 |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
September 2006
Elsewhere on the WebVictor Davis Hanson’s Private Papers Victor Davis Hanson Archive on National Review OnlineTour Books
A War Like No Other How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War
by Victor Hanson
Amazon.com’s Best of 2001 Many theories have been offered regarding why Western culture has spread so successfully across the world, with arguments ranging from genetics to superior technology to the creation of enlightened economic, moral, and political systems. In Carnage and Culture, military historian Victor Hanson takes all of these factors into account in making a bold, and sure to be controversial, argument: Westerners are more effective killers.
by Victor Davis Hanson
by Victor Davis Hanson
by Victor Davis Hanson
by Victor Davis Hanson, John Keegan Hanson, for those who somehow have missed him until now, is a professor of Classics at California State and also is a part time farmer, both of which have contributed to his writing as a military historian. As a classicist, Hanson is well versed in the sources in their original Greek, and as a farmer he understands how agriculture affected the experience of the Greeks at war.
by Victor Davis Hanson
by Victor Davis Hanson
Hanson relates the life stories of his farmer neighbors, writing that their way of life will likely soon disappear, thanks in part to a federal system of agricultural subsidies that favors large-scale, industrial farm corporations over individual “yeomen.” This is a sobering and eye-opening book. by Victor Davis Hanson On first glance, The Soul of Battle appears to be three different books: biographies of two well-known generals—Sherman and Patton—and one who is virtually unknown today, the ancient Greek leader Epaminondas. Yet Victor Davis Hanson, a classics professor and author of The Western Way of War, makes a compelling connection between these three men. They were “eccentrics, considered unbalanced or worse by their own superiors” who led democratic armies on missions of freedom.
by Robert B. Strassler (Editor), Victor Davis Hanson (Introduction)
|
September 26, 2006 1:39 PM
We are all very lucky to live in the Civilization of the WestClintonian and Cartesian Angst Why when leaving office did we hear little, if any, second guessing—much less criticism of their successors—from Gerry Ford, Ronald Reagan, or George Bush, Sr.—but lots of self-serving revisionism from Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton? Ford and the elder Bush, after all, were both defeated at the polls and might have voiced hurt at their fates? In contrast, Carter and Clinton, as self-appointed moral censors, have a bad habit of campaigning for international approval (remember Carter’s embarrassing lobbying for the Nobel Prize) by ankle-biting current American Presidents, and by extension their very alma mater. It was forgotten in the repulsion over Carter’s smug 2003 wartime criticism of George W. Bush, that after 9/11 Clinton lectured the world on American sins dating back to William Tecumseh Sherman, praised Iranian democracy, and from time to time went off on “right wingers.” Three explanations explain this postpartum ex-presidential depression: one, the country has moved steadily rightward—Congress, the Presidency, the Supreme Court, and state governments. So much of the whining is from the out-of-power, know-it-all and self-anointed, who, like precious wounded fawns, resent deeply their perceived wounds and lick publicly their scrapes. Second, there is a lot of acclaim and money to be made by jetting around the globe, finger-pointing about right-wing insensitivity, the environment (so much for the ecological consequences of flying on private planes), third-world poverty, and American hubris. Third, we are nearing an election, and a blow-up by Clinton can be passed off as yelling out “truth to power” as an out-of-office, unapologetic Democrat takes on “Fox News,” thereby galvanizing the true believers. Clinton as either truthful or without resources is, of course, laughable; but then so were his other roles as serious historian, global humanitarian, lip-biting empath, professorial wonk, and sensual, caring alpha-male. He is what he is—a half-grown-up, but canny chameleon, blessed with considerable skills at the impromptu rant and instant repartee, with a sharp mind and little real knowledge that ensure he has a veneer of impressive knowledge about an inch thick. Leftwing politics and hyper-privilege are a bad mix, winning hypocrisy as an additional wage to self-righteous impracticality—as we see from the likes of a John and Mrs. Kerry, George Soros, and Ted Turner. The truth? Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton are both small-minded men, with a wide mean streak. And for all the smiles and deference to folksy Protestant religion, they display an un-Christian vindictiveness that makes us happy they are not in office. A psychiatrist would diagnose all sorts of neuroses of compensation and projection, their psyches finding overt ways of balancing (and hiding) some very dark emotions. When Clinton leaned over to Chris Wallace and ranted about his smirk, I was reminded of the deified Carter promising to kick Ted Kennedy’s ass and telling the world in 1988 that George Bush, Sr. was effeminate. Will Latin American Politics Follow Illegal Aliens? Hugo Chavez’s primordial rant, the antics of Evo Morales, the likelihood of a Sandinista victory, along with noises from the recent Mexican election and near insurrection in Oaxaca, should remind us that Latin America, for all its natural riches and hard-won democracies, is still dysfunctional. Its poverty, as in the Arab world, is too often blamed on Yanquis, gringos, and foreigners, rather than the lack of property rights, transparent government, personal freedom, the rule of law, and open markets. And this anger frames the entire ongoing debate over illegal immigration in new and disturbing ways. Does the United States really wish to allow in over a million illegal aliens per year, who flee the chaos south of the border, but not necessarily the endemic anger that someone else is responsible for their misery rather than their culture at large? In concrete fact, of course, aliens know that something north of the border results in a system of wealth, security, and freedom, but in romance they often cling to the notion that an oppressive foreign way of doing things owes them what they cannot obtain—as we see not just voiced in marches of illegal aliens, but in the antics of the open borders lobbyists and politicians here in the United States. Move the UN? Is there any reason for the United Nations to stay in New York? The combination of its affluence and celebrity-driven culture draws in an odious international cadre, one that hates the United States (witness the applause for Chavez) as much as it enjoys living here. Surely it could move to Nigeria, Dafur, Cuba, or Venezuela, where its sensitive membership would be closer to real problems, well away from the television studios and five-star restaurants? Once again, privilege and left-wing piety are a bad combo. When Not Enough is Too Much One of the most disturbing facets of the current war is the sinking realization that we are not fully mobilized against Islamic fascism, that we underplay its dangers—even as we are damned for being Islamophobes. The Pope incident is a prime example of how the world should be outraged that Muslims are issuing threats and promises of retribution against someone who in academese referred to age-old Islamic propensities for violence. Instead, Europe scrambled to apologize. What to do about such a syndrome? We saw it in the 1930s when Europe tried to appease Hitler when it should have been building far more tanks. It is indeed an entirely human phenomenon that when we confront a reality too awful to contemplate—that a large part of the world hates Western liberality for what it is rather than anything it has done, and has the wealth and thus soon the means to act on that venom—we construct mental escapes of denial, appeasement, and obsequiousness, turning on each other for insensitivity rather than on the perpetrators for their hate. Let us hope that there is not another 9/11 which would shatter such a glass edifice rather quickly, but instead pray that the public can be educated about the danger and the unique exceptionalism of its culture of the West, which after all, is really humankind’s last and only hope. The Benevolence of the West Or can you imagine, thousands in the street in the US or Europe, chanting ‘Death to Islam’ over the latest theocratic rant from Iran or Saudi Arabia? Or better yet, imagine how 15,000 American Christian students would be treated in Saudi Arabia, had 15 Americans blown up 3,000 Saudis. Or contemplate enormous Christian Churches being built by expatriate Americans in Riyadh? Or what if the Pope thought the Islamic exclusion of infidels from Mecca was a good idea worth emulating, and thus no non-Christians could enter either Rome or the Vatican? The West really is the world’s life raft, and that is why immigration—civilization’s precious barometer of men’s innermost thoughts—always flows from East to West, never vice versa. Comments (33)Dave Begley - Omaha :John in Cincinnati :Great dressing down of Clinton and Carter. I think Carter annoys me more -- he seems to really believe the stuff he says. I don't think the U.N. should be moved. I think we should charge all the diplomats going in a nice percentage of their G.D.P., to help us since we have to clean up all the messes that they won't, or that they make worse, or that they stick out their foot in front of us while we're on our way to clean them up. I'm in a good mood -- I'm going to see Hitchens speak over in Bloomington, Indiana, tomorrow night. Joe Monahan :Brilliant as always. Your writing skills are truly a gift. I cannot think of a contemporary political writer who is equal. Jeff Stone :VDH is right on the mark with his assessment of Clinton and Carter. The truly disgusting aspect of these former Commanders in Chief is that they encourage the enemy with their commentary and at the same time demoralize our fighting men and women are on the battlefield. Politics does not end at the water's edge for these men. Nothing is in bad taste. George Wilson :The best reason to keep the U.N. in N.Y. is to make the NSA's job easier. Brian J. Dunn :If it was up to me I'd build a new UN building in NYC--but make sure it is the tallest building in the city. Put the SecGen on the top floor--that might focus minds immensely. Nathan Ditton :Hey was wondering if anybody can recommend a good book on Israel, I am thinking of doing my oral presentation at my school on our need to support Israel or Anti Amercanism. Any recommendations of books on those subjects would be appreciated. Also I would prefer ones that were more written in a Edith Hamilton manner as oppessed to a Bernard Lewis. I know its a little off topic, but there are alot of students in my class that have no idea why we support Israel and as a consequence dont know the benefits of a true free democracy. tbrosz :"Three explanations..." Actually, there's a simpler one. By and large, to a leftist, political power is everything. To a conservative, it's just a job. That's why Republicans who leave office go golfing, or to the ranch. Democrats hang on the outside of the windows of the halls of power like a suction-cup cat. Shelley Grover-Pletscher :The Benevolence of the West segment was good, but I think your reasoning on the bullet points is flawed. You mistake our benevolence here in the US for cluelessness, disinterest but most of all, fear of speaking up unless one gets labeled a xenophobe or intolerant. Political correctness still has a powerful grip. I cannot get enough of your articles. I never miss them. Liana :It is wonderful to live in western civilization, especially the land of liberty. Never have been able to reconcile the Christianity of Jimmy Carter with his actual behavior. Bill Clinton has always appeared to me as a bold faced liar, who could look you straight in the eye and lie, lie, lie. Two of the worst presidents of my lifetime, ungrateful sods. Maybe we could send the U.N. to Latin America, but that seems too cruel for those who already live under the dreadful corruption of their governments. I agree, that we are the worlds life raft. America is so generous to any and all, virtue is it's own reward, unfortunately in America's case, no good deed goes unpunished. We are continually vilified, resented and hated in return. Yet our best and brightest volunteer to risk life and limb so that others might enjoy lives of liberty and freedom. God bless them and their families. Yes to western civilization Dogbone :You are particularly on target today. Jenn M. :I'm not sure Clinton's rant against Wallace was staged. It had the same off-the-tracks tone as "I did not have sex with that woman..." When Clinton goes off, he reveals the darkness, the smallness that VDH suggests. Also, many Americans have not "seen" him lately. They're used to stock footage from his prime, or very brief appearances on the news. But this is post-Cardiac Clinton, he looks overly made-up and unhealthy. Poking that scrawny finger into a youthful-looking Wallace's face was a disastrous move. His weak physical appearance will only underline the accusations that his attempts to "kill" Bin Laden/al Qaeda were weak and ineffectual. Improbulus Maximus :Yes, we are all very lucky, but our luck is running out, because what most people think of as luck is really just the sum of a lot of hard work, sacrifice, clarity of purpose, keen foresight, vigilance against threats, and good old common sense. While those characteristics are still to be found, they are increasingly rare. Don H :Prof Hanson, Enjoy your commentary greatly! My fave read of the year was your work on the Peloponnesian War; looking forward to your next publication. I am very happy you are blogging for PM. Don H Mike H. :The Benevolence of the West. Rather than being impressed with our position, consider the result when the tolerance and benevolence is lost because of an act that is desperately sought by the enemy. How many innocents will be lost for the self image of a few corrupt religious figures who desire power and property. It would seem that bin Laden and Zawahiri worship themselves and not God. Brian :The only justification to keep the UN in New York is that it makes it easier for our spooks to bug the world's diplomats, which, if you're dealing with cutthroats and thugs like those who infest the UN, is a consideration that probably should be factored into the equation. Personally, I'd rather it was moved to Tehran, even though that would give the Iranians a spying/blackmail advantage they probably don't presently enjoy. In any event, I think we ought to reduce our contribution to the UN to about $500,000 per year, remain a part of the UN in order to retain our veto as a permanent member the UNSC, and enjoy the perverse pleasure of exercising it as required. Brian gringoman :But is today's West--at least the elite--too wussie for words? You have to wonder, now that even the Berlin Opera, rather than depict severed religious heads, daring to include, yes, even Mahomet's, is canning a Mozart opera. Wussie wonders? They will "mullahfy" the Islamos after a police advisory of 'possible' trouble? The bearded ones didn't even have to burn a single German flag or burn a Western icon in effigy. Query: What happens when the imams and their worked-up Ummah find out that Mahomet---as shown recently in gringoman---is rotting in Dante's Inferno with his guts hanging out (also a vivid illustration by Salvador Dali)? In Penguin editions all over the infidel world. Who will apologize to who? ArtD0dger :Can you imagine an Islamic caliphate conquering and colonizing the West and then NOT forcing conversion, dhimmi status, slavery, or death upon all of its inhabitants? Or better yet, imagine said caliphate inexplicably abandoning its colonies to the natives after a period of time, despite maintaining overwhelming military dominance. Or contemplate them then paying the westerners billions upon billions of dollars for a vital natural resource that they could much more easily – and reliably – take by force? Yep, historical grievances are the cause of terrorism. Webutante :What a great idea to move the UN to, say, Venezuela or Cuba and then see how much fun it'll be serving on the Security Council. On another note, I was recently through Little Rock and decided to make a brief stop at the new Clinton Library. I was struck by the most popular and prominent historical remnant of his long gone administration: Front and center was the old Presidential armored limosene, one of the most tangible physical symbols of all that power. It was a real crowd pleaser as throngs of people gathered to see and hear all about Clinton's motorcades during his two terms while the good times rolled. But something about seeing it displayed there, then, made me sad for him, and for our country. I felt I could have just as well been at Graceland looking at the momentos of a fallen Elvis, rather than at a Presidential Library. But while there was a limosene, and plenty of other paraphernalia, there were certainly no cigars.
John Moore :Clinton's behavior in the Fox interview was that of the narcissist being challenged. I'm not a shrink, but the best model I can find for understanding Clinton is narcissism - the desperate need for constant approval, praise, and worship, and the explosion when, in spite of all effort and expectation, criticism is encountered and cannot be suppressed. Bill Clinton is a weak and therefore dangerous man. It's a good thing he isn't in power any mmore. Dr. Hanson - love your work. The west needs to listen to yourself and others - historically informed clear thinkers and good writers. Thank you. Papa Ray :VDH never disappoints me. He even sometimes surprises me with his clarity of thought and his ability to pass it on to a dumb old redneck like me. Yes, we are being so nice and so tolerant that we are helping our wonderful Republic along the dark road to being a Mexican/Muslim socialist country, where we will be the slaves and pay our taxes to the Islamic Government. Over my dead body and all of my friends as well. Oh,,,and the UN? Pay them nothing, tell them that we are paying them enough by letting them live and work in our Republic. If they complain, tell them we will charge them! Papa Ray Ivan Lenin :Wow, pretty strong. With few words, VDH gets right to the point. The "Benevolence of the West" part, especially. w3bgrrl :I can also not imagine a Venezuela where anyone, especially the U.S. President, would be free to stand on the its streets and criticize Hugo Chavez. It is, at times, frustrating that we allow such free expression by foreign guests of our country, but then how else do we juxtapose the tyranny of Latin American dictators with the free and open society we enjoy in the United States? It is only by allowing those with forked tongues to speak without threat of governmental interruption that their contradictory claims can be seen for what they are. Vinny Vidivici :Yes, the contrasts could not be more stark. The same simpletons who label criticism of what they say 'stifling of dissent' or a refusal to buy Dixie Chicks CDs 'censorship' give Islamists a pass when they rant and riot over what what others say or write. Or take the Islamist protestors calling for the Pope's execution outside Westminster Abbey after Sunday services. Was there any attempt to keep the hecklers away from those attempting to exercise their religious freedom without harrassment? Or was preservation of the protesters' free speech rights of paramount concern to the police? Did any of the threats being made constitute 'hate speech,' worthy of investigation, as has been the case with negative comments made about Islam? More important, was there any variation in the 'see-how-angry-the-Pope-made-them' template of media coverage? If a group of protesters, insulted by constant incitement to murder emanating from mosques -- or, perhaps incensed over the slaughter of innocents by Islamist terrorists -- stood outside a mosque calling for the submission or murder of Islam's 'holy men,' think the coverage template would be 'look-how-angry-they-are-over-Islamist-atrocities'? Hard ly. Instead, boilerplate about intolerance and the influence of 'right wing hate groups' would be trundled out for yet another encore. 'Society as a whole' would be blamed for its insensitivity and for fostering an atmosphere where such an appalling display of bigotry could take place. Any police attention would focus on protection of the mosque and its attendees, lest law enforcement authorities be chastised for failure to extend the protection law to 'beseiged' minorities. Please pardon my long comment. chip outnumbered in santa rosa :Mr. Hanson, you are so fun to agree with. Your presence in the theatre of ideas is such a balm to me. Where the sheer volume of half-thought-out ideas appears to bury reason, your words repair the damage. uhzoomzip :So, coming from the Clinton vs. Fox tirade - I had an interesting thought concerning our national security. Let's pretend 09.11.2001 did not happen - or hasn't happened *yet*. How would the Bush admin dealt with the growing threat of militant Islamic fundamentalism? Would he have had the intelligence/military support to put troops on the ground in the Middle East? Or would he have dealt with trigger-shy politics - as Clinton suggested he did in the 90s. Exactly what steps was the Bush admin taking after he got into office to deal with terrorism? Few have been very clear on this. Reportero :The situation you mention in Oaxaca keeps descending into deeper - and more dangerous - foolishness. Just this week, after four months off the job, the embattled governor finally insisted the striking teachers stop being paid. Actually, the teachers go on strike every year - the running tally is somewhere north of 20 straight years. One encouraging thing in Mexico, when the PAN party wanted to kneecap Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, they compared the leftist populist with Hugo Chavez. It worked - who needs Yankee bashing? victor :Nathan Ditton: I'll offer two, the first being 6 Days of War by Oren, and the second being The Case For Democracy by Sharansky. The former is a tough slog if you're not into military history and names with lots of punctuation, but the latter is a fairly short read and about as clear as glass. There is also Dershowitz's The Case for Israel, but that one seems a bit obvious! William J. Simmons :Dr. Hanson, Dave Cook :Mr. Hanson - I just wanted to take this opportunity to voice my appreciation of your talent and insight. It is easy to find oneself despairing amongst the current dysfunctional (nay crazy) "conventional wisdom". Your words keep my spirits up. Shepard Barbash :Re illegal aliens: "in romance they often cling to the notion that an oppressive foreign way of doing things owes them what they cannot obtain." In God We Trust--all others bring data... especially for observations like this that are vulnerable to the charge of tendentiousness. Staged marches and the antics of border lobbyists do not constitute data--any more than do my personal experience getting to know a few hundred Oaxacan illegals, whose lives (I would contend) refute the above characterization. "In republican democracies," Lincoln observed, "public sentiment is everything. With it nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed." One can reasonably doubt that the public would have put up with so many illegals for so many years if their sense of grievance and entitlement--on balance, as a class--were as bad as you suggest. I am not with the open-borders crowd, but your sloppiness here ill befits the tradition of the great historians who shaped you. Steve C. :After the initial giddiness of the MSM and the left over Clinton's staged rant on Fox News, the reality is beginning to set in that "Mr. Bill" has reverted from the kinder-and-gentler head of the Clinton Foundation to the same mean bastard we all came to know a decade ago. I can't imagine that is a positive thing for the Democrats. And if Fox really wanted to be mean-spirited, they would run, back-to-back, clips of Clinton's rant against Chris Wallace and his infamous "I did not have sexual relations with than woman, Ms. Lewinski" rant in 1998. Same guy, different suit. Lee W. Dodson :Not to worry actually, Carter, et al., witness the death of liberalism in the American sense, not the classical sense. They are elitists, one and all, and the marketplace of ideas is extremely unkind to those who allow history to pass them by. This is why they fight so hard, why Clinton fights so hard, to keep their "better" ways alive, even if it's on life support and slipping into a permanent vegetative state. Carter's policies twenty years ago were seeds to today's problematic weeds. He senses it, and he will do almost anything to cover it up with "if only you'd listened to me" excuses. If he and his ilk weren't so damn petty, they'd be honored for their service, but every time they open their mouths, we are reminded of years of failure. Too bad Church isn't around to share the embarrassment. Comments have been archived for this page. |
Pajamas MediaAn American Senator in Paris Warning: Opposing Putin Hazardous to Your Health Anti-Patriot Act Poster Boy Kidnaps Own Kids AP’s New ‘Accountability Journalism’ Is a Sham Obama Wows Germans — But Will It Play in Streator, IL? Homeland Security Meets The Sopranos Obama Does Offer Hope — to America’s Foes Yahoo-Icahn-Microsoft Aftermath: Who Really Won?
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
RSS FeedsADVERTISEMENT
|
digg this
del.icio.us
VDH nails the Clinton character right here, "Clinton as either truthful or without resources is, of course, laughable; but then so were his other roles as serious historian, global humanitarian, lip-biting empopath, professorial wonk, and sensual, caring alpha-male. He is what he is—a half-grown-up, but canny chameleon, blessed with considerable skills at the impromptu rant and instant repartee, with a sharp mind and little real knowledge that ensure he has a veneer of impressive knowledge about an inch thick." But add in, "an INeffective President." He squandered the whole eight years.
And I'm ashamed he's a graduate of Georgetown. Bill Clinton is Jesuit education's biggest failure, but then again he was probably too far gone by the time he reached college and Ignatius himself couldn't have done any good with this guy.
The Clintons are out for one thing and one thing only: themselves.
Sep 26, 2006 03:02 PM