Of Heroes, Critical Thinking, and Other Things "Un-American"

Every morning, as I watch the news concerning the presidential campaign and the little of world news the media is willing to provide, I am reminded of this quote from H.L. Mencken.

“It is common to assume that human progress affects everyone - that even the dullest man, in these bright days, knows more than any man of, say, the Eighteenth Century, and is far more civilized. This assumption is quite erroneous. The men of the educated minority, no doubt, know more than their predecessors, and of some of them, perhaps, it may be said that they are more civilized - though I should not like to be put to giving names - but the great masses of men, even in this inspired republic, are precisely where the mob was at the dawn of history. They are ignorant, they are dishonest, they are cowardly, they are ignoble. They know little if anything that is worth knowing, and there is not the slightest sign of a natural desire among them to increase their knowledge.”

Such immortal vermin, true enough, get their share of the fruits of human progress, and so they may be said, in a way to have their part in it. .... He has at hand a thousand devices for making life less wearisome and more tolerable: the telephone, railroads, bichloride tablets, newspapers, sewers, correspondence schools, delicatessen. But he had no more to do with bringing these things into the world than the horned cattle in the fields, and he does no more to increase them today than the birds of the air. On the contrary, he is generally against them, and sometimes with immense violence. Every step in human progress, from the first feeble stirrings in the abyss of time, has been opposed by the great majority of men.

The inferior man's reasons for hating knowledge are not hard to discern. He hates it because it is complex - because it puts an unbearable burden upon his meager capacity for taking in ideas. Thus his search is always for short cuts. Their aim is to make the unintelligible simple, and even obvious.”

Yesterday morning, the geniuses of the media offered the controversy (not that I doubt it – nothing about this country’s dementia surprises me any more.) concerning a state intending to legalized drinking for men and women in the military but under twenty-one years of age. One supposed legal expert says the law would be unconstitutional. Another says that’s ridiculous. I note that no one so much as mentioned the obvious corollary of it all, that someone should enact a law that makes it unlawful to send “minors” to war.

That would cramp the White House and military industrial complex corporations’ style, wouldn’t it?

Next there was the love fest the other day among Arnold Schwarzenegger, Rudy Giuliani – “the hero of 9-11” – and John McCain, “the Vietnam War hero.” There are heroes all over the place these days – so many of them that I can’t help wondering. What, exactly, is a war hero?
And I’m not the only one who has wondered about that. In October, none other than the late and lamented Colonel David Hackworth, himself the recipient of something like seventy-eight medals, wrote concerning medals for everyone, and to hear the media tell it, everyone serving in the military in Iraq is a hero. Everyone who knows me or reads my stuff here will tell you that I’m sick and damned tired of the way this effeminized, sissified, and “touchy-feely” society has crippled and castrated the language. “Male chauvinist” meaning a man who knows he’s not a woman, “abortion” meaning kill an unborn or partially born baby, “women’s issues” meaning a way to make language a weapon in the hands of women, “power rape” meaning any time a groupie wants to change her mind, “reproductive rights” meaning the power to kill with impunity, “issues” meaning trouble, problem of difficulty, and now this. A few weeks ago, a white guy got in trouble for saying a black guy was articulate (that, the pantyhose pundits said, implied that everybody black was not articulate!). And now, everybody in a uniform is a hero (because – I suppose - a few years ago, we made everybody in uniform a criminal and arch-villain).

I can’t help being reminded of the young woman who charge of rape sent four young men – one of them incapable of sex - to prison for “rape.” Contacted years later, she averred that perhaps the men didn’t know they had committed rape (think about that one for a minute); that, she said, was up to the woman – wasn’t it! Yup, words and language are very important to feminism (and, it seems, racists). In a “politically correct’ world, do you suppose we will ever call a spade a spade again?

Anyway, I wonder about “heroes.” What, in a society that can torture any word until it sweats blood - yields and surrenders meaning completely antithetical to what it once meant, too - is a “hero?” One like me immediately thinks of Jessica Lynch (no offense, kid – I understand perfectly), whom political correctness in the form of Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and “women’s issues” generally, turned from a victim of insane feminist ideology (don’t let’s get me started) into – yup – a hero.

And you don’t even dare say “heroine” – that’s “sexist.”

But I digress (women have always been able to turn my head – and a lot more). Colonel Hackworth, an honest-to-god hero, had this to say on the subject::

“Recently in Iraq, an Army two-star general put himself in for the Silver Star, a gallantry award, for just being there, and for the Combat Infantryman Badge, an award designed for infantry grunts far below the rank of this division commander.

“During the (Iraq) war, members of an Air Force bomber crew were all awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for lobbing a smart bomb from 30,000 feet onto a house where Saddam was rumored to be breaking bread, - even though Saddam's still out there somewhere sucking desert air. In 1944, the only way a bomber crew might have gotten the DFC would have been if it had wobbled back from Berlin on one wing and a prayer after a dozen-plus missions of wall-to-wall flak.

“Here's another "Believe It or Not," the genuine her goes on (careful, Hack – you and I come from a different place, time, and ‘ism’ rule): When the Scuds were thumping down on Kuwait, a Navy two-star admiral and six of his flunkies were awarded the Bronze Star after a missile struck 10 miles away.

“ . . . . I know of two Medals of Honor - one in Korea and the other with a Navy unit in Vietnam - that shamefully went to still-living former officers when in fact their above-and-beyond deeds "witnessed" by sycophants were actually performed by grunts.

“In the latter days of the Korean War and in Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Desert Storm and Somalia, such abuses of military honors increased with each battle. In Vietnam, a dog was awarded the Bronze Star, and in Grenada, more medals were awarded than there were soldiers on that tiny island. In Desert Storm, Army infantry battalions that never saw a shot fired were awarded the coveted CIB (Hal’s note – Combat Infantryman’s Badge, for ninety days under enemy fire).”

Hackworth goes on, to chronicle the absurdity of what can happen when language – politically correct language, that is – rules reality. Is there any husband or father of girls who doesn’t know or recognize what I’m talking about?

When Hackworth continues, he makes a point I wonder if even he recognized. You’d have to have experienced “no child let behind” and all the “kids should never have to fail”, “everybody should win,” and “you’re okay, I’m okay” insanity to do so. Compare this with the humanist-feminist nonsense being promulgated only a few years earlier:

“Now warriors in Iraq are reporting that COs there are using a quota system for awards. Sgt. Bill Casey, whose unit saw heavy combat in Iraq, says: "Our awards were not given out on heroism. They were based entirely upon rank and duty position. If you were a company commander, you got a Silver Star. If you were a platoon leader or platoon sergeant, you got a Bronze Star. If you did a good job at a level below that, you might get a Bronze Star. If you were a PFC (private first class), you probably didn't get a medal for valor. Every award was entirely based upon rank and duty position ñ rather than whether that person stood tall and continued to return fire or whether that person continued to bring the fight to the enemy or flat-out ran away when the bullets started flying."

So, when I wonder “what’s a hero,” you (maybe) see what I mean. The U.S. Air Force, for instance, has approved more than 50,000 medals for operations in the Middle East.

Think that’s amazing? Well, let’s let Hackworth tell it:

“The U.S. Army, trying to catch up with the folks in blue who flew through all that imaginary Iraqi flak, has issued medals as though they were Cracker Jack prizes. So far they've pinned on tens of thousands of awards, from the coveted Distinguished Service Cross to the CIB (Combat Infantryman’s Badge). More than 5,000 Bronze Stars alone have been awarded. One-half the members of a 700-strong aviation squadron at Fort Stewart were recently presented Bronze Stars and Commendation medals. “
Ah, but then there’s that bastion of anti-feminism (those macho, sexist bastards), the U.S. Marines: “But as of Sept. 22, 2003, the U.S. Marine Corps has approved only 56 Meritorious Bronze Stars - 46 to officers, 10 to enlisted - and 15 Bronze Stars for valor - 11 to officers and four to enlisted - for their 70,000 fighters who kicked more than a little butt during the war in Iraq.”

And – what do you want to bet – the feminists, “I’m okay, you’re okay,” ultra-humanists are examining those stats, determined to find them “sexist” and biased against women? After all, we’ve long since decided that award on the basis of ability and accomplishment is “racist,” “sexist,” and “politically incorrect.”

So, how much a hero is John McCain? Now, “politically correct,” FoxNews reality, and all the other manifestations of the enlightened society we have become dictate that I point out that John McCain suffered relentlessly beatings, torture, and broken limbs – all inflicted during savage interrogations. He went through what for the rest of us would be considered hell. But how does all that compare to, for instance, the story of Sergeant Alvin York, or Gunnery Sergeant John Basilone, or Master Sergeant Roy Benavidez?

John McCain is being hailed by the press as a "genuine war hero." But is he a war hero in the conventional sense like Chuck Yeager, Robin Olds, Dickie Bong, Joe Foss, Greg Boyington, Audie Murphy, and their like? I don’t know – never having been one, I lack the insight to say. But I know propaganda, and I wonder.

THIS morning (February 2, 2008) we have Brian Kilmeade of the evil-minded (actually, it’s that “crazy, or crazy like a fox, stupid or crooked, thing again – with these guys, you can never be sure) challenging Barak Obama to say how he will pay for his health care plane, then – in almost the next breath – demanding to know if Obama will withdraw our forces from Iraq, should General Petraeus say the war is being won. We can’t afford health care for our people, but we can afford literally trillions for a war winning nothing but hatred from a huge segment of the planet’s population.

That’s reasoning, by FoxNews.

“. . . but the great masses of men, even in this inspired republic, are precisely where the mob was at the dawn of history. They are ignorant, they are dishonest, they are cowardly, they are ignoble. They know little if anything that is worth knowing, and there is not the slightest sign of a natural desire among them to increase their knowledge.”

H.L. Mencken, you should have lived long enough to watch FoxNews (and Gretchen Carlson has one of the prettiest little asses you’d ever want to see).

Those who read my stuff here and elsewhere on the World Wide Web will recall my own observation concerning how man seems to fear even the act of thinking. It therefore occurs to me that thought is fearsome not only because it is subversive and revolutionary, nor because it is merciless to privilege, to established institutions, and to comfortable beliefs. It might even be that thought isn’t fearful because it is anarchic and lawless, totally indifferent to authority and the “wisdom” of potentates. Uh-uh. All of that would require of Mencken’s “great masses of men” far too much thinking. This kind of man fears thinking simply because it demonstrates to him how stupid he is.

Some, of course, might argue that stupid men are prohibited by their own stupidity from knowing how stupid they are. Point well taken. Kilmeade probably thought he’d made a telling argument against Obama. I’m sure he did.

Just for the record – and it makes a point about thinking, too - John McCain’s “fruit salad” includes the Silver Star, a Legion of Merit for Valor, a Distinguished Flying Cross, three Bronze Stars, two Air Commendation medals, plus two Purple Hearts. Along with Colonel Hackworth, I note that Senator McCain has more medals – “on a purely medal count basis,” to put it as Hack did – than any of the guys I mentioned earlier (just that ought to start some thinking on the public’s part).

To continue Colonel Hackworth’s research of the matter, we find that McCain's valor awards are based on what happened in 1967, during which – on his 23d mission over Vietnam - he was shot down, seriously injured, captured and imprisoned for five and a half brutal years.

But none of the senator’s awards, except the Distinguished Flying Cross, were for heroism on (or over) a battlefield. The fact – that thinking some of us fear more than anything else – is that John McCain spent no more than twenty hours in actual combat (to get a CIB – Combat Infantryman’s Badge – you have to be in combat for ninety days. Two Naval officers described the awards as "boilerplate" and "part of an SOP medal package given to repatriated (Vietnam era) POWs."

Continuing Colonel Hackworth’s report, “McCain's Silver Star narrative for the period 27 October 1967 the day after he was shot down to 8 December 1968 reads: ‘His captors… subjected him to extreme mental and physical cruelties in an attempt to obtain military information and false confessions for propaganda purposes. Through his resistance to those brutalities, he contributed significantly towards the eventual abandonment…’ of such harsh treatment by the North Vietnamese.’

“Yet in McCain's own words just four days after being captured, he admits he violated the U.S. Code of Conduct by telling his captors ‘O.K, I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital.’”

And critical thinking requires also the addition of still one more think from the record compiled by a hero. Colonel David Hackworth notes that one of McCain’s detractors has remarked that Senator McCain ". . . received the nation's third highest award, the Silver Star, for treason. He provided aid and comfort to the enemy!"

As I so often point out, there are things you can’t have both ways: when I was a soldier, you were permitted to give enemy captors name, rank, and serial number. Period. In Korea and Vietnam, the enemy either broke a prisoner or killed him. In short, it was considered by the military in which I served and by my superiors that survival as a prisoner of war meant treason. Obviously, the rules have changed, for sure (we go to war without the niceties of a congressional declaration, too). As Colonel Hackworth additionally notes, POWs are now trained to “give them something – don’t risk damage to health, mind, or body.” And, as Hackworth goes on to add, “(John) McCain certainly doesn't appear to be a war hero by conventional standards, but rather a tough survivor whose handlers are overplaying the war hero card.”

It would be remiss, should I fail to observe that women now make a lot of the rules by which we live, and make war. We are an effeminate country, we are spinning out of control, and our decline has paralleled in inverse fashion the rise of feminism.

Like I said, not being a hero, I lack the insight necessary to make any assessment concerning and claim of heroism; and my remarks now are intended to make a point, not “swift-boat” a politician. Critical thinking is not only hell where all the considerations I mentioned earlier here are concerned; thinking is hell on heroes, too. Would that it would somehow become as hard on political candidates.

We could have avoided George W. Bush and his “administration.” We might even avoid another.