us who feel abandoned by the Republicans should start a new party called the CONSERVATIVE party.

MikeR
I have more faith that Western Civ. is not in the very near term completely lost. I also think that a reflexive looking for worse examples than oneself, in order to justify oneself, is unjustifiable. Balances must be struck, clear-headed analyses cannot forsaken, however, the starting point of analysis is key. If we begin with the assumption that capitalism, democracy, freedom of press, individual liberty, property rights, etc. are more desirable than the contrary, and that the U.S. represents a flawed, but nevertheless honest attempt to secure these principles, then analysis can proceed with patriotic verve, having committed to the aforementioned foundations. However, if fealty to the U.S. is continuously demonized, marginalized, and merits only disdain, then "analysis" so begun will doubtless end up with a different view. And, make no mistake, no one sits on a hilltop, literal or intellectual, completely "objective" in their analysis.
Lastly, I appreciate your optimism, and don't share in "the sky is falling" analysis some threads offer. I don't think Sowell does either, but I read him as saying that storm clouds are gathering. And, I must confess that a truly historic catastrophe may come our way sooner than later.

Decline of Western Civilization
Decline is a long process. Even if we are part of it, few would actually recognize and admit it. Moreover, decline is a mass attitude. It is not one thought,opinion,or action/inaction,but many,many millions and over many decades. So, decline is overlooked and underestimated. Part of the attitude involves walling out information and developments which one disagrees with.

In the case of Mike R.,it is endless arguing, quibbling, and insistence on having "the last word". These are unmistakable signs of decline. The election is just one more aspect to a long established trend.

Who will end up being the "New Visigoths"? Arabs, fascist Islams, Al Queda, North Koreans? We can find out when America becomes so deceived internally as to have removed all the deterrents to foreign aggression. Once we know for sure who the real enemies are and how dangerous they really are, it might be too late to avoid calamity.



MikeR
You wrote:

"Seriously, this is just another example of
Sowell’s complete misunderstanding of history."

Perhaps he just doesn't subscribe to your
"understanding" of history. I'm assuming you are
not omnipotent. In my opinion, his take on history
holds more water than yours, but that's just my
opinion, as equally valid as yours. The last
statement should resonate pleasantly with your
sensibilities.

"There was undoubtedly some altruism in our
military protection of Western Europe, but that
is not why we were there. All our efforts were
to counter the Soviet threat to us."

Okay then. Guess you're just restating the canard
that altruism is ultimately selfish. What's your
point?

"Europe has gone 60 years with out a major war many
times. The current ‘peace’ is because the ones in
power have different and more efficient ways of
settling economic disagreements."

Funny how outside threats bring people together.
About the "60 year peace" periods, I really don't
know. How about you naming a few.

"The “Roman Peace” came at its own cost. The empire
lost its ‘internal cohesion, patriotism and fighting
spirit’ because of that cost. If the self serving
leaders of Rome looked to economic influence over
military power, the history of Europe would have
been different."

Please re-read Sowell's passage regarding the
"Roman Peace". You seem to be addressing his
subsequent passage regarding "internal cohesion",
which is a whole 'nother subject. His point regarding
the fabled Roman Peace was it was obtained through
military strength.

"This is NOT where western civilization is heading.
Western civilization has survived all of Sowell’s
concerns and will continue to survive. Sowell is
confusing western civilization with an odd form of
nationalism."

Was Rome an example of Western Civilization"?
Are you an oracle of some sort? This "odd form
of nationalism" you speak of, how does it manifest
itself? Are we to disregard progressive "western"
philisophical thought simply because not all
"westerners" have subscribed to it, or have been
hypocritical in their actions? What exactly is
your point?

"A classic example of this is slavery. While what
Sowell writes is true, it misses the point entirely.
Western culture claims a much deserved moral
superiority to people like the Barbary pirates.
Therefore, when is it displays the behavior, it
becomes doubly wrong. This is not a national issue,
it’s a cultural one. The US, for example, once
declared that all men were created equal and endowed
with certain inalienable rights. That was the result
of the growth and spread of western culture, not just
some uniquely American idealism. The tragedy was that
it was written by a slave holder and published during
a time of slavery."

Sowell's point was that anti-slavery opinion emanated
in the West. Not that nobody elsewhere thought it was
morally wrong as well. I suppose he was illustrating
the fact that anti-slavery legislation and a general
abandoment of the practice occurred in Western nations
during a time when it was continued elsewhere, yet,
over here in this country, the subject of "slavery" in
schools seems to be confined to the practice occurring
in the United States.
You seem to be addressing the subject of hypocrisy more
than anything else. Glad you just realized there is no
Santa Claus.

Sowell's column can be reduced to this. Self flagellation
can be morally uplifting, but don't expect those who would
knock you down to give you credit for it.
You are a product of western civilazion, and we can be
proud of your moral and spiritial development. Just don't
expect us to feel safe with you in our foxhole.

I misspelled "civilization".
Guess I'm going to be blown away.

Mike R.'s DECLINE
Mike thinks terrorism is something which indicates internal strength in America. Quite the contrary. When America was strong and in it's prime, nobody dared attack us at home. Terrorists are like wolves, they attack sick or weakened game animals or livestock. Liberal Democrats are weak on defense and crime control.

We have really slipped alot as a sovereign country since as recently as 1971. Since then, we have gone off the gold standard. We have a huge and uncontrolled illegal immigration problem. No surprise, a $60,000 house in 1970 is worth over $650,000(+) today. Asset inflation has reduced the value of your dollar to about 10 cents(in 1970 dollars).

In 1955, almost half our economy was domestic manufacturing. Today, it has drastically shrunk. Much of it sent offshore or to Mexico in search of ever cheaper labor. In place of manufacturing, we have "services".

It should be intuitively obvious America can not remain a world leader with just services and words to back it up. Somebody will eventually call our bluff.

Politicans deal in words. Hostiles only respect the willingness to use force. Liberal Democrats avoid using force. Liberals also deny the world is a jungle, and they are the prey.

Bin Ladin is happy with the results of our election. Bin Ladin probably likes our new direction. Expect more trouble in future years. Sooner, if we let down our guard.

Sowell
MikeR & ProfGene
Mike must be in the profs class.
The comment "Don't ask a college student about foreign policy" was a sign of maturity
Teach4

Respect for America?
Don't worry, Democrats will talk to our enemies and try to understand them and make them understand us.

Only if Carter had used "Gunboat Policy" we would not be in this mess.

Used to be, If an American citizen, (JUST ONE), was held hostage by some foreign country they would be warned just once and then a Battle Wagon would stand off their coast hull down and throw a few salvos into one of their coastal cities. They usually released the hostage without any need for that big ship to blast another city off the face of the earth.
That kind of discouraged taking Americans hostage.
As soon as Carter left office for a sterner President, Iran released those hostages.

Did other nations love us during the days of Gunboat Deplomacy?
Nope, but they damned well FEARD us!

Where is the West?
Isolationism is becoming increasingly attractive.
We need a strong defense capability and a diminished foreign presence so we can focus on ideas that made The USA great: Individual freedom and independence in a just society having a strong tradition of rule of law.
It is worth striving for such a fantasy. We will get a chance in 2008 after current legislators show themselves just as disfunctional as the current legislature.

A Conservative Plan For Iraq
http://www.controlcongress.com

Anyone who questions the lack of a realistic and comprehensive Iraq strategy is labeled a friend of fascism by the Republican leadership. House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) recently said, “I wonder if [Democrats] are more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people.” Republicans are paralyzed with the fear of being thought ineffective on national security and the war.

Meanwhile, the Democratic leadership cannot seem to accept that—regardless of how we got there—we are in Iraq. They have not made a convincing case that an arbitrary phased or date-certain troop withdrawal is in the best long-term interest of the United States. Rather, they seem to think that withdrawal will undo the decision to have gone to war. Rubbing President Bush’s nose in Iraq’s difficulties is also a priority.

This political food fight is stifling the desperately needed public discussion about a meaningful resolution to the fire fight. Most Americans know Iraq is going badly. And they know the best path lies somewhere between “stay the course” and “get out now”.

Some Truths

1) Iraq is having a civil war between the Sunnis and Shiites. The Kurds will certainly join, if attacked. It may not look like a civil war, because they don’t have tanks, helicopters, and infantry; but they are fighting with what they have.

2) Vast oil revenues are a significant factor behind the fighting. Yes, there are religious and cultural differences—but concerns about how the oil revenue will be split among the three groups make the problem worse.

3) Most Iraqis support partitioning Iraq into Shiite, Sunni, and Kurdish regions. (Their current arrangement resulted from a pen stroke during the British occupation, not some organic alignment.)

4) Most citizens of the Middle East who support groups that kill and terrorize civilians—such as Hezbollah, Hamas, or al Qaeda—in part because of their aggressive stance against Israel and the United States, but also because they provide much needed social services, such as building schools.

5) Both Republican and Democratic administrations have spent decades doing business with the tyrants who run the Middle East in exchange for oil and cheap labor. This has been the one of the rallying calls of Bin Laden and Hezbollah—that we support tyrants who abuse people for profits. In fact, our latest trade deals with Oman and Jordan actually promote child and slave labor; it’s so bad the State Department had to issue warnings about rampant child trafficking in those countries.

6) Iran is using the instability in Iraq to enhance its political stature in the region. Leaving Iraq without a government that can stand up to Iran would be very destabilizing to the region and the world.

From the U.S. perspective, this is all mostly about energy. As things stand, a serious oil supply disruption would devastate our economy, threaten our security, and jeopardize our ability to provide for our children.

New Directions

Success in Iraq and the Middle East in general requires us to work in three areas simultaneously: (1) fostering a more stable Middle East region, including Iraq, (2) pursuing alternative sources of oil, and (3) developing alternatives to oil. To these ends we must:

1) Insure that the oil revenues are fairly and transparently split among all three groups: Shiite, Sunni, and Kurds based on population.

2) Allow each group to have a much stronger role in self government by creating three virtually-autonomous regions. Forcing a united Iraq down their throats is not working. Our military would then be there in support a solution that people want, rather than one they are resisting.

3) Become a genuine force for positive change, thus denying extremist groups much of their leverage. Driving a fair two-state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian problem should be our first priority. We should also engage in projects that both help the average Middle Easterner and Americans, such as supporting schools that are an alternative to the ones that teach hate and recruit terrorists. We should also stop participating in trade deals that promote child and slave labor by insisting on deals that include livable wages and basic labor rights.

4) Declare a Marshal Plan to end our Middle Eastern energy dependency with a compromise between exploring for new sources, reducing consumption, and developing of alternative energies. For example, we should re-establish normal relations with Cuba so we can beat China to Cuba’s off-shore oil. We should also redirect existing tax breaks for Big Oil into loan guarantees for alternative energy companies.

Once we no longer need so much oil from the Middle East, we can begin winning over its people by using our oil purchases to reward positive and peaceful behavior from their leaders. This would ultimately reduce tensions and encourage prosperity in the region.

We will have to live with the threat of Islamic radical terrorism forever; but these solutions are a start to reducing the threat. Both parties have to put politics aside and put together an honest and reasonable plan that the American understand.


America's Lack of Patriotism
Today's vote at Orange Coast College to ban the pledge of allegiance is proof positive that "Not only is patriotism disdained, the very basis for pride in one's country and culture is systematically undermined in our educational institutions at all levels."

People need to wake up to what's being taught in our schools. Free Speech is vital to this country's welfare...and that includes the right to affirm your faith in both God and country.

Yo Mike R
Dr. Sowell is not saying the "bad side" of our history should not be taught, but when ONLY the bad side is taught, there is a problem. His example of how the issue of slavery has been taught in our schools is a good example of how the "Blame America First" crowd of teachers have taught our children to be ashamed of being an American. It is clear those teachers have a disdain for the struggle and sacrifice of our forefathers to establish this country and fight against terrible issues like slavery and became a country that attracts people from all over the world. While our history is not always pretty, we've done pretty well, not only for ourselves, but through the centuries have been willing to sacrifice our military and treasury on behalf of others.

Morality and Death Penalty
"European nations protesting Saddam Hussein's death sentence, as they protested against forcing secrets out of captured terrorists, should tell us all we need to know about the internal degeneration of western society, where so many confuse squeamishness with morality."

Well, if Christian morality involves attemption to act like Christ, since He spoke out against the Death Penalty TWICE, it can be seen as IMMORAL. This is likely the reason the West opposes Saddam's penalty, not because they don't feel he should be punished, but because THEY HAVE ABOLISHED THE DEATH PENALTY ON MORAL GROUNDS!

Although Jesus didn't specifically address torture, one would also likely conclude that He would oppose that as well. It is AWFULLY HARD to distinguish one from one's enemies if you engage in the SAME TACTICS!
Remember when we USED TO condemn Saddam and his TORTURE CHAMBERS? Well, we unfortunately lost the moral high ground in the eyes of most Iraqis (and most of the world) when it turned out that WE were torturing prisoners. Notice how we no longer speak of Saddam's torture chambers any longer?

During WWII, Nazis (arguably AS BRUTAL AS ANY ENEMY) surrundered in droves BECAUSE they knew that the US would treat their prisoners humanely. Sadly, this image of our GREAT NATION has been tarnished by what has been allowed to happen in the name of FREEDOM!

Even Tony Blair recently said he opposed Saddam's Death Penalty because he is opposed to the death penalty for ANYONE! Surely you don't think him 'squeamish'?

Good topic, poor development
Needs to go back for a copy-edit. Looks good on the surface, but fundamentally this article is inadequately thought-out and and poorly constructed.

And another thing
I was brought up in the 60's with womens rights and all of that crap. I believed it bought into it and I'm a strong person. However, the womens movement looking back was nothing more than a way for "some" women to get ahead and make plenty of money! Boy, was I stupid!

Where are all of these so call womens rights democrats, and that's what they all were, when the middle eastern women are not able to go to school, they have to ware burca's, are denied every right under the sun? Mind you I don't expect women in this country to be able to change things in those countries but as facism spreads in this country and others what do they expect to happen to the women in this country when it is taken over.

Al those women who shooted womens right are all liberal democrats who don't believe that we should be fighting the musclim extremest in there land, we should appease them, we not have a say when the facist have made it clear, clear, clear, to any thinking person that they intend to kill us all and take this country for themselves. The facist have tried this for centuries and it would have worked out for them if there weren't people willing to go to the mat to fight them.

I am so ashame of the women's right's women in this country, and more so my stupidity, that I can't stand it.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.