From Apathy to Dependency

War has been the determining factor in the rise and fall of civilizations throughout history. From the Old Testament times until the middle of the 20th century, they were largely dependent on the number of soldiers, their courage and skills in battle, and the supremacy of the weapons technology. A great number of victories were the result of courageous men willing to die for their country, rallying their fellow men to victory against uneven odds. There were codes of conduct for the treatment of captives, and honor to the bravery of the men of both the victor and the vanquished. The technology of warfare as it has matured throughout the 20th century has removed the honor from the battlefield.

WWII leveraged technology that would forever change warfare, mainly aircraft, submarines and aircraft carriers. Hitler’s infamous “blitzkrieg” (lightning war), relied heavily on fighter bombers supporting ground troops, and his fast moving armies swept across Europe. He conquered most of Europe, threatened Britain, and drew all the nations of the world into the conflict (with a little help from Japan, of course). The battles in Europe against Germany were mainly land battles fought with infantry and artillery relying heavily on the courage of the individual in the prosecution of the battle. The battles to control the pacific islands were, bloody, horrific slaughters of men on both sides.

Ironically, the battle that led to the allied victory in the Pacific was the battle of Midway. A battle fought between aircraft carriers, the soldiers being pilots; very few of the total sailors of the two opposing fleets were involved in the actual combat. I’m not implying that the victory did not depend on great courage of the pilots involved, and the gunners defending their ships. Flying into a hailstorm of defensive gunfire or manning a gun facing an incoming plane about to drop a bomb in your lap is most certainly harrowing. The decisive technology of Naval combat was the aircraft carrier, and the Japanese fleet lost four in a matter of a few hours, forever changing the course of the war.

As technology improved, war could be prosecuted from greater distances. The final victory came over Japan when the B29s dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, breaking the will of the Japanese to fight on. As with all conquering, victory is not complete until the vanquished has lost its will to fight. This new technology would end the attempts to gain world control with soldiers and armies. To achieve world domination in a world where a World War would certainly result in the destruction of all living things, it would have to be done ideologically, via the world economy.

The end of WWII marked the pinnacle of America. Heady from our victories abroad, we began to turn our backs on the foundational principals of our nation. Our economy was strong, the world was at peace, and we had emerged strong in our manufacturing power and prosperity abounded. But many of the wives who had gone to work out of necessity during the war enjoyed the freedom and additional income and were reticent to return to the role of housewife. This began the deterioration of the nuclear family, which had devastating consequences to our society as the children born in the baby boom would question the roots of our society a couple decades later.

As America grew rich its people became complacent, believing that the prosperity they enjoyed would always be part of their way of life, and they needed do nothing to preserve it. But the world at large was not at peace. The cold war frightened everyone as we realized we could be vaporized in a matter of minutes and that nations diametrically opposed to our way of life had the power to initiate it. It did little to inspire our generation to follow our leaders, who with a few exceptions were corrupt professional politicians, bearing little resemblance to representing the people as our founding fathers had intended.

I developed a strong healthy fear of government growing up. The Kennedy assassinations, the riots in Detroit in ’67, the bungled Viet Nam war, Watergate and the ensuing trials and revelations (or non-revelations as the case may be) did much to reinforce that. The hostage crisis in Iran and Carter’s bungled attempt to free them, along with the realization that Ross Perot sent commando’s in and got them out himself, did much to strengthen my fear of the potential of the radicals in the middle east, and the weakness of the democrat philosophy to stand up to it.

Carter’s economic policies which created 21% mortgage rates, 12.5% unemployment and enacted some of the first “green” legislation (the mandate for catalytic converters) which nearly bankrupted the auto industry gave me a strong fear of socialist ideas. The following administration under Reagan, showed me how limiting government taxes and spending would foster a strong economy. Clinton benefitted from his predecessors wisdom, but did little else than reinforce my disdain for dishonesty in Washington. Bush was handed a sagging economy, the first successful terrorist strike on our soil, and responded in what I believe he thought was the only appropriate way. The protracted war put a drag on our economy, and the reckless spending on both sides of the isle set of the financial crisis we enjoy today.

Although I managed to maintain a healthy fear of government as our constitution intended, I fear my peers did not. Solving this financial crisis with spending, and believing that it was not cause by the government itself is willful disregard for the truth. It has been said that Satan’s greatest accomplishment was convincing the unsuspecting that he didn’t exist. The politicians in Washington would have us not look at the root cause of the housing crisis, because if we do, we find government pressure on banks to lend money to unqualified borrowers and face fines for not doing so, and Fanny and Freddie stuffing the coffers of liberal democrats campaign funds.

The spending bill just passed will give an average of $13.00 per week to those who receive the welfare funds. How can that be called “stimulus”?

I quoted Alexander Tyler writing about the fall of the Athenian Republic in an earlier post, but it needs to be repeated here.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage."

I fear we are passing from apathy to dependency. And I don’t look forward to the last phase.