Desperate Times Call For Desperate Measures
By John Feeny
As a result of the Louisiana Purchase Part Deux on the night of Saturday, November 21st, Harry Reid has forced the American people one step closer to the proverbial cliff, an eventual near-complete takeover of the once proud American way of life. It goes without any need for further explanation that all of the policy decisions coming out of this administration, let alone the cultural behemoth that is health care, simply make no mathematical sense whatsoever.
Whether this is the result of some deliberate, calculated attempt with an underlying agenda or complete, unabashed ignorance is a question that can be debated by future generations; resolving the threats that we face in the here and now is the task at hand.
The one question that I think gnaws at the back of the minds of many common sense conservatives these days, however, is why these liberal Democrats are intent on embarking on such a reckless--some would say politically suicidal, as it applies to those Democrats who are up for re-election in 2010--course of action. Why are they doing this?
Seemingly with each passing day, there’s some new outrage coming out of Washington, and the beginnings of the resurgent conservatism that we’re all beginning to sense in this country is making it more and more clearly evident that this is indeed a center-right nation and that, for the most part, Her people have no use for the extreme measures being undertaken by this administration. Yet these people continue on the path of "the ends justify the means," so much so that they’re not even bothering to hide the boldness of their political machinations any longer. Transparency indeed.
I think, however, that there is an answer (of sorts) to this question. Many of the men and women who constitute the far-left of the Democratic Party are what I would label Ideological Kamikazes. We may be witnessing a suicide mission, and I think there’s a bit more to the metaphor than merely what the label suggests.
I don’t think anyone who reads America's Right and other political blogs of the same type would dispute the contention that we are, in a very real sense, in the midst of a sort of civil war. Our battlefield, however, is not Gettysburg, Bull Run, Okinawa, or Iwo Jima; our shots are being fired on the Battlefield of Ideas. As with any great war or battle, there comes a time when the momentum shifts, usually as a result of a variety of reasons: lack of manpower, resources, political and/or popular support, and so on.
In the context of this metaphor, I think it important to look to two of America’s staunch adversaries of the past sixty-odd years: imperial Japan and radical Islam. An interesting case can be made that both of these political and cultural entities had and continue to have two things in common: they represent altogether different cultural values, and both may have begun to at least perceive that their very existence (way of life) was and is in peril.
One of the foundational tenets of any entity involved in a war of any sort is that when it opts for suicide warfare--which is decidedly different from the notion of honorable sacrifice--it has reached the point at which surrender or any form of compromise with the enemy is no longer an option.
Our liberal Democrats, if they haven’t reached that point already, may be quickly approaching it. As I’ve said, however, I feel that there’s more to this than initially meets the eye.
Generally speaking, the military rationale for suicide warfare is that the people making preparations for battle reach a point at which they begin to realize that they truly lack the adequate resources with which to engage the enemy; other and better alternatives to the last, best measure--terrorism--no longer exist. In the case of Japan, the military decision to move forward with kamikaze missions was the empire’s last, desperate attempt to balance the ever-increasing industrial and technological might of the advancing American forces in specific and the West in general. While Japan had munitions available, their resources both in armaments and manpower were rapidly diminishing. While suicide warfare would no doubt deplete them of even more manpower, Japan had reached the point of needing a force multiplier. Not only did each bomb have to count, but the damage had to reach maximum output. Anything less would be a wild failure.
Radical Islam’s situation is quite similar, although the battle that is being waged is more cultural in nature than overtly political. There’s no question in my mind that the prevailing crux of the conflict is founded in the dichotomy of West vs. East; the specific source(s) of that in which we find ourselves currently engaged, however, would seem to be the Iranian Revolution of 1979 (which, in addition to other political factors, was heavily influenced by the sense on the part of many fundamentalist Muslims that many young people in the Middle East were becoming far too "Westernized" in the manner in which they behaved, dressed, thought, etc. -- after all, who would want to be free, right?) and Afghanistan’s decade-long war with the Soviet Union, which, upon its conclusion, was subsequently followed by the United States’ near-immediate pullout from the area, leaving a vacuum of both power and resentment.
Here again, much as in the case of Japan, I’m guessing that there are quite a few fundamentalist Muslims who see Western Civilization as a threat to their very cultural survival. Lacking the military organizational and industrial might of America, these terrorists have taken up the very same kamikaze tactics of World War II Japan -- guided smart bombs, only on a completely unheard of and unimagined level.
In the case of the liberal Democrats currently in Congress, it seems as though there’s far more at hand than merely trying to get health care reform legislation passed. The behavior of some of these people leads me to think of what, in the psychological field, is deemed the "sunk-cost dilemma." Simply put, these ideologues have so much invested in bringing their platform to fruition--even at the expense of the United States as a whole--that common sense and logic no longer factor into any equation; having arguably invested--financially, politically, emotionally, and otherwise--40-plus years into their endgame, defeat, surrender or compromise are no longer political options. It’s the entire socialized package or nothing at all. They must now choose between the certain loss of the sunk costs if they were to actually acknowledge political realities versus possible--even if unlikely--electoral success should they charge ahead. These Marxist Democrats seem to tend to favour uncertain success over the certain loss of political manpower in the fallout.
In my mind, then, there’s no doubt that these politicians may in fact view themselves in much the same light as imperial Japan at the end and radical Islam in the here and now, given that their agenda has now been exposed and that they’re likely to find themselves short of adequate political resources in the very near future -- popular and political support, for instance, in addition to manpower in Congress. As a result, the leftist Democrats may now view as necessary the political suicide of some of their cherished "Blue Dogs," because the very existence of their worldview is at stake.
The torpedoes will take the form of outrageous bribes, and the spectacular detonations to the side of the USS Constitution will be outlandish. It is important to note, however, that history clearly shows that those countries who eventually turned to the tactic of suicide warfare have always lost their war.