When Dictators Fall, Who Rises?
One month before the invasion of Iraq, Riah Abu el-Assal, a Palestinian and the Anglican bishop of Jerusalem at the time, warned Tony Blair, "You will be responsible for emptying Iraq, the homeland of Abraham, of Christians."
The bishop proved a prophet. "After almost 2,000 years," writes the Financial Times, "Iraqi Christians now openly contemplate extinction. Some of their prelates even counsel flight."
The secular despot Saddam Hussein protected the Christians. But the U.S. liberation brought on their greatest calamity since the time of Christ. Scores of thousands of those Iraqi Christians fleeing terrorism and persecution after 2003 made their way to Syria, where they received sanctuary from President Bashar Assad.
Now, as the FT and Washington Post report, the Christians of Syria, whose forebears have lived there since the time of Christ, are facing a pogrom should the Damascus regime fall.
Christians are 10 percent of Syria's population, successful and closely allied to the minority Alawite regime of the Assad family. Said one Beirut observer, "Their fear is that if the regime falls to the Sunni majority, they will be put up against the same wall as the Alawites."
For decades, notes the Post, the Assad regime "has protected Christian interests by enforcing its strictly secular program and by curbing the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood."
Bashar's father, Hafez al-Assad, slaughtered perhaps 20,000 followers of the brotherhood after they began a campaign of bombings and terror and attempted an uprising in Hama in 1982. Hafez al-Assad rolled up his artillery and leveled the city.
Observing the toll of dead protesters—more than 100 this past weekend, more than 200 overall, the work of police, snipers and agents of the regime—it is hard to summon up any sympathy for Bashar Assad. And if his regime were to fall, that would eliminate a patron of Hamas and Hezbollah and a close ally of Iran in the Arab world.
But before he embraces the Syrian revolution, President Barack Obama ought to consider, as President George W. Bush did not, what happens to Arab Christians when a long-repressed Muslim majority comes to power.
In Iraq, liberated Shiites used their newfound freedom to cleanse Baghdad of Sunnis while al-Qaida arrived and went straight after the Christians. In Syria, it would be a Sunni majority rising if Bashar and the Alawites were to fall.
What would that mean for Syria's Christians, for peace, for us?
Since 1973, even when clashes have occurred and wars have been fought in Lebanon between Israelis and Syria or its proxies, the Assad government has maintained the truce on the Golan Heights.
Would a Sunni-dominated Syria do the same?
With the fall of the Mubarak regime in Egypt have come Islamist attacks on Coptic Christians. How will the Copts fare if the Muslim Brotherhood wins the September election and writes Shariah into Egyptian law?
In The Price of Revolution a half-century ago, D.W. Brogan inventoried the costs of the revolutions that so often intoxicate secular Western man.
The French Revolution led to regicide, the September Massacres, the Terror, the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Catholics in the Vendee region of France, and almost two decades of Napoleonic wars.
The abdication of Czar Nicholas II led to the dictatorship of Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, who would effect the murder of 1,000 times more victims than did the Spanish Inquisition in 300 years. And among the Bolshevik murder victims were the czar, his wife and his five children.
Fifteen years after the hated Kaiser, ruler of the Second Reich, abdicated, a proud veteran of his army, Adolf Hitler, established a Third Reich.
No altar-and-throne regime ever compiled a record of horror to match those of the French and Russian revolutions—or those of Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro and Pol Pot.
When the Shah of Iran fell, within a year we had the Ayatollah Khomeini.
Americans have welcomed the "Arab Spring." Yet we should be forewarned that among those liberated when dictators fall is the sort of men that Edmund Burke described:
Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites. ... Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere, and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.
Americans, who incarcerate 2.3 million of their own citizens, 90 percent of them males, are surely aware of the truth Burke spoke.
And across the Middle East, there are millions of "intemperate minds" that would use the freedom and power democracy provides to majorities to suppress or eradicate their long-hated rival minorities.
If one-man, one-vote democracy across the Maghreb and Middle East is almost certain to strengthen the Muslim Brotherhood and to liberate Islamists to persecute Christians, why are we for it?
When did this idol of modernity called democracy, in which none of our fathers believed, become a golden calf we all must fall down and worship?
COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM
Entries(RSS)
Is Syria the target of another color coded revolution or is the goal to weaken Assad as much as possible, without reaching a tipping point? A humbled Syria that exits Lebanon, but allows the Alawites, Druze and Christians to keep power in Syria may be the end game. The Russians at Tartus limit how far the West will push.
An excellent column.
Democracy is a chimera. All it says is that 51% of the voters will rule. It says nothing about how that rule should be exercised. I would prefer living free under a dictator or a junta than living constrained by the whims of 51% of my brethren. I don't care what the form of government is so long as I am free. But democracy is one of the worst forms and is easily subverted. It's no accident that totalitarian movements easily use democratic mechanisms to destroy democracy.
An excellent article, indeed. My only quibble is Pat's neglect of the huge increase of women in prison. 10% is alot of Christians in Syria and the high percentage of women incarcerated in America is also. Briefly, for the United States....
"the female population in prison has risen an astonishing 757 percent from 1977 to 2005. (much higher in the last four years) It leaves the United States with the distinction of having the largest prison population and the highest rate of incarceration in the world."
The number of women giving birth in prisons has jumped significantly, and not all prison facilities are equipped or prepared to handle a growing baby population.
It is not uncommon for women in prison to discover that they are both pregnant and HIV infected.
Most U.S. facilities allow newborn babies to stay with their mothers from 12 to 18 months. Some do not.
Now, back to the plight of ancient Christian communities in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Lebannon and Palestine.
Justin Raimondo has written an excellent piece today on the complexity of Syria. He points out Sunni former Baath leader Abdul Halim Khaddam has set up an office in Washington DC, looking for foreign assistance. The Syrian first family has deep British roots, it will be interesting to see if William Hague throws them under the bus. My only quibble with Raimondo is he suggests the SSNP may be the armed gang referred to by the Sana News Agency, without a hint of proof. His assertion that the SSNP is not rooted in reality is spot on however.
Barak Obama doesn't care about the plight of Middle Eastern Christians (and might, given his track record, not be competent to do anything for them anyway if he did). Neither does anyone else in Washington. There is a reason why the mainstream journals say so little about them: Middle Eastern Christians are an inconvenient presence, for their conservation would require drastic re-engineering of the U.S.'s post-Cold War geopolitical strategy in a direction that does not readily benefit the bankrollers of D.C., Wall Street and the A.P. It is true that if they did come up more often, Born Again, Fundamentalist and Pentecostal leaders would paint them non-Christians under the pretext of their refusal to adopt a perverse pseudo/Arminianism, but America's continued diplomatic idiocy would completely lose the already very shaky toleration of Catholic and conservative mainline Protestant voters. So far as America's Committee of Public Salvation is concerned, that simply must not be allowed to happen.
The Christians of the Middle East are often nationalists who seek to strengthen their respective countries. General Michel Aoun of Lebanon quickly comes to mind. Naturally, that makes them fair game for the Empire.
Great column and good answers. America's Free Church Christians probably don't know any Arab Christians. And also because Maronite Catholics and Antiochian Orthodox who won't talk gibberish and fall backwards, don't count.
Foggy Bottom analysts and other K Street spivs simply loathe Christians as much as their Israeli counterparts do.
NGPM,
I am a sycophant of yours in so far as I rarely agree with anyone about anything (other than the weather)but I tend to agree with you about most things. In fact I agree with everything you have written in post #6. I even tend to believe Pat Buchanan agrees with you but too much of a Patriot to admit such a thing in public.
Speaking of incarceration statistics, I chuckle a little when I hear an American President condemn "human rights abuses" in a Middle Eastern or East Asian country.
Syria has a far smaller percentage of its population in prison than United States. Even Saudi Arabia has far lower incarceration rates. So does China. So does Russia.
In "liberal" Massachussetts, an elderly person will be dragged away by police, because he happened to be growing the wrong kind of medicinal plants there without a license. In no other rich western industrial country do we see so many people imprisoned for so little.
#10,
Mr. Sanjay,
Sometimes I wonder if the use of incarceration as the primary means of punishing criminals is nefarious in itself. Putting criminals together for long periods of time can only make them better criminals. Furthermore, the temptation to exploit the prisoners for economic gain is overwhelming.
It would be far better for the majority of criminal penalties to consist of fines, lashings/canings, or some combination thereof.
I do get your point about prison for economic gain. A governor of a state may find private prisons lobbying and funding his election, and he may reward them with arbitrary laws to bring in more people to be arrested for them.
In my view, when you have a democratic society with a tabloid media that exaggerates crime, puts the microscope on it, and makes it seem like it's a pervasive phenomenon, you almost always have an opportunistic politician trying to win votes with harsh laws. In that sense, a democracy like America need be no less a police state than Syria.
Indeed, Syria doesn't even have humiliating check-up procedures for domestic transportation.
The moment complaints about TSA procedures were released, cartoonists across the world used their democratic right and released cartoons in which turbaned terrorists were also protesting against TSA procedures. To think hundreds of cartoonists are complicit in ensuring that elderly women and young children are given degrading treatment in public. At least Syria's state-owned media sticks to mundane, uncontroversial news and stops there...
I would be interested to hear Dr. Wilson's comments about our cultures "crime and punishments". I have a deep suspicion that we are still suffering the effects of Puritan theology towards sin and iniquity,( as something that must be srubbed clean away from a thriving culture)) but I could be wrong. One thing I am certain of is when a culture begins to rely solely on the positive law to hold itself together as a people, that culture is in very deep trouble in terms of longevity.
#7 Jonathan is right to point out Maronite Catholic Michel Aoun who has outreached to the Shia. Why? In 2000, Ehud Barak threw the mostly Catholic South Lebanon Army under the bus, most were killed or received decade long prison sentences. Now, Hezbollah controls the border. As NGPM has pointed out, the perverse Arminian strain in American politics could care less. There are no innocents in the Palestine-Israeli conflict, but a concern for historical Christians needs more authors than Buchanan and Dr.Trifkovic.
The Evangelicals don't think that Catholics or Orthodox people are worth saving. It is all about Israel. They will sacrifice their own children and anyone else in this crusade to control the Middle East. Not for Christianity, like in the real Crusades but so tha there can be an Ersetz Israel and that the Temple can be rebuilt. Christians and Muslims have no place in the new Israel.
I did construction work in a lot of prisons over the years and found at least 50% of the people inside were nonviolent felons. I think most of these could be moved out and a lot of money could be saved.
Mr. Marino,
Why is it that evangelicals dislike Catholics? As a Catholic I do not necessarily dislike them. Jimmy Swaggart seems to always insinuate derogatory comments about Roman Catholics in his prayer meetings but in amy ways I don't mind him so much and often like the folks who listen to him regularly. Also Billy Graham who I also think did some good work before his death.
Yesterday I was speaking with a woman about home schooling while my children were practicing in a local play, Oliver Twist. She was convinced of her work and I was listening with great symapthy. We had common friends who were Baptist and who had also home schooled their six childen. She seemed very interested in our conversation until she asked me where I attended Church.
Now it is true I find some of their national leaders like Ralph Reed to be suspicious characters and of no lasting importance to the remnant of Christian culture just as I am sure they must have their suspicions of Popery, Hocus Pocus, rosary beads, idol shops and all the rest. But I do share their belief in pondering the scriptures, the ten commandments, baptism, marriage, educating ones children, care for sick and dieng neighbors, to bury the dead, charity towards widows and orphans, and other such things.
I have always thought the first principle of sociology is that people do not get along. But other than this common fact, what are some of the other reasons?
#17,
Mr. Nicoletti,
According to this French documentary, Hezbollah largely refrained from reprisals against former SLA members and that gesture contributed further to its substantial popularity.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1312140417688176823#
Fortified by alliance with Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement as well as with a slew of left-wing nationalist and pro-Syrian parties, Hezbollah's position in Lebanese politics appears impenetrable. I think that Hezbollah's primary political weakness cannot be found in its Lebanese record, but in the fact that its Iranian alliance requires it to walk an extremely fine line on the situation in Iraq. One the one hand, Hezbollah must oppose the US military occupation of that country. On the other hand, because Iranian complicity makes that US occupation possible, Hezbollah must forbid its members from going to Iraq to help the resistance forces there.
I stand corrected, only the upper leadership of the SLA was targeted, literally. Aoun's outreach to Hezbollah is still a significant minority position among the Maronites. The fall from dominance has been hard for the Maronites. The Greek Orthodox are far more likely to be pan-Syrian and pan-Arab nationalist in groups like the SSNP.
Keep Patrick J. Buchanan is your prayers. His upcoming biography by The Guardian's Timothy Stanley is likely to be a hit piece. Mr Buchanan once summed up what happened to American Catholicism in the 1970's with a single name: "Jean Jadot."
Once should beware of Greeks bearing gifts and Brit Guardian reporters in pink shirts.
Mr. Sanjay - I think you need to be careful when comparing incarceration rates. In addition to taking composition of the population into account, you need to look at who is being incarcerated and why they are being incarcerated. I suspect that if you could isolate various population factors to measure their contribution to the incarceration rate, you would find that diversity is not a strength.
"...far more likely to be pan-Syrian and pan-Arab nationalist in groups like the SSNP."
An accurate observation. It's pretty much clear that the re-establishment of a Near Eastern Caliphate, frustrating Western imperial depredations, would be the greatest boon imaginable to Near Eastern Christians. It was the interest of the caliphs to protect and cultivate the native Christians as a sort of middle-class urban population and as loyal village farmers. The secular West's imposition of liberalism exasperated the Mohammedans and deprived the Christians of the ancient privileges given to them by royal patrons. The Armenians know this and have been ably ingratiating themselves with Iran and the Arabs. The Americaniser Saakashvili believes a bundle of EU flags from Brussels will change the geographical reality of his nation and remove the need of the friendship of adjacent Near Eastern countries.*
*On this point of the woe of the self-deceived I turn your attention to the suspiciously modernist "Alternative Right" organs, run by irreligious and unscholarly urban yuppies, uprooted and unmarried, who rant about Christian 'universalism' or backsliders from 'the movement' despite the fact that they are political analysts or think-tank boffins who live comfortably in cosmopolitan yuppie Washington DC. This 'movement' is going nowhere.
In the 1990s one had a Near Eastern geopolitical fautline with Israel, Turkey and Azerbaijan on one side and Iran, Greece, Syria (all backing the PKK to varying extents) and Armenia on the other.
Today, Armenia has maintained its friendship with Iran while cautiously exploring reconciliation with Turkey. The Turks have pursued normalization of relations with Armenia even at the expense of upsetting their Azeri cousins, perhaps knowing that, while Baku may pout, pipeline politics will require that it conform to Ankara's wishes sooner or later.
This dynamic, combined with Turkish-Syrian and Turkish-Iranian reconciliation, has meant that Israel's diplomatic options in the region are increasingly restricted to the nutty Sunni fundamentalist potentates of the Arabian Peninsula (they were made for each other...) and their old Hashemite partners.
Regarding Saakashvili in Georgia, for a petty satrap he does retain the good sense to maintain friendly ties with Turkey and Iran. The problem is his policy of confrontation with Russia. The Kremlin might decide on a more permanent solution to his antics one day, and it is not at all certain how much his Turkish and Iranian neighbours would be willing or able to save his skin.
if you could isolate various population factors to measure their contribution to the incarceration rate, you would find that diversity is not a strength.
Yes, the numbers are not favorable for diversity, open borders, liberations from reality, rugged individualists and other revolutionary notions the governess taught Mr. Russell.
Mr. Van Sant, you are counting beans.
Look at any demographic representation in a small group. And then look at demographic representation in total population. Every demographic group will be "over-represented" or "under-represented".
Neither does this satisfy the politically correct claim that minorities are "discriminated against" nor does it satisfy polemic claims that some ethnic groups have "tendencies" or "common traits". It really just means nothing.
Both sides fail to do simple math. The mathematical odds of perfect representation of any group in any organization are minimal. To show you the math, if we had to take 5 men and 5 women, and we needed 2 people for a task, then the odds of perfect representation (1 man and 1 woman) are...*calculates*...25/45 = 2/9. Meaning that even in a fair, non-discriminatory world where women are exactly the same as men, the odds of one man and one woman being selected out of this group of ten is 2 times out of 9.
There are more original Asians than Ashkenazi in the Israeli army. What does it mean? Nothing. There are more Russians or Russian-origin people in certain American math departments. What does it mean? Nothing.
Yes, it's all an accident.
Than you Prateek. I feel much better now knowing it was all an accident. Does this math suggest also that we can simply print more money to help strengthen the falling dollar?
The mathematical odds of perfect representation of any group in any organization are minimal.
HOW TO LIE WITH STATISTICS
Lesson 453: Standard Deviation
In no non-uniform population can a randomly chosen example be expected to be equal to the mean or median. The Standard Deviation is the numerical expression of the likelihood of finding a random element close to the mean of the set.
Most people are unaware of this concept. Therefore, it suffices to point out the first fact:
In no non-uniform population can a randomly chosen example be expected to be equal to the mean or median
... while neglecting to mention standard deviation.
*end of lesson*
Mr. Sanjay, I often enjoy your perspectives but as one who works with tests, statistics and demographics for a living I have to remark that I am more than a little scandalized that a reasonably intelligent man from such a diverse country as your own could argue that variance and deviation within a set of humans is meaningless.
Robert: appreciate your kind words. I do think you are right about Mr. Buchanan, but he has enough admirers that it is worthwhile to point out the gaps that he is afraid to trod and thereby complement his analyses.
I agree with you about Pat Buchanan but I do wish he would form an exploratoy committee for President to simply participate in the first few rounds of televised debates. The GOP would need to either rearrange the debate format (which would provide us with definitive information about who their candidate will be) or it would give Mr. Buchanan a chance to reiterate the costs of unnecessary wars in the Middle East, the costs of exporting our manufacturing base, the costs of open borders, the IMF, NAFTA, GATT and all the other difficult issues the duopoly loves to ignore in favor of Libyan Al-Qaeda rebels, Donald Trump, and federal funding for Planned Parenthood. In other words, it would add a touch of reality or gravitas to the current debate between anarchists on the one hand and devout socialists on the other.
"Look at any demographic representation in a small group. And then look at demographic representation in total population. Every demographic group will be “over-represented” or “under-represented”."
Yes, and twice two equals five.
"Both sides fail to do simple math. The mathematical odds of perfect representation of any group in any organization are minimal. To show you the math, if we had to take 5 men and 5 women..."
With respect Mr Sanjay (and I seriously mean that I'm not insulting you), your pretended mathematical refutation does not demonstrate the error of particular conclusions from general observations but rather that in periods of extreme decay (i.e. now) abstract reasoning and absurdity are inseparable.
Contrary to the figments of modern European man's stupor, wisdom is the highest good in life not liberty (certainly not of the ignoble 'individual liberty' kind); life is not about reconciling irreconcilable interests or accommodating incorrigible and alien disaffected factions (the bourgeoisie's ideal). The State does not owe lesser persons within its territory reasons for prohibiting them from doing whatever they want. This is a transitory existence (so I believe) and we are called upon to show courage and fidelity.
Yes, it’s all an accident.
Life is hardly a series of rational calculations or fretting about minute exceptions to the well-tried prejudices posterity receives as counsels from the past.
PJB mentions the "Anglican bishop." Pope Leo XIII concluded negatively on their ordinations, but Mr. Rowan Williams is a true scholar, who wrote a great book on Dostoevsky. Yesterday's news that the A.of C. blocked reform of the Act of Settlement of 1701, sounds like a really bad episode of "Yes, Prime Minister." One can have a British king who is an atheist or worships GAIA or steals another man's wife, but not one who is a Roman Catholic.
What Roman Catholic in his right mind would consider such a title in these times? If it were put to a test these days I suspect neither the Royal family or royal descendants of Bourbon could gather more than a plurality against the decendants of Aga Kahn.
To Mr. Nicoletti at #19. Tim Stanley's published pieces on American politics and on PJB are quite fair-minded, given the perspective he was coming from, and as a recent Catholic convert, Stanley actually is quite sympathetic to Buchanan. If it is a hit piece, you all have me to blame, since after talking to Stanley and reviewing his record I badgered PJB I badgered Pat into giving him an interview. I've been fooled before by far lesser men--the odious BM Dougherty, for example--but I am pretty confident that Stanley will do his best.
Stanley can do no worse to Pat than his friends inside the GOP have already done to him.
Not to deviate the discussion too much, but the point was this.
If there are 70 male teachers and 30 female teachers in one school, and 20 male teachers and 80 female teachers in another school, both may have happened due to pure random chance.
There need not be any explanation for it. It would say nothing about whether women are or are not more preferred at one school than at another.
They once found a gravesite in Israel, which was marked with the Aramaic names of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph. What are the odds that it was not the real Jesus? After it was referred to a group of anthropologists and all others, it was decided to be NOT that of the one famous Jesus. It was an unlikely event, but it was deemed true nonetheless that the graves in Galilea just happened to be of another family with the same names.
Mr. Robert @16..."Also Billy Graham who I also think did some good work before his death."
Happy to report that Billy Graham is alive and well, 92 years young. And I agree that he has done good work.
"Why is it that evangelicals dislike Catholics?"
If it makes you feel any better, I am one evangelical who does not at all dislike Catholics. Many of my favorite people and authors are Catholics. Not to split hairs but all Christians are, in the final analysis, evangelical, in the sense that all Christians carry around with us the good news of Jesus Christ. Otherwise, how could St. Francis of Assisi say, "Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words." ? But I realize that when you refer to evangelicals, you mean the tragic fact that many self-described Evangelicals have actually hijacked that word and foisted upon it all kinds of unfortunate and anti-Biblical components such as an uncharitable view of Catholics. I do not deny it, though I do regret it.
Tim Stanley, in an SPLC/ADL style, yesterday in his Daily Telegraph blog ripped a Texas Libertarian into total shreds for pointing out the House of Windsor is in fact the German House of Saxe-Colburg and has supported eugenics in the past. Stanley's style is to paint a picture of an absurd conspiracy theory, rather than to debunk facts of history.
Yes, I agree with you. Vulgar popularizations of anything good is the worse thing that can ever happen to it. In matters of faith and morals better to stay local with what is known than to expand to universals that are known but manifested differently among differnt people. "If you are not for me, you are against me" is not the same thing as (but similar to), "If you are not against me, you are for me."
A Bishop,however, once told a friend of mine that he was neither for him or against him. Which is closer to my understanding of Nirvana than anything Christian. But I digrees...They have a difficult job. Thanks again
"the House of Windsor is in fact the German House of Saxe-Colburg"
Dr. Wilson has pointed this out for years. He has also suggested at times that the GOP has a similar problem in that what it is and what it claims are quite differnt.
I am glad Dr. Fleming pointed out Tim Stanley is a new Catholic convert. In jest, Stanley calls his faith "Buddha hugging voodoo."Blah. He was a Labour candidate for MP in 2005 and despises Ayn Rand nonsense. Perhaps he is an example of what is known as "Red Toryism." He claims he voted for Huckabee the huckster at CPAC, which would be inconsistent with his anti-war stance.
@33: I daresay that may be the reason Buchanan has foregone further presidential bids. It is also possible he understands that a prince must accept the people as he finds them, and that in modern America he would find little that he would like to preside over (i.e., the country he grew up in).
Regarding the King of England, I am not in agreement, first of all, because proper monarchies do not owe their positions to democratic plebiscites (however happy one may rightfully be about the case of Liechtenstein), and secondly, because despite Prince Charles's eccentricities with the ladies (and how many monarchs or any other types of heads of state, besides Louis IX and Louis XVI of France, have NOT had extramarital trysts??), I admire the British royal family, Prince Charles included. I think that if the "democratic" British and French political classes cared half as much about their respective countries as Charles does, we'd be outstanding. Take for example the incident of the Prince of Wales Institute for classical architecture. (As for Diana, the real tragedy of the marriage was as much as her victimhood the way her conduct revealed a modern young girl totally unfit to have become royalty.)
With respect to incarceration, it is sad that under states' three-strikes-your-out-laws people are being sent to prison for stealing a pound of cheese or a ham sandwich, yet real criminals like GW Bush and Dick Cheney enjoy comfortable retirements at the taxpayers' expense.
Dickens would have had a field day with our "new" America.
#40 NGPM
I did not mean to denigrate the Royal family. In fact it is perhaps a shame that all we Yanks have is our military for formal occassions. I did not think, however, the german lineage of Windsor was worth disputing.
#41 Miles Gloriosus,
Agreed. We should a least reinstitute the draft so we could collect our conscience again about stupid and needless wars and the men who fight them.
The following pre-battle letter, which is as true today as when it was written,illustrates the nature of why every war should be as just as humanly possible. And why alleged Christians like George Wiegel should quit carrying water for neo-cons who never met a war they didn't like but refused to fight.
'I know you will never forget or let the dear children do so. I am prepared for death and hope that God will have forgiven me all my sins. My desire for life – so that I may see and be with you again –could not be greater, but I have only done what every man was bound to do in our country’s need. It has been a great consolation to me that you approved my action; the sacrifice was really yours. May you be consoled and rewarded by our dear Lord.'
"Seven hundred and sixty members of the battalion engaged in the successful assault. When relieved, 70 walked back. Colonel Malone was not one of them."
In as much as the female branch of the species is, if anything, less able, in Burke's phrase , to "put moral chains upon their own appetites", it is only fear of organized feminism, and a misplaced vestige of chivalric feeling, that keeps the percentage of them in jail so undeservedly, unjustly low. Looking out my window at any time of any day I can spot numbers of females in a proportion that would be, I'm sure, far higher than 10% of the total, who manifestly should be behind bars. Count up the welfare double and triple dippers, the falsified documenters, income hiders, identity thieves, identity fabricators, (births that never happened, children who don't exist) shoplifters, insurance frauds, check kiters, alimony grifters, dealers, fences, prostitutes, and yes, robbers, burglars and murderers in any hundred women passing my door (someday I'll instal a webcam to show y'all what I'm talking about) and I'll wager twenty at least are candidates for the slammer.
PJB seems to be a little uncomfortable with the fact that we have 2.3 million people behind bars. I say about ten million more in there would just about begin to make a tangible positive difference in the quality of life for law abiding Americans.
Robert,
You've made as good an argument for reinstating the draft as any I've heard, including my own. There is no better medicine against needless wars than the threat of exposure to danger for the progeny of the leadership.
"Count up the welfare double and triple dippers, the falsified documenters, income hiders, identity thieves, identity fabricators, (births that never happened, children who don’t exist) shoplifters, insurance frauds, check kiters, alimony grifters, dealers, fences, prostitutes, and yes, robbers, burglars and murderers in any hundred women passing my door (someday I’ll instal a webcam to show y’all what I’m talking about) and I’ll wager twenty at least are candidates for the slammer."
Other than the new American breed of Amazon referred to as "The REPO CHICK" I think you have a rather exhaustive list. If I installed a webcam outside my office, we could perhaps share different pictures of criminals but the faces of crime would remain the same. As General Patton once said, " God, how I hate the modern world."
@Robert: I was referring to your comment that a Catholic should not aspire to the position.
@Gilbert Jacobi: it is not that the number of people rotting in American jails do not deserve chastisement but that incarceration is in itself a highly perverse form of punishment. Many people in jail deserve capital punishment. A number of others could be let go with a few lashings and stiff fines. Still others (though doubtless fewer) have been unjustly cast away by unfair laws or prosecution. But I cannot see how a person who truly needs to be locked up for the good of society would not be better off dead--and how we as a society would not be better off with them dead. Besides, how much do we spend annually per prisoner? I heard of a European prison expert who managed to reduce the marginal cost to two euros per prisoner per day, and I cannot imagine that that would offer conditions that are anywhere near morally permissible (if lifelong restraint can ever be moral). Capital punishment is by far more humane.
As for women, you are probably correct, and I will not dispute that when an individual woman commits a crime she must be called to heel. But when the proportion of female criminals is as high as it is, there is something seriously wrong with masculinity in society--a lack of it, an inability to morally and materially protect women so that they, in turn, can fulfill their role as moral and material nurturers of men. A society that produces so many of these morally bankrupt kinds of inhabitants can and should be called to heel for it.
NGPM,
You offer much to chew on; unfortunately, it's time for me to go to work and let the bosses chew on me.
Why would anyone think that Blair, and Bush's handlers, would care anything about Christians?
"There need not be any explanation for it. It would say nothing about whether women are or are not more preferred at one school than at another."
This is a confusion. It may in fact not say anything about "preferences" but that doesn't mean it doesn't say anything or there is no explanation. It might indicate, for example that the process is at least not uniformly random.
Not to mention, I believe your initial math was off. The odds of selecting a man and a woman in any order out of an initial pool of 5 and 5 is actually 5/9, which means a random sample is more likely to represent the underlying population than not. This is probably an example of the idea of regressing to the mean.
Our prison system is an absolute shame any way you think of it. Mr. Marino, I have read statistics, which bolster your observation, that state that just over half of federal inmates are non-violent drug offenders. Just another over-reaction.
Why would anyone think that Blair, and Bush’s handlers, would care anything about Christians?
Exactly the point.