Monday, May 31, 2021

Memorial Day


                        Memorial Day

War is man's most evil pursuit. Every single human motive morphs into something horrible and destructive; the most noble of man's qualities become misapplied. Somehow the diffident grasshopper becomes the predatory locust. 

Yet within the world of men, some things must be done. Individuals must live and act within the admitted abomination that is war. In the Second War the Germans and the Japanese were asked to fulfill their destiny, to complete history. This involved destroying or subjugating everyone who was not them. The Allies' children were asked to fight for their lives. Their behavior in this gargantuan struggle should always stand as a testament to man's higher elements in the midst of man's lowest. Yet questions always arise.


When Obama was in Japan and visiting Hiroshima, new discussion of the WWII atomuc bombing began. An article in the LA Times asserted the bombing was cruel, gratuitous, and not a factor in the ending of the war. "Most Americans have been taught that using atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 was justified because the bombings ended the war in the Pacific, thereby averting a costly U.S. invasion of Japan. This erroneous contention finds its way into high school history texts still today," the article states. More, the cause of Japanese surrender was actually the Russian invasion of Manchuria. "It was not the atomic evisceration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that ended the Pacific war. Instead, it was the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and other Japanese colonies that began at midnight on Aug. 8, 1945 — between the two bombings." Indeed the sentiment at least seems to be in line with current thinking; the majority of Americans in polls think the bombs should not have been dropped.

Of course, people will differ in the assessment of history. Some assessments will be more accurate--sometimes more honest--than others. And many military men did not want to drop the weapons. But of all the wars in history, World War Two is the least ambiguous to analyze.

The History website has this summary:
Early on the morning of July 16, 1945, the Manhattan Project held its first successful test of an atomic device–a plutonium bomb–at the Trinity test site at Alamogordo, New Mexico.
By the time of the Trinity test, the Allied powers had already defeated Germany in Europe. Japan, however, vowed to fight to the bitter end in the Pacific, despite clear indications (as early as 1944) that they had little chance of winning. In fact, between mid-April 1945 (when President Harry Truman took office) and mid-July, Japanese forces inflicted Allied casualties totaling nearly half those suffered in three full years of war in the Pacific, proving that Japan had become even more deadly when faced with defeat. In late July, Japan’s militarist government rejected the Allied demand for surrender put forth in the Potsdam Declaration, which threatened the Japanese with “prompt and utter destruction” if they refused. (Italics added)

General Douglas MacArthur and other top military commanders favored continuing the conventional bombing of Japan already in effect and following up with a massive invasion, codenamed “Operation Downfall.” They advised Truman that such an invasion would result in U.S. casualties of up to 1 million. In order to avoid such a high casualty rate, Truman decided–over the moral reservations of Secretary of War Henry Stimson, General Dwight Eisenhower and a number of the Manhattan Project scientists–to use the atomic bomb in the hopes of bringing the war to a quick end. Proponents of the A-bomb–such as James Byrnes, Truman’s secretary of state–believed that its devastating power would not only end the war, but also put the U.S. in a dominant position to determine the course of the postwar world. (italics added)

On August 6, 1945  an American B-29 bomber dropped the world’s first deployed atomic bomb over the Japanese city of Hiroshima. The explosion wiped out 90 percent of the city and immediately killed 80,000 people; tens of thousands more would later die of radiation exposure. Three days later, a second B-29 dropped another A-bomb on Nagasaki, killing an estimated 40,000 people. Japan’s Emperor Hirohito announced his country’s unconditional surrender in World War II in a radio address on August 15, citing the devastating power of “a new and most cruel bomb.”

So the Emperor cites the bomb as a factor. And the alternative was an island-by-island attack on Japan that the experts accepted would cost one million--MILLION--American lives.

The LA Times article suggests the U.S. ignored a Japanese peace approach to the U.S. requesting only the Emperor survive. But that is not entirely true. Their proposal was to keep the Emperor and the current governing militaristic system intact, something the Allies thought nonnegotiable. Another element overlooked in the LA Times article is the continuity of events. Over 200,000 people were killed in the atomic attacks. Isolated, that is horrific. One wonders how the essayist saw those deaths in the context of the war itself. Or do they spare themselves the difficulty? China suffered between 15 and 17 million--MILLION--deaths directly related to combat--many described as "crimes against humanity." The Russians lost 25 to 27 million. MILLION. Certainly, we need kinder, gentler wars.

Nonetheless, the LA Times article was quite critical of American behavior and motives in one of the world's most easily evaluated conflicts, the American democracy vs. Nazis and Japanese imperialists. Applying morality to war is tricky and can be practiced only by our best and brightest. Fortunately, a look at the by-line has the reassuring information that the LA Times article was authored by none other than Oliver Stone, the esteemed and awarded movie director. He is certainly qualified. As a member of the exclusive self-absorbed entertainment cult and the reliable creator of the movie JFK, one of the cult's more astonishing productions of historical analysis, we can certainly rely upon his opinion.

And I'm sure he would have been willing to talk to the widows, the orphans, and the parents of those million Americans, explaining that those soldiers had to die assaulting the Japanese islands because we were true to our inner nature and did not drop the cruel bombs that could have ended the war. That was not who we are.

Sunday, May 30, 2021

Sunday/The Alchemist's Gate

 

                 Sunday/The Alchemist's Gate

Ted Chiang is a writer of several books of short stories with unusual sci-fi concepts. (His story "Story of Your Life" was the basis for the film, Arrival.)

"The Merchant and the Alchemist's Gate" is a story of time travel. As in all time travel stories, there are some contradictions but prominent is the idea of fixed history and the need to come to peace with the past. In an interview, Chiang said he chose to place the story in the Islamic culture because he was interested in the Arabian Nights' tales within tales and in the culture's "acceptance" of fate. There are other non-Western qualities of the story setting too, like a formality that never becomes stilted, a politeness that becomes easy.

But the culture also reflects the themes of the story, forgiveness, repentance, and atonement.

Belief in God allows many to accept the tragedy of life. Faith permits those very notions of forgiveness, repentance, and atonement. Is Chiang implying the West no longer supplies the environment for these essential human needs?

Saturday, May 29, 2021

SatStats

 



                                         SatStats

The state's war against inequality.

Since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913 and given control over the nation’s money supply, the Consumer Price Index has increased by a factor of 27.25 times which has caused the US dollar to lose 96.3% of its value/purchasing power. (Perry)

Friday, May 28, 2021

Uncritical Theories


                        Uncritical Theories

"Critical race theory (CRT) is decades old but, having insinuated itself just in the last few years into cable television, social media, public school systems, and the very public institution of “cancel culture,” is receiving precisely the backlash one would hope for, even from those who do not know it by its name.

Developed in academia, it combines paranoid racial conspiracy theories with a now-orphaned pro-Soviet Marxist ideology. The fingerprints of its creators show up in its singular focus on racism in one particular country and in one particular era against one particular group. This makes it a very narrow idea, whose adherents can simultaneously turn a blind eye toward actual genocide in China while making the ludicrous claim that everyday life in America is a constant genocide.

…..

It is also a thoroughly racist ideology because it imputes evil to people solely based on the color of their skin. It is already bad enough to attribute faults to people based on their own ancestors’ misdeeds before they were born. But critical race theory establishes guilt based on far less than that — a vague resemblance to long-dead suspects is sufficient."

This is from the Washington Examiner and is a reasonable summary of the pernicious anti-American quasi-philosophy of Critical Theory. It is impossible to have a culture based upon reverence for the individual when everyone is seen as members of malicious, competing groups. This bigoted, racist nostalgia for the problems of Old Europe--and the equally vicious "solutions" of the new "Old Left"--would be laughable were they not so incredibly dangerous, Proven dangerous.
Anyone with a brain who believed such a horror would, with any conscience, devote their lives to eradicating it.

Thursday, May 27, 2021

Bad Guys with Leverage

 



                     Bad Guys with Leverage

From an Issues and Insights editorial:


"The birthplace of most electric cars is the Democratic Republic of Congo, a country where the diamond trade has helped finance civil war. There, “slave labor” is feeding “big tech’s quest for cobalt,” an element used in the batteries that drive EVs.

“Our children are dying like dogs,” a Congolese mother whose son and cousin died while working in the Congo’s cobalt mines. She and others have filed a lawsuit in U.S. federal court that “insists companies are simply turning a blind eye to the egregious abuses that include children killed in tunnel collapses or losing limbs or suffering from other horrific injuries caused by mining accidents.”

The United Nations says that “nearly 50% of world cobalt reserves” are found in the Congo. But it’s not the only element needed to build “green” batteries. They require lithium, natural graphite, and manganese, raw materials that are “highly concentrated,” according to the U.N., “in a few countries.”

“Nearly 50% of world cobalt reserves are in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), 58% of lithium reserves are in Chile, 80% of natural graphite reserves are in China, Brazil and Turkey, while 75% of manganese reserves are in Australia, Brazil, South Africa and Ukraine,” says the U.N.

Look at the list again. What do some of those nations have in common? They are, the U.N. admits, “susceptible to disruption by political instability.” They also create by their Third World nature “social and environmental impacts” directly linked to “the extraction of raw materials for car batteries.”

The hypocrisy of the green movement emits a bad odor. The political left hates mining, but apparently only in the U.S., and maybe Canada. Seems that dirty mining is OK as long it’s out of sight. It’s the same with kids. “It’s for the children,” Democrats and progressives claim when their big-spending plans are challenged. Yet none on the left are calling for a halt to the green agenda until child slave labor has been eradicated from the supply chain."

I do not know Issues and Insights. This is how they describe themselves: Issues & Insights is a new site launched by the seasoned journalists behind the legendary IBD Editorials page.



Wednesday, May 26, 2021

Buffaloed



                           Buffaloed

As the bell curve becomes more and more a straight line, it is harder and harder to find a place to fall off. For example, it is often said that Qanon is a group that is representative of the right. I have never met one or anyone I know who has any knowledge of them. They only appear in Left articles. Maybe the Left knows a lot about them but, as far as one can see, they are not a significant group and their followers seem to be nonexistent. But they continue to appear, front and center, as prominent examples of the Conservative political movement. (The guy with the horns on his head in Washington was called the "Qanon Shaman" presumably by himself. He also has several regular names and a lawyer who says he has autism. What he is truly representative of is uncertain.)

Another seemingly peripheral group is those who believe in the "pregnant man," people that the Right seems to believe is representative of the Left. It sounds equally unlikely except it also appears as a theme in the left Press. The USA Today ran its second story this year on pregnant men.

So does that give credence to the idea that such thinking is ingrained in the Left?

Tuesday, May 25, 2021

Crack

 

                          Crack

The University of North Carolina has rescinded its offer of a tenured journalism professor position to the New York Times '1619 Project' author after an intense backlash.

Instead, UNC officials confirmed this week that Nikole Hannah-Jones, who won the Pulitzer Prize for the 2019 series which 'reframed' American history to focus on when the first Africans arrived in Virginia as slaves, will join its faculty this summer with a five-year contract.

That means one of the New York Times's most vaunted reporters who the newspaper has doggedly stood by even as the project has come under withering criticism by historians for its inaccuracies didn't qualify for a permanent appointment.

This is from The Daily Mail, a bit of a surprise, and is heart-warming--except it sounds as UNC changed its mind for PR reasons rather than rational and idealistic ones. But at least that means the observers are rational and idealistic, even if the institution isn't.