Tag Archives: morality

What Does Europe Owe Ukraine?

Posted on by
Reply

The crisis in Eastern Europe…is now entering its 10th month. What began with the collapse of an association agreement between the European Union and Ukraine can now be called a war.

Emphasis added.

All Ukraine wanted was to be free. Free from Russia; free to chart its own course; free to begin to escape its own history of governmental corruption; free to align itself with, learn from the association, and perhaps to prosper in its freedom. The EU implied, with that agreed association, that it would help Ukraine work toward those goals, using that association and EU’s vasty trade market.

When the collapse of the agreement occurred, the Ukrainian people tossed the mendacious government that had collapsed it—and those people—in favor of returning to the Russian sphere; in retaliation against the Ukrainians’ making their wishes, their demands, their very sovereignty over government known, Russia invaded Ukraine. First, the Russians occupied Crimea and then partitioned Ukraine, incorporating Crimea into itself. Then the Russians invaded eastern Ukraine, initially by supplying arms and ammunition to Russian “separatists” already present in the region, then by supplying Russian soldiers “on holiday,” and now openly, driving a Russian held corridor through southern Ukraine stretching along Ukraine’s erstwhile Sea of Azov coast from Russia to Crimea.

What is Europe doing about this? They’re talking. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has telephoned Russian President Vladimir Putin 25-35 times, to engage in idle chit-chat. The EU has applied pinprick “economic sanctions.” They do not supply arms and ammunition. The openly say they will not supply troops—which Ukraine already has said they do not want, but still….

What is the value of Europe’s agreements when they dishonor the implications of an association agreement? Even the one that was signed by the government which the Ukrainian people put in place a couple short months ago?

Democracy People’s Republic of China Style

Posted on by
Reply

And democracy Hong Kong style.

The PRC’s view of elections in its satrapy is that only candidates acceptable to the Communist Party of China can stand for office in Hong Kong. Indeed, the Deputy Secretary General of the National People’s Congress’ Standing Committee, Li Fei, has said out loud that openly nominating candidates would create a “chaotic society.” He went further:

[R]ights come from laws, they don’t come from the sky. Many Hong Kong people have wasted a lot of time discussing things that are not appropriate and aren’t discussing things that are appropriate.

The contrast between freedom and tyranny could hardly be made more starkly clear.

Pursuant to Li’s remarks,

The…Standing Committee ruled that all candidates for chief executive must receive more than half of the votes from a special nominating body before going before voters.

And

[T]he 1,200-member nominating committee would select two or three candidates. After one is selected through universal suffrage, the chief executive-elect “will have to be appointed by the Central People’s Government.”

The good citizens of Hong Kong, though, have been holding massive demonstrations during the current run-up to the elections for governing positions there, demanding that actual democracy break out (as agreed by the PRC when the UK gave up Hong Kong to them at the end of the last century). These citizens demur from the PRC’s despotism.

Democracy, freedom, are messy and chaotic at times. That’s the price, and the strength, of free men working their way along a path of their own choosing, rather than suffering the order of government telling them what their path must be. The noisiness and seeming chaos are in the nature of every man being free, of every man having his say, of every man acting in his own time according to his own needs and wishes. It is a sign of a healthy society.

My suggestion, in the hubris associated with my position on the outside looking in: the citizenry should agree on a couple of candidates for the relevant posts—most particularly, for Chief Executive—and then, en masse, write those names in, and thereby elect one of them to each of those relevant posts. The citizens then should demand the PRC recognize that man as the Hong Kong Chief Executive and those men as the elects for those relevant posts.

Of course, such a prior arrangement is not different from what the Standing Committee has done, but as a one-time event to make an important statement and to make the PRC’s behavior internationally public, perhaps an exception can be made. After all, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is the citizens of Hong Kong’s right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

In such an event, extraordinary measures become necessary.

Qatar’s Role

Posted on by
Reply

There seems to be quite a bit of…dissembling?…here, and it’s not all Qatar’s.

On the matter of whether Qatar supports terrorism while hosting our military base, there’s this from Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David Cohen:

Press reports indicate that the Qatari government is also supporting extremist groups operating in Syria. To say the least, this threatens to aggravate….

Wait. What? The US’ State Department gets its intel from the press? Well, that would be consistent with President Barack Obama only knowing what’s going on in the world from newspaper articles.

There’s more.

Qatar is a US “frenemy,” according to Jonathan Schanzer, of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. On one hand, it hosts the biggest US military base in the Middle East…and acts as the “white knight” intermediary in hostage negotiations.

But, but. The US doesn’t negotiate with hostage takers. Do we?

None of this is to say that Qatar is squeaky clean, but we certainly can’t tell from what State claims.

Civics in Education

Posted on by
Reply

A great part of what ails our country is ignorance of our history and so of who we are—how the US came to be, how we got where we are today, the nature of our culture and ethnicity. This hasn’t been taught with any seriousness since the middle of the last century, beyond a couple of semesters of civics-like courses in high school and a once-over lightly few units of American and European history in grade school and junior high. Throughout the current century, civics, American history, the form and style of American governance, and the like almost are not taught at all. Symptomatic of this is the growing emphasis on identity politics and the differences among those who live in the US, rather than our share culture. Too often, we African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Chinese- or Japanese-Americans, etc. There’s too little thought given to the concept that we’re all Americans, full stop. American, albeit some of us might have African heritage, some of us might have Hispanic heritage, some of us might have Chinese or Japanese heritage, etc.

If we don’t know whence we—our nation—came, how can we be expected to understand who we are, or where we ought to go?

Civics, though, and Government also, and American history, English and European history, Western Civilization, are too important to be taught in a couple of semesters in high school with a few short programs in grade school and junior high school. These subjects must be taught, in depth, throughout every child’s K-12 education. Furthermore, they must not be taught from a moral equivalent or moral relativist perspective—our culture is at the core of our greatness, after all, and Civics and Government must be taught from that perspective. In the end, too, these courses need to be especially intensive for our immigrant children, as they’ll have, depending on their age when they enter our school systems, quite a bit of catching up to do.

It is, after all, how we came to be, how we arrived at our social compact, that led to our American ethnicity and our American culture—the very things that made us so powerful, so prosperous, and for which others from all over the world go to lengths they do (highly risky lengths in a large per centage of the cases) to become a part of.

Our culture and ethnicity can be preserved and strengthened only through the education of our children in these components of our culture. We need to go back to taking that seriously.

This also demonstrates the…foolishness…of the moral relativism (masqueraded often as “cultural proficiency”) of folks like Oxnard Union School District Superintendent Dr Gabe Soumakian, with his insistence that the patriotic chant of “USA! USA!” is—or may be in some mythical context—racist, himself racist. One might ask of Dr Soumakian whose cultural proficiency?

The Administration’s Considerations Regarding Resurgent Terrorism

Posted on by
Reply

Here we are, with the terrorist gang, ISIS, butchering American journalists, doing their best to exterminate Yezidis, Christians, fellow Muslims who don’t think like these thugs do, et al. Here we are with ISIS continuing to make significant military gains after their blitz through Iraq to the outskirts of Baghdad. Here we are with ISIS having successfully seized a military airfield in Syria.

And here we are with President Barack Obama still…dithering…about what to do about these terrorists. After all, despite these terrorists having announced that they intend to fly their flag over the White House—our White House—despite these terrorists continuing their butchery of the innocents of other nations, the innocents of nations who would be our allies were we to allow them, the innocents of nations who would be our friends were we to allow them, American innocents, he’s still…not doing anything. And his military chief is assuring him—and us—that these terrorists, who’re sworn to do us harm, are not a direct threat to our nation.

With this background, Colleen McCain Nelson and Adam Entous in The Wall Street Journal, argued in all seriousness that

President Barack Obama faces pressure at home and in the Middle East to quickly step up strikes at Islamic State militants….

They also trotted out a roster of politicians applying that purported pressure: Senator Lindsey Graham (R, SC), Congressman Adam Schiff (D, CA), even Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel all saying that the US needs to do “something more” about ISIS.

But Obama feels none of this pressure. This is amply demonstrated by his behavior surrounding his (actually quite stirring) speech condemning the butchery of James Foley, that journalist mentioned above. He reluctantly interrupted his Martha’s Vineyard vacation to make the speech, and within the hour following that speech, he was back on the golf course, yokking it up with his capitalist and lobbyist cronies.

This unpressured president also is unlikely to allow any meaningful action because, after all, the war in Iraq is ended, al-Qaeda is on the run, and Osama bin Laden is dead. And ISIS is just junior varsity, anyway.

And all of it is of a piece with this guy, who occasionally sits in the President’s chair, putting the Palestinian Authority terrorists on the same moral plain as Israel.

No, this administration is unlikely to do anything beyond idle chit-chat about terrorism.