Sunday, November 20, 2005
Vietnam, Iraq, and the Anti-American Clown of MIT
Comparisons between the conflict in Iraq and the Vietnam War have been made by many who know better. To a knowledgeable observer there are many differences between the two conflicts, and a few similarities. The worst similarity to all parties concerned (except the one hoping to establish a totalitarian society) is the desire to "cut and run." Those who know more than trivia or Hollywood fiction regarding the Vietnam War know that The United States didn't "lose" the war in Vietnam, it simply left. After leaving, it eventually even cut off supplies and economic assistance to our former allies. The result should have been a surprise to no one.
Anyone interested in the history of America's involvement in Vietnam and the lessons that should have been learned in how that conflict was conducted should definitely read Melvin Laird's interesting and insightful article on the issue at Front Page Magazine.
Laird was the Secretary of Defense under President Nixon and oversaw the transition from America's active involvement there to the South Vietnamese themselves.
The personal insight Laird offers far exceeds the banal editorial comment we've become used to in debate regarding the pace and degree in which America should support or abandon the cause of freedom in Iraq.
The following essay was originally posted at this site earlier this year. I do these reposting of some essays I've written in the past because it buys me time and I have considerably more readers now then when the essays were originally posted. I think the issues addressed are still valid. Essays or comments like the following on Noam Chomsky tend to particularly infuriate the cult followers of the MIT socialist charlatan. The guy's a wealthy best seller all over the world -- partially because he is required reading for the captive audience of so many socialist college professors -- and yet his devotees go nuts when they read a lone blogger who dares note the despicable nature of his values and clear dislike for a country that has clearly been more than generous to him and his family.
There are lots of sites and forums to debate one's causes. If you really want to watch an overblown comedy show, check out the debates that occur regularly regarding Noam Chomsky -- the Socialist who's paid by MIT to be a linguist.
Those who collect Chomsky tomes, tapes, and videos (a lock of hair perhaps?) will ramble to no end citing facts (true, questionable, and bogus) to prove…what?
If you just believed in Jesus, Mohammad, Amway, or Noam Chomsky, all would be right with the world perhaps.
Okay, let's say Chomsky is a "genius" (I’d agree he's smart). Let's go further, and say he's right about America. Lets say America is a rather bad country, that it has done a disproportionate amount of bad things, and is marked historically by racism, classism, and imperialism (there are plenty of non-“geniuses” that have come to the same partisan and questionable conclusions).
The Left’s choices in what systems and countries to “critique” and which ones they let slide is cause for speculation. Either way, I can’t help but feel that holding one’s own country in disdain is, in itself, somehow despicable, particularly in view of the other options so often defended by the weasels of Left-land. Of course, healthy criticism is a good thing and its existence is one of the benefits of an open system of government. There is, however, such a thing as the one-sided partisan attack, and this is where Chomsky and his ilk appear to come from on the spectrum of "healthy criticism." Either one believes that people like Chomsky are somehow oppressed by their country or that they have some magical sympathy for truth and goodness that motivates them, which may, after all, be what they are really getting at; that they are superior in insight, knowledge, and affection for people they have nothing in common with, and if we don’t share their dislike for America that makes us…?
So what’s the real point the adoring roadies of Chomsky fanfare are trying to make? If I were to say, "You’re right! I agree with everything you say and I think Chomsky is really cool.” What would we then do, don party hats and throw a Chomsky party?
It’s just assumed that if we read Chomsky’s books (often just transcribed lectures or interviews), listened to the tapes, and watched the videos of his lectures, then we would all agree with him and, perhaps, like our country less – boy, are we missing out. What fun!
Actually, I think Chomsky-ism is just a boring religion for socialist nerds who hate more common folks. I admittedly have no footnotes to back that up (Chomsky types really like footnotes – preferably to other anti-U.S. icons or just to Chomsky himself). When I hear or read of Chomsky’s bland intellectual indictments I come away feeling that his main points are really nothing new, that they’re no different than the thousands of other stale rants heard from neo-Marxist / new and old left "thinkers" – but that’s just me.
How do we exactly meet the persuasive goals of a Chomskyite? Take that flag down on the July 4th? Apologize to Al Qaeda? Reinstall Soviet communism everywhere it's been vanquished? Double the size of the already inefficient bureaucracy to further, "[not] address human needs?" Punish wealth and success (The Left’s favorite)?
While some of Chomsky's followers would no doubt favor such strategies, I sense in the fervor of their "message" that the real point they're making is that they are somehow cooler than those of us who still admire our country’s system, history, and impressive record of good. Okay, maybe we’re wrong. Maybe we just suck and the socialist nerd of MIT is a genuine hero.
And your point is…?
A brief excerpt from a “glossary” of Ed-World terminology from an essay on my experiences in Ed-land U.S.A. (To be posted sometime in the next few weeks):
- The “Rote Learning” straw man
This is a big one. Ed-schools, and teachers in general, like to pretend that there is some traditional teacher out there who is the norm and bores his or her classes with lectures, facts, and information. This phony concoction is often accompanied by the phrase, “drill and kill,” in which students are imagined reciting meaningless facts which are deadening their minds. Check out a local school classroom today you’ll search long and hard for any remnants of rote learning or drilling information. “Progressive Education” has had a firm lock on America’s schools for decades and each year they try to pretend that the enemy is some imagined boogeyman that’s making kids learn facts through rote memorization.
A Comic Commentary from Promethean Visions:
Voices without a voice...
Promethean Quote from The Promethean Observer:
" 'Fight the powers that be.' -- then, collect a check from them for singing about it."
