Liberty

Current Issue  |  Archive  |  Subscription Services  |  Liberty Store  |  Writers' Guide  |  Editors & Staff  |  Search



December 2002
Volume 16,
Number 12

  Reflections  



Timothy Sandefur is (slowly) working on a biography of Jacob Bronowski.

The milkman cometh A protest by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals turned ugly in October, when over a hundred schoolchildren pelted the protesters with their lunch milk. One PETA activist, dressed as a cow, was held down and drenched in moo juice for ten minutes, before being rescued by police. "This is a stupid idea," one child told scotsman.com. "We should be encouraged to drink milk and I certainly won't stop drinking milk just because a man has dressed up as a cow outside my school."

When the pain in my sides finally stopped my laughing at this story, two things occurred to me. First, while engaged in their delightful counterprotest, the schoolchildren were chanting "Milk for the masses!" — understanding what so many American college students do not: that the alleged compassion of the anti-technology left is really a cover for a philosophy that seeks to deprive real people of real nutrition. The vandalism and protest against "globalization" is really vandalism and protest against the only means of actually feeding people around the world. Yet the leftists who destroy golden rice and sabotage years of genetics research are portrayed as heroes who care deeply about the spiritual values of life. In fact, they are pro-death. Second, PETA's recent media campaign encouraging college-age girls to strip down to their panties and hold signs reading "We Don't Wear Fur" would probably be a much more popular protest outside of high schools — Timothy Sandefur

Michael Drew is a writer living in Berkeley, Calif.

A woman's place is on the sidelines? Andy Rooney is in hot water again, this time for complaining about "those damn women they have down on the sidelines [of football games] who don't know what the hell they're talking about." I'm no fan of the 60 Minutes commentator, but I think Rooney's current sentiment resonates with many more people than are willing to admit it publicly. Judging from the latest feminist storm of media abuse heaped on the octogenarian blubbermouth, it'll probably be awhile before anyone of note stands up to speak about the subject again. (Fortunately we not-of-note people are still here to carry on.)

I remember a column by a former female sportswriter ridiculing the archetypal male "sports nut," pointing out that "for women, sports is just another interesting slice of life." She couldn't have been more right, and for that reason alone probably shouldn't have been hired as a sportswriter in the first place. Why should any game played, coached, and watched by fanatics be analyzed or presided over by a dilettante? Many of these people are "doing sports" to shine up their résumés for future career advancement; I've heard them say so openly. Hard to say the same about a John Madden or a Terry Bradshaw.

But Rooney misses the larger point behind his own emotion, one reason his critics are having a field day. Maybe some of these women really are knowledgeable; maybe some really are football fanatics. Maybe some men (like Rooney) aren't very knowledgeable themselves. I really don't care. For me and millions of others, men's sports is like a blue collar "men's meeting." Just as the typical women's support group or business club doesn't want a male voice presiding over it (God forbid), I do not want to hear a female voice disrupting the male bonding of my men's meeting. It's too trite to say that I like, love, and yes, respect women as people, but at the same time I really do.

As for genuine female sports fans, most of those I've known have no particular desire to hear a female voice covering men's sports anyway. Many women were among those who complained about former San Francisco Giants announcer Sherry Davis (the first woman to hold the job in the majors) making fans at the ballpark feel like they were in a second-grade classroom.

All of this is very personal and subjective, of course. Then again, men might take a cue from women on the point that sometimes the personal, subjective answer happens to be the right one. — Michael Drew

Stephen Cox is a professor of literature at UC San Diego.

An ancient plague When I was an ephebe, I was much impressed by one of Mary Renault's historical novels about ancient Greece. Lately I felt an urge to read another one, "The Mask of Apollo" (1966), a story about the ancient theater. Renault knew all the ancient sources and knew exactly how to use them. For instance, here is her protagonist's approach by sea to the great fortifications of the city of Syracuse: "All this was the work of [the tyrant] Dionysius. The cost hardly bore thinking of; but then his rapacity was famous all over Greece; it was said, and I started now to believe it, that he taxed his subjects' incomes as high as twenty percent. I asked the captain how they bore it." — Stephen Cox

R.W. Bradford is editor and publisher of Liberty.

All power to the president! In 1789, the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the power to declare war. In 2002, Congress gave that power away, to George W. Bush.

Congress succumbed to the president's theory that it is appropriate for the United States to mount a military attack on the government of another country, provided only that the president believes that country is a threat to the United States, and that the president need not explain to the American people, to Congress, or to anyone at all why he believes the nation faces a foreign threat. In the process, Congress also ceded to the president the power to take away the inalienable rights of Americans, guaranteed by the Constitution, provided, again, that the president believes the country is threatened.

On the face of it, George W. Bush is the most powerful president in American history, with greater personal power than any other president, including Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt, who presided during world wars, and even Abraham Lincoln, who presided over the Civil War, the nation's most horrible calamity by a wide margin.

He managed to get this power despite the fact that the United States faces no serious military challenge from any other nation — in fact, when the United States is by a wide margin the most powerful government in the world. No other government can even challenge U.S. military superiority. The U.S. has fought several "small" wars in the past two decades with hardly a casualty, imposing a new government in Haiti, deposing a government in Yugoslavia, expelling an occupying military force in Kuwait, working its will on most of Iraq, destroying a government in Afghanistan and installing in its place a puppet state, kept in power by an occupying U.S. military force. It has even invaded another nation and kidnapped its head of state, hauling him to the United States and charging him with breaking an American law while outside U.S. jurisdiction, then convicting him and sentencing him to a long prison term.

George Bush has managed to do all this because a tiny handful of Islamic terrorists discovered what sensible people have always known: that people who are willing to give up their lives can kill other people. This has always been the case and it always will be. The fact has been forgotten that the government, through its inattention to airline security, its construction of a building particularly susceptible to attack by air, and its fostering an ethic of giving in to the demands of hijackers rather than challenging them, enabled this attack to succeed.

And add to the list of forgotten facts the following: that attacks like those on Sept. 11 could not succeed again because passengers and crews will not again surrender control of an aircraft to a small number of lightly armed men, that there is no evidence of any relationship between the Sept. 11 terrorists and the three nations that comprise Bush's "axis of evil" and the fact that the three nations are in no way an "axis" of anything.

All most Americans can think about, it seems, is that a handful of Muslim men killed nearly 3,000 people on Sept. 11, 2001. The threat of sudden, violent death is mesmerizing. Any response seems reasonable.

If the president needs to do away with our constitutional rights . . . well, that's a small price to pay. And if the president wants to attack another country because he says he believes it is a credible threat to us . . . well, what the hell, he ought to be allowed to do so, even if he won't tell us, or even the people we've elected to Congress, what evidence he has for doing so. After all, war isn't such a bad thing. Practically no Americans die in wars, and those that do mostly die in accidents.

It's easy to see why Congress abandoned its responsibilities and converted the president into an emperor. Most members of Congress are spineless people who are concerned mainly with being re-elected. And they can all read the polls.

But I do not think the American Republic is dead. It is only sleeping. The president's support is a mile wide but an inch deep. Congress can stop the war any time it pleases, simply by refusing to appropriate the funds needed to prosecute it. The courts can declare the president's usurpations unconstitutional anytime they please. Of course, neither Congress nor the courts will intervene until people change their views, and this will probably not happen until the costs of the war become higher.

The French and British tolerated their governments' wars of empire, which included some of the most brutal and hideous acts of terrorism in the history of the world, so long as the costs were low, so long as the wars were fought by professional soldiers and adventurers eager for spoils, so long as the people subjugated could be robbed and exploited to pay for the cost of subjugating them. Citizens of the Soviet Union tolerated their government's wars against their neighbors until the costs began to include their sons and they began to realize that their government was making their lives poor, nasty, brutish, and short. Americans were happy to prosecute the war in Vietnam until the costs got out of control, until the war began to cost them their sons, conscripted into the killing fields of southeast Asia, and began to cost them their money, through a ten percent income tax surcharge.

One thing that governments do very well is obscure the relationship between cause and effect. Like any magician, however amateur, governments are adept at misdirection. Right now few Americans have any real idea of what the preparations for war are costing them, either directly (through the taxes they pay and the depreciation of their dollar-denominated assets) or indirectly (though the depressing effect that higher taxes have on economic activity). Americans have wasted hundreds of billions of dollars in their reaction to the events of Sept. 11, in millions of ways great and small, through taxes, through greater regulation, through malinvestment of time and money.

Sadly, the most likely way that the American Empire will come undone and the Republic restored will be the way in which other empires have come undone: it will grow so corrupt that it cannot sustain itself. Power corrupts, as Lord Acton observed, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

America has been a singularly fortunate land, thanks to the cussedness of its people and its republican tradition. When its government has gotten out of control, the traditions of republican government and individual rights have reasserted themselves, in the wholesale dismantling of the state in the Gilded Age that followed the Civil War, the tax cuts and inactivist government of Harding and Coolidge after the Great War, the GOP's resurgence after the depression-and-war imperialism of Franklin Roosevelt, and a similar resurgence after the despotism of Lyndon Johnson's Vietnam War and "Great Society."

The question is when the next resurgence will happen, and how much will we suffer before it does. — R.W. Bradford

© Copyright 2008, Liberty Foundation


Send editorial comments to letters@libertyunbound.com.
All letters to the editor are assumed to be for publication unless otherwise indicated.

Send web site comments to webmaster@libertyunbound.com.


Current Issue  |  Archive  |  Subscription Services  Liberty Store  |  Writers' Guide  |  Editors & Staff  |  Search