Monday, September 03, 2007

On the Repressed Violence of the Nonviolent

Didn't get much sleep last night. The boy spiked a 104 degree fever right before bedtime, so it took awhile to get it down, then we were up again at 3:00AM. Now it's 6:30, and I'm guessing he'll be up any minute.

Which reminds me of a bizarre development that occurred a couple of weeks ago, that I've been meaning to write about. That is, the mother of Tristan's best friend broke up with us (I know, it sounds like a Seinfeld episode) when she learned of Mrs. G's plans to write a children's book in praise of Modern Military Heroes. She abruptly cut off all relations, because she doesn't want her son to have any knowledge of, or contact with, things military. Not only does she not allow him to play with evil things like toy guns, she would never even allow him to wear so much as a camouflage t-shirt. She is horrified at the thought that he might become aggressive. Which of course anyone can see that he already is, being that he is a human being in general and a boy in particular.

I'm a boy, I'm a boy, but my ma won't admit it
I'm a boy, I'm a boy, but when I say I am, I get it
--Pete Townshend

This fear of aggression is an interesting projection. Based on what I can tell of her, she is troubled by unconscious aggression that she cannot express, so it comes out as an aggressive fear of aggression. This is a common pattern among "pacifist" leftists, who are always so passive-aggressively obnoxious. To imagine that you can simply eliminate aggression and violence from the human repertoire is pure fancy. In any event, you wouldn't want to eliminate them even if you could, any more than you'd want to dismantle the immune system because of the violent manner in which it deals with bacterial intruders. What are we supposed to do, love viral invaders into submission?

I didn't get all of the details of the conversation, in part because Leslie was so stunned that she didn't remember all of it. But one thing the friend -- who is thoroughly secular and irreligious -- asked was "how can you be so spiritual and pro-military?" I think Leslie was so taken aback by the question that she hardly knew how to respond. She's not very confrontational most of the month, but of course the only appropriate answer is, "how can you be spiritual and not be pro-military, dumbass."

Naturally, it all depends upon which military you're talking about. The moral retardation of so many leftists just astonishes me. And it is literally retardation, for just as one may be mentally retarded but a decent person, one may be intellectually brilliant but a moral imbecile, as so many leftist professors prove (not that they're so brilliant, either). Violence is good or bad, depending entirely upon the uses to which it is put.

Which gives rise to an immediate corollary that even many religious people don't appreciate: that love can be good or bad, depending upon the use to which it is put -- or, to be more precise, the object to which the love is directed. For just as there is profoundly moral violence, there is profoundly immoral love, for example, the kind of corrupt and immoral love expressed by one of the most overrated human beings of all time, Mohandas Gandhi. Just as knowledge that knows falsehood is not really knowledge, love that improperly loves evil (for there are properly severe ways to love the evildoer) is a kind of hatred.

Regarding Gandhi's immoral pacifist-aggression, Richard Grenier notes that he wrote to Hitler and attempted to convert him to the ways of nonviolence. "'Dear Friend,' the letter begins, and proceeds to a heartfelt appeal to the Fuhrer to embrace all mankind 'irrespective of race, color, or creed.'" Gandhi naively thought that "Hitler's heart would be melted by an appeal to forget race, color, and creed, and... was sure the feelings of the Japanese would be hurt if they sensed themselves unwanted."

Yes, fighting fascists will only create more fascists! Until we kill all of them.

At a particularly dark time of the war, "when Germany's panzer divisions turned west, Allied armies collapsed under the ferocious onslaught, and British ships were streaming across the Straits of Dover from Dunkirk, [Gandhi] wrote furiously to the Viceroy of India: 'This manslaughter must be stopped. You are losing; if you persist, it will only result in greater bloodshed. Hitler is not a bad man....'"

In fact, The Great Soul also composed an open letter to the British people, "passionately urging them to surrender and accept whatever fate Hitler' had prepared for them": "Let them take possession of your beautiful island with your many beautiful buildings. You will give all these, but neither your souls, nor your minds."

He also had good advice for the Jews, really no different than today's leftists who compare the fence to keep murderous Palestinian savages out to the wall that kept decent people from escaping communist tyranny:

"All Jews sitting emotionally at the movie 'Gandhi' should be apprised of the advice that the Mahatma offered their coreligionists when faced with the Nazi peril: they should commit collective suicide. If only the Jews of Germany had the good sense to offer their throats willingly to the Nazi butchers' knives and throw themselves into the sea from cliffs they would arouse world public opinion, Gandhi was convinced, and their moral triumph would be remembered for 'ages to come.' If they would only pray for Hitler (as their throats were cut, presumably), they would leave a 'rich heritage to mankind.'" Even after the war, when the unprecedented extent of the massacre became known, Gandhi callously insisted "that the Jews died anyway, didn't they? They might as well have died significantly."

Could Gandhi be as stupid as Jimmy Carter? It's possible.

Meanwhile -- and this is important -- "Gandhi's monstrous behavior to his own family is notorious." You'll have to read the article to find out how, but the point is how similar this is to the rank and foul Hollywood leftist, the kind of person who loves mankind but detests actual human beings. I am quite sure that this is one of the main appeals of radical environmentalism, because it allows the preening, self-absorbed narcissist to imagine he is a morally superior person merely by hectoring other people about their energy usage.

Look at the truly detestable Mark Cuban and Brian de Palma, whose new film smears American troops as rapists and butchers -- as if the actions of a few people are a reflection on the tens of thousands of others. Meanwhile, the same gentle and compassionate leftists will say that we cannot judge the Religion of Peace based upon "a few" people who take the Koran seriously in its persistent directives to murder infidels.

Again, if you naively deny your own aggressive tendencies, they will simply come out in an indirect manner. The angry projection of aggression is utterly palpable on websites such as dailykurse or huffingandpissed. These people deny that we are under attack by violent killers (their favorite candidate says that the war on global jihad is just a "bumper sticker"), but constantly fantasize that they are being attacked by President Bush, which leads to a heightened fear of him, and therefore the need for more violent projection to rid themselves of the irrational fear. This cycle is commonly encountered in clinical practice.

Regarding Gandhi's own denial, Grenier writes that it is not appreciated "how much violence was associated with [his] so-called 'nonviolent' movement from the very beginning." The poet Tagore astutely "sensed a strong current of nihilism in Gandhi almost from his first days, and as early as 1920 wrote of Gandhi's 'fierce joy of annihilation,'" which he feared "would lead India into hideous orgies of devastation -- which ultimately proved to be the case." Here is a description of the wages of Gandhi's "nonviolence," after the "violent" and oppressive British left India:

"The Indians -- gentle, tolerant people that they are gave themselves over to an orgy of bloodletting." Bloodthirsty mobs "surged through the streets from one end of India to the other, the majority group in each area, Hindu or Muslim, slaughtering the defenseless minority without mercy in one of the most hideous periods of carnage of modern history.... Blood-crazed Hindus, or Muslims, ran through the streets with knives, beheading babies, stabbing women, old people." Grenier notes that "we will never know how many Indians were murdered by other Indians during the country's Independence Massacres, but almost all serious studies place the figure over a million, and some... go to 4 million."

So, what have we learned today by this comparison of the microleft and macroleft?

I guess I've learned that I don't really want my son associating with dangerous pacifists. Or maybe he should just beat them up, so they can get it through their thick skulls that pacifism doesn't work.

Many on the political left are so entranced by the beauty of their vision that they cannot see the ugly reality they are creating in the real world. --Thomas Sowell

Let's just wish the inferno out with cold and soggy thoughts!

I don't think so. No heroes up in the firmament, no civilization down here on earth.


walt said...

Sympathies to Mrs. G!

Re her friend: "She is horrified at the thought that he might become violent."

I had a lady friend with a young son, and she endlessly said "Yes!" to him. When I inquired about this, she explained, "I never want him to hear the word 'no'!"

She was not pleased with my opinion about this matter.

Gecko said...

Another Cindi Sheehan type Mom in the making draws the line in the sand. Pretty unkind to the kits. He will find sticks to be guns and swords.

hoarhey said...

"Get out of my way you peon, I'm out to save the world!"
I always enjoy when Michael Medved, at one time a devout leftist, speaks of his association with leftist politicians and their rude treatment of underlings. He has a particularly interesting story of how he was charged with babysitting Ted Kennedy to keep him from drinking before an important appearance.
He said it was one of the factors which began to change his mind about the true motivations of the Left.

jwm said...

A moral inversion layer has settled over much of Western Civilization, preventing the natural escape of idiocy and trapping it close to the ground where it has blinded huge sections of the populace.
Those afflicted are easy to spot. They fear global warming, second hand smoke, and Republicans. They recognize the clear and present danger of Christianity.
They march in solidarity with muslims because no group who wishes the destruction of the West can be all bad. They are immune to cognitive dissonance, therefore they can simultaneously march for abortion rights and Title IX enforcement while embracing those who would force women to wear the veil.
They will take to the courts to prevent a creche in the public square at Christmas while using taxpayer funds to install islamic prayer rooms in schools and other public places.
I'm not kidding her, I am worried.
I remember a sense of hope in '03, and '04. But the disloyal opposition never, ever rests. They have something that we do not. They have the fervor, the passion, and the faith of religious conviction in their positions on smoke and heat. For them the telos is immanent. The perfect world awaits. They believe they can reach it if they just crush enough of the opposition.
Our energy is divided- Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and render unto God that which is God's.
Perhaps the Alignment of Sides is complete. I'm afraid they have the numbers. But isn't that how it always has been? I don't know. I just don't know.
By the way, Bob- if you and Mrs. G want to see non-violent pacifism in action light up a cigarette within 100 yards of your earth hippie friend, and her kid. Just don't call 911 when she goes balistic and attempts homicide. You'll be arrested for child endangerment. No jury in California would ever convict a mother defending her child from second hand smoke.



jwm said...

I should preview.
I'm not kidding, here
And one signature is enough.
Great photo, Bob. I just got one notch less worried for the future.



walt said...

The song you quoted continues:

"Cut myself and see my blood
Wanna come home all covered in mud..."

Oh, the horror!

Sal said...

My daughter, lulled by the Disney Princess girliness of her eldest, and I have been reciting this little litany for months re: her second born-
"Why does he drum on everything?"
"He's a boy."
'Why does he hoot like a crazy monkey?"
"He's a boy."
"Why is the only thing he notices balls?"
"He's a boy."
"Why isn't he scared of anything except the vacuum?"
"He's a boy."
"Why does he sit in the bathtub holding his pee-pee in one hand and a bath toy in the other?"
'That's the only time it's free- and he's a boy."

It's not that she wants him to be Metrosexual Boy- it's just that the differences are SO striking.

Arthur Miller- another lovely leftist. See today's American Thinker blog.

hoarhey said...

And speaking of the military, I wanted to address Stu's question of possibly joining the Marines. My guess is that when the whoulda coulda shouldas come in the later years of your life, you'll not regret the decision to join but may regret the decision not to.
In joining, you'll experience an honor culture preserved through the ages and unseen in most of contemporary life; you'll also uncover currently unknown resourses within yourself which will stand you in good stead throughout the remainder of your days.

will said...

>>This fear of violence is an interesting projection . . . she is filled with a great deal of unconscious violence that she cannot express, so it comes out as a violent fear of violence<<

I think this also harks back to a previous OC topic, the modern leftist denial of suffering, of the necessity of accepting suffering. Acceptance - and the eventual sublimation - of one's own violent, instinctual tendencies necessarily means suffering. But to the materialist, personal suffering is a no-no.

In the case of mrs G's ex-friend, I also wouldn't dismiss the sheer power of fashionable-ness, the hipness of the faux-spirituality called "sensitivity". Going along with the crowd is always good for lending one a false sense of purpose and identity - that way, you can avoid the suffering involved in the task of really becoming a free-thinking individual.

Sal said...

Great toys for boys at Vision Forum.

debass said...

Don't worry. I've known a couple people like that. Their sons grow up and join the military.
It's unfortunate for the trauma they inflict on their children their chidren's friends.

stu said...

Thanks, Hoarhey. I do believe that not joining the marines would be a lifelong regret. I just wish I had realized this after graduating college instead of 4 years later.

Why did I have to waste my college years as a bleeding heart liberal atheist?!

I'm now waiste deep into my current life circumstances, which makes this an excrutiatingly difficult decision. This would be by far, the most extreme change in my life path that I have ever chosen. I wonder what the right decision is. And I wonder if I will be strong enough to make it.

I can think of many reasons to continue along my current path. But the allure of taking a few years to serve as a marine corps officer is very strong.

will said...

Stu -

As a wise friend of mine invariably says after I ask him a question re: a future course of action I'm considering taking: "Well . . . how do YOU feel about it?"

Meaning: take the time to meditate on it and you'll get the answer.

stu said...

The problem is, Will, I already know the answer. But there is a large part of me that doesn't like that answer at all.

jwm said...

I have a small handful of "I did its", a huge pile of "I wish I would have done its", and almost no "Glad I didn't do its".

I don't mean to be glib, here, but in ten years' time your decision will have fallen into one of those three categories. I wish you the best regardless of what path you choose. Our prayers will be with you in any case.


tsebring said...

Again, the subject of the evils of pacifism comes up! Yahooo!! If I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times; pacifism is evil, because it permits evil to exist and flourish (of course if you don't believe there IS any good and evil, I don't suppose that would make any difference). Pacifism is really cowardice in disguise; a person trying to rationalize their own fear of suffering and dying by pronouncing that suffering and dying wrong. Of course, as the Black Panthers and Weather Underground showed us, pacifists are perfectly willing to espouse violence when it is in the pursuit of their revolutionary goals; the ends justifying the means, one of the constantly repeating themes of murderous tyrants throught history. I have always believed, like Hobbes and Machiavelli did (and contemporaries like Robert Bly), that humans (specifically males) are basically warriors at heart, and when we attempt to unnaturally supress that instinct to the extent that Johnny isn't even allowed to have a cap gun, we risk having that violence be repressed and erupt somewhere else, like Virginia Tech. One of the great things the military does is to take that warrior instinct that all human males have, and teach the soldier to CONTROL it and couple it with rigid discipline, thereby turning the soldier into one who is a terror to his enemies and a friend for life to his comrades. (As an aside, I think that this is one of the reasons I don't believe that females should serve in front-line combat roles; they just don't, for the most part, have the necessary warrior instinct. But women serve in the Israeli army in combat,and do well, so what do I know??)

Unfortunately, besides the movie Ghandi, entertainment is full of examples of pacifism; movies like Billie Jack and The Mission attempt to elevate pacifism to almost religious levels (I must admit that, to me, the scene where Billy Jack kicks ass in that bar is the best scene in that film). Add to that all the war movies that make war look insane, like MASH, Platoon and Apocalypse Now. I suppose that films and TV that have a pacifist or anti-war theme are meant to be "morally ambiguous" and "thought-provoking", which is the hallmark of any lefty production. Lefties and pacificts are never interested in moral clarity, since they have none of their own. Go to any art cinema and you'll see how the Euro films treat sex and religion the same way.

I'ts good to know, though, that there are plenty of films that present war as the necessary means to defeat evil and as a path to glory for the meek but courageous nobody, such as the Lord of the Rings trilogy, the Star Wars double trilogy, Saving Private Ryan, The Dirty Dozen, The Guns of Navarone, Pearl Harbor, Midway, and countless other great non-ambigous war movies. Yes, I must admit that, like Ronald Reagan, I get a visceral sense of satisfaction when Rambo kicks ass on commies or when Chuck Norris and Stephen Segal do likewise to terrorists. Ditto with 24. No guilty feelings whatsoever.

BTW, wanna read a really bloody book full of wars and battles? Try the Bible, especially the Book of Joshua. This in NO WAY makes Christianity and Judaism equivalent to Jihadist Islam, which Christianne Amanapour has tried, in her nauseating PBS (where else??)documentary, to make a case for. The Israelites were commanded by God to annihilate the Caananites, and ONLY the Caananites, because they represented a real threat to the future kingdom of Israel, and because they posessed the land that God had promised the Israelites. The resemblences to Mohammed's opening jihads are only superficial. The muslims basically swept EVERYONE out of the way, and they saw "the promised land" as basically the entire known world. I say that mostly just to head off the moral equivalence argument that you know would be inevitable in such a discussion.

will said...

>>But there is a large part of me that doesn't like that answer at all<<

Wouldn't be worth it if there wasn't any psychological resistance. Seriously. It might help to think of it this way - the more the resistance, the more you know you're doing the right thing.

hoarhey said...

>>But there is a large part of me that doesn't like that answer at all<<

The Marines will teach you how to establish a beach-head and overcome that "large part".

Leslie Godwin said...

"I didn't get all of the details of the conversation, in part because Leslie was so stunned that she didn't remember all of it."

Hey, wait just a minute! I might not have the steel trap memory I had prior to becoming a mushy-brained mommy, but I just didn't want to bore poor Bob to tears with all of the gory details.

"But one thing the friend -- who is thoroughly secular and irreligious -- asked was "how can you be so spiritual and pro-military?" I think Leslie was so taken aback by the question that she hardly knew how to respond."

I did, too! I did, too! (I hope I'm not sounding a little defensive here.) I said, "Good vs. Evil. It's right in the bible."

I was a bit stunned, though. That is true. I really like this person and her son and have several very close friends (including Tristan's godparents) with different politics/religious views. So I didn't see this coming. In fact, I was over there to help her in any way I could because I knew she was having a really bad week and was in need of support.

This made me think of what Dennis Prager says about judging religions. He doesn't judge them by their holy books, but by the actions of their practitioners. I have always been a little doubtful about completely ignoring the holy books, but I do wish my friend had used this criteria when judging me.

Oh well. I am sorry to lose this friend, but I'm glad she told me straight out instead of leaving me wondering why we don't see much of her anymore.

I feel better now. On with the ACTUAL purpose of this post. I guess it wasn't really about me ;)

Mrs. G

ximeze said...

Stu said:"I just wish I had realized this after graduating college instead of 4 years later.

Why did I have to waste my college years as a bleeding heart liberal atheist?!"

Only took you 4 yrs in the real world to get a clue? I'm truly impressed. Many of us here took many times that number. You're way ahead of the pack already.

"This would be by far, the most extreme change in my life path that I have ever chosen."

So you're about 26-7? Ya likely get tired of fogies telling ya this, but I'm twice your age, 3 decades out of school & Stu, ya ain't seen nothin yet!

Hee Hee

Eleanor Deakin said...

I can't help wondering of this pacifist is pro-choice. That would be a laugh.

dilys said...

Stu could break down the decision, and start collecting information from a recruiter without enlisting instantly. Sounds like he's being "called," and if he is, like many things, it is urgent but there is no hurry.

I was never as nice or free of guile as Mrs. G. and thus would never have thought it safe to disclose the book topic in other than the general "having to do with the complications of national policy, some of the material that is coming out involving the military. No, I can't discuss it while it's in proposal." Ah, well, hindsight. May this all be turned to good.

Van said...

"Not only does she not allow him to play with evil things like toy guns, she would never even allow him to wear so much as a camouflage t-shirt."

Been out on the deck watching the navy's Blue Angels - their doing an air show near by, and our neighborhood has been their bank around spot the entire weekend for their shows. Absolutely awesome.

Her son will not thank her for keeping him from them. I wonder if she's thought of what kind of thing he'd need to become in order to thank her for it?

We experienced a similar situation from the other end of the spectrum years ago. A Mother of Ryan's school friend asked my wife "And so, are you a Christian? And by that she meant were we from the same fundie sect she belonged to. Carol told her she was raised Episcopalian... that didn't cut it. Her little boy was no longer allowed to speak or play with Ryan.

A difficult thing to explain to a 7 yrold, my sympathies trying to do so at FL's age.

Of course the stereotypical result came to pass - her darling little boy grew into a corner lurking goth clothed lost soul.

So sad, that parents think they can keep their children at arms length from life. The truly sad thing is that in the most awful way, they do succeed in doing so.

Leslie Godwin said...

There are two sides, I think. One is the one you've mentioned. You are drawn to the marines in what feels like a calling. You might always regret not serving if you don't heed the call.

But you could also be wishing you were the kind of person who had the calling to be a marine. And sort of romanticizing the whole thing, including the regret.

I don't mean that I know you so well, just that it struck me that there might be another side.

I also believe that there are not that many super-specific callings. My experience is that we're called to use certain skills or talents, or called to be used by God because we're in the right place at the right time for something.

In other words, if you reflect on your call to the Marines, you might find there are a dozen ways you could answer the call.

There are certain jobs that are very high callings, and being a Marine is definitely one of them. I hope you keep us posted as you figure it all out.

Bless you for thinking about that kind of service and sacrifice,
Mrs. G

Alan said...

Sorry for the off-topic post - but here's another story from the annals of "determining truth by poll"...

Jim said...


I retired from the Navy over twenty years ago. Since then I’ve run into countless men who are in their forties or more who, when the subject comes up and I tell them I was in for so such a long time, they always have this strange look in their eyes and they ask me one or two questions about my time but their look tells me they want to know more but are embarrassed to ask any more. They know the time has passed for them and they will never know what it is like, no mater how many movies or how much Discovery Channel they watch, they just can’t know what it is like but they want to so very much. It really makes me sad for them; they thought they were being so clever by getting out of serving.

Get your ass down to the recruiter, now maggot! (A little military lingo for ya)


Anonymous said...

Thanks for your thoughtful reply, Mrs. G. You've given me a lot to think about.

There are two main reasons why I want to become a marine corps officer.

1) I feel obligated to fight the emerging peril of islamism - not just verbally, but physically. As a member of a family that was largely annihilated in the holocaust, I learned from a very young age what happens when good peope do nothing in the face of evil, or when they waste time talking about ideals when they should be acting on them. I feel duty bound to act upon my beliefs instead of just talking a big game while others risk their lives in my stead.

2) Both of my grandfathers served in the military when they were young men, as did their fathers. Just a few generations ago, military service was a given for nearly all young men. I don't know what happened over the course of 50 years that this is no longer the case. But whatever happened, I believe military service is still a very important deveopmental phase in a man's life. By not serving, I would feel like I'm missing out on an important life experience.

That being said, the marine corps lifestyle does not innately appeal to me. But I do love all that the US marine corps stands for.

And while I wouldn't want to make a lifeong career out of it, I think it would be a very valuable way to spend a few years.

I have a feeling that time will sort this one out.

Thanks again, Mrs. G, for your kind and insightful remarks.


cousin dupree said...

Jodie Foster -- what a complete idgit:

"I don't believe that any gun should be in the hand of a thinking, feeling, breathing human being. Americans are by nature filled with rage-slash-fear.... violence corrupts absolutely."

cousin dupree said...

Legos Banned at Leftist School

jwm said...

Dennis Prager tells a story about forbidding his young son from playing with toy guns. Until he found the boy making a toy gun out of his toast.
Why did he need the gun?
To kill the monsters.
After that, Dennis Prager let the boy have his guns.


debass said...

"I don't believe that any gun should be in the hand of a thinking, feeling, breathing human being. Americans are by nature filled with rage-slash-fear.... violence corrupts absolutely."

Only the non thinking, unfeeling humans (criminals) should be armed. Americans like you (leftists) are by nature filled with rage. It's obvious that you are too stupid to defend yourself or your property. What's your address?

jwm said...

I had to quit the Lego article for health reasons.
You know- If the teachers would have bought more legos, then all the kids could have played. I guess that never occurred to them.

Some kinds of stupid come naturally, others take a lot of effort.


Leslie Godwin said...

Thank YOU for your kind remarks. I find it interesting that the men here think you should get going and sign up. I can't help but have my female/mom point of view.

I'm sure that time and contemplation will sort it out. I do see the compelling points that the guys here have made, though.

I am also glad that the large majority who serve come home healthy and the better for it. It's heartbreaking that any have to give their lives or health and their families lose a beloved family member, of course. But I think the Vietnam-fearing types who spread propaganda that hurts the moral of our troops and those who should honor them have made the case that it's even more dangerous for more of our troops than is the reality.

What a thoughtful and decent young man you are! I hope Tristan wrestles with important issues as you are doing when he is your age.

Mrs. G

Susannah said...

Another woohoo! for Vision Forum stuff. Knife-throwing! Yeah!

I find it hard to believe, given all the contrary research, that some mommies out there still attempt to emasculate their sons. They are doomed to fail. As many have noted, this woman's son will be building guns with his legos. What's she going to do then: ban legos?

(Oh. my. gosh. I wrote that before I saw Dupree's link!)

Leftists are such control-freaks, aren't they? They're even willing to decimate the Constitution just to gain complete control and micromanage everyone.

Like John Edwards' latest.

"I can't help wondering of this pacifist is pro-choice. That would be a laugh."


Here's another example of totally screwing over the people in your own life, while claiming to care "deeply about the environment and world issues."

Danish fan said...

Stu might find this article by Matt Pottinger about why he quit the Wall St.Journal Beijing bureau to join the USMC at 30 of some interest.Godspeed.

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

It's really a shame, and so...self-righteously smug, that this lady would end her friendship and the friendship of Tristan and her son, over an apolitical children's book designed to teach our children of the Modern Heroes of America.

I shudder to think what America would become if militant pacifists (now there's an oxymoron) had their way.

My condolences Mrs. G..

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

I would only add, if you do decide to be a Marine officer, make sure you really, really want to.

If you do join up, to say that it is difficult is an understatement, and you will do far more than you ever thought you can do, pushed to the limit, time and time again.
And, if you don't quit, you will exceed all of those preconceived limits.
That's the key: never give up! Ever!

And if you don't join, know there are many other ways to serve your country.
You would be no less a man if you don't join up.

I urge you to contemplate, meditate and pray about this decision you face.
Whatever you decide to do, go all out.
Godspeed to you, Stu!

If you have any other questions, don't hesitate to ask.
I'll be more than happy to help in any way I can, no matter what you decide to do. :^)

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Debass said:
Only the non thinking, unfeeling humans (criminals) should be armed. Americans like you (leftists) are by nature filled with rage. It's obvious that you are too stupid to defend yourself or your property. What's your address? "

Heh! That was funny (and true)!

Webutante said...

To want, demand, only peace and no war, is like demanding summer with no winter, soft without hard, cold but not hot, sunshine without rain.

And we'd best learn to make use of this earthly crucible containing all of the above, rather than just our idealistic one-sided wishing, if we are to face and live and grow up here.

Me, I like fishing and always catching! But alas, it's those days of getting skunked that are as useful if not more so that teach me just as much.

Sorry to know of your "loss." Ever notice how it's the liberals who usually cut it off, and then accuse (project) conservatives of being ao biased?

Mizz E said...

This week, Slate is publishing three exclusive excerpts from " Dead Certain: The Presidency of George W. Bush " by Robert Draper.

"When you're responsible for putting a kid in harm's way, you better understand that if that kid thinks you're making a decision based on polls—or something other than what you think is right, or wrong, based upon principles—then you're letting that kid down. And you're creating conditions for doubt. And you can't give a kid a gun and have him doubt whether or not the president thinks it's right, and have him doubt whether or not he's gonna be suppportive in all ways. And you can't learn that until you're the guy sitting behind the desk." - GWBush

Magnus Itland said...

Pacifism is a perfectly viable option as long as you deal with sufficiently civilized people. Unfortunately, someone has to kill all the barbarians first.

templeoflove said...

Jesus was a pacifist. "Turn the other cheek."

Mizz E said...

“Thou shalt not kill,” has been frequently, but implausibly, misconstrued as a prohibition on self-defense.

It is a mitzvah to rescue a person pursued by a killer, even if it means causing death to the pursuer.

julie said...

Also, the commandment was originally "Thous shalt not murder," which is a very important distinction.

Bugs said...

...she doesn't want her son to have any knowledge of, or contact with, things military.

She should have named him Percivale instead of Tristan...

Bugs said...

templeoflove - Jesus is God. It's not like you can really hurt Him.

You, on the other hand, are emphatically not God, and someone can really hurt you. I think Jesus will forgive you if we take imperfect measures to deal with the imperfect world in which you have been deposited.

If being a martyr makes you feel better about yourself, however - go for it. I'll stay alive and admire your holiness from this side of the grave.

Anonymous said...

I shudder to think what America would become if militant pacifists (now there's an oxymoron) had their way. -- USS Ben

One generation of "Bread and Circuses!", then ten thousand generations of "ALLAHU AKBAR!"

LarryD said...

To Stu:

I'm ex Air Force myself and have nothing against the other branches of service. But you might want to see exactly what kind of missions the Army and the Marines are doing in this war. My impressions is that the Army gets to work on valuable tasks in addition to combat (not that the Army has any shortage of combat) more so than the Marines. I could be mistaken though.

Anyway, I don't know exactly what you feel called to do, but check em both out.

Changing subjects - before his arrest, Jesus told his disciples to arm themselves. One said "Master, here is a sword.", and He replied "It is enough."

Turning the other cheek is how to deal with someone who is being a jerk, not someone trying to kill you.

Re the Lefts treatment of underlings. I vaguely remember a quote from some where "A man's character is revealed in how he treats the help." Something like that.

Anonymous said...

So why weren’t the lessons learned from the post-British occupation mayhem effectively applied to post-Saddam Iraq?

Susannah said...

"A man's character is revealed in how he treats the help." Something like that.

Does anyone else remember that fascinating article about the tailor to several recent presidents, and his impression of them? This isn't exactly it; it was written differently, but his favorite presidents were Reagan and Bush II.

Anonymous said...

“The German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history. The tyrants of old never went so mad as Hitler seems to have gone. And he is doing it with religious zeal. For he is propounding a new religion of exclusive and militant nationalism in the name of which any inhumanity becomes an act of humanity to be rewarded here and hereafter. The crime of an obviously mad but intrepid youth is being visited upon his whole race with unbelievable ferocity. If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified. But I do not believe in any war. A discussion of the pros and cons of such a war is therefore outside my horizon or province. But if there can be no war against Germany, even for such a crime as is being committed against the Jews, surely there can be no alliance with Germany. How can there be alliance between a nation which claims to stand for justice and democracy and one which is the declared enemy of both?"
- published in Harijan, November 26, 1938

GM Roper said...

Dr. Bob and Mrs. G.,

Thank you both for one of the most intelligent posts and series of comments I've read in a long, long time. Every minute I spent reading both the post and the comments were well worth it. I picked up on the "Moral Retardation" concept and expanded it a little (though I could never do as well as Dr. Bob) in Moral Retardation & Islamophobia. Of course, Dr. Bob always has an honored place in my series Brief Politico-Therapies: A Tour of the Psych Bloggers