I've come to believe that all of politics are defined by the need to control others. My left/right spectrum is driven by one question: "Do you feel the need to control other people, all outcomes and society itself? Do you want to make rules for every situation?"
If you do, I consider you to be a Leftist, of the political Left. The Constitution makes these people uncomfortable or downright hostile, because it takes the power of control away from government and yields it to individuals and their local representatives and governments.
If you don't, I consider you to be of the Right, like libertarians. The Constitution is your guiding document, and the rights enshrined are sacred to you. You are satisfied with a Free Market and individuals self-sustaining as long as they respect your own rights and others' rights. Your terms of coexistence with others are happier and more accepting.
So I always look through this lens to figure out who a person is, and whether they are hostile to me or someone who is friendly.
Interestingly, the Classical Liberal is someone I deem very friendly, even though I am someone of the "Far" Right (as is popular in our modern lexicon). "Live and Let Live" is very comfortable to me. I am not hostile to or threatened by someone who just wants to live peacefully and surf on the ocean like a hippie. I don't care either way. I also believe this is why we can easily identify Leftists and Democrats by simply listening to them. The lockdowns, vaccine requirements and mask requirements were revealing of everyone who couldn't contain that inner desire to control everyone else. Leftists wanted to force you to be vaccinated, wear a mask and stay in your home -- away from them. People of the Right felt it should largely be each person's own decision.
I like to read the humanities through this lens. Think of obvious ones like 1984, or Lord of the Flies, or Shakespeare. It's all there.
This to me, is Friedman's essence, and your essence, Mr. Carter. It's why I continually read every piece of yours, and I feel at home, as if you were a family member.
I listen to Gavin Newsome, and Joe Biden and AOC, and Rashida Tlieb and I feel very aggressive, uncomfortable even. These people don't wish for me to live freely, but want to control my life and every aspect of it until they achieve some sort of utopian outcome that they will define. Somehow we've never reached it, as they keep trying, with ever greater vigor.
That's how I see things, and wondered if others see it the same way?
Excellent comments, thank you. They help to clarify my thinking. You also help me to process the lingering trauma I feel from covid. Being in the bay area, CA during this time was brutal. Little tlieb's, aoc's and newsome's everywhere. These people relished in taking away freedoms and aggressively punished any offender with rude behaviors. The whole ordeal was a leftist utopian wet dream. Every fiber of my being felt the sadness of it all. But covid did expose the fact that I was going to the wrong church and I found a freedom loving one -- that was a gift.
In the 1960s, the draft was composed primarily of young men who didn't go to college. College was a four year deferment and in the early years longer than that. A lot of guys went into the reserves, and had limited active duty and a continuing obligation. For someone who grew up during the draft, the important thing is whether or not you served -- not whether or not you were in harms way. A lot of guys who were drafted wound up in Europe or Alaska and not Viet Nam. It's a false dichotomy to use Viet Nam as the measure of service. Once you put on the uniform, you go where they tell you. Putting on the uniform, doing unpleasant things while the college guys were eating pizza, honored an obligation that so many never fulfilled. And this continues for reservists today. George Bush may have been rich and privileged but he put more time into serving this nation than most of his contemporaries.
that is a fair point. I stand corrected to a point. My friend Bill Shepard was drafted, couldn't finish college and wound up in Germany. Another friend, drafted could have gone but luck of the draw assigned to Japan. Another, going to get drafted and enlisted, OCS, wound up in the Brown Water Navy and saw action every day. I still in my gut think strings were pulled for Bush. What about people like Dick Blumenthal? https://www.leftyliars.com/the-lefts-freudian-slip-regarding-vietnam/ Does all he can to stay out of the war, deferment after deferment, joins the USMC but looks like he makes a deal to stay out of harm's way. At any rate, the lesson is an all-volunteer army is the way to go.
"Yet, other connected people like President Bush actually served in the military but were given plum jobs stateside which never put their lives in danger"...GWB flew the F-102 Delta Dagger, an airplane that had a fairly poor record for safety. Not comparable to front-line ground or air combat, but significantly more dangerous than a desk job.
The F-102 was an interceptor, designed to shoot down enemy bombers. It was totally unsuitable for the ground attack role, and not really designed for an air combat role against other fighters.
Yeah, it does. You wouldn't use a drag racer to deliver packages, and if all you've ever driven is a drag racer, then you're probably not going to be assigned to deliver packages.
The F-102 is the aircraft equivalent of that drag racer; go fast in one direction. It's not a fighter, DEFINITELY not a bomber, and would be useless at close air support. Even if Shrub had WANTED to go to Vietnam, it wasn't going to happen. And the Air Farce wasn't about to retrain him to fly F-111s or or B-52s.
Outstanding! I hope our military isn't too far gone to the woke, imbecile side. We're seeing a sharp drop in re-enlistment and recruiting numbers. Milley and Austin need to either quit or address that asap and learn how to execute war plans instead of worrying about toxic masculinity and "white rage," whatever that is.
"Yet, other connected people like President Bush actually served in the military but were given plum jobs stateside which never put their lives in danger."
Whatever you know about economics, you clearly don't know jack about history or the military.
Bush was flying military planes. This has NEVER been a safe task that "never put their lives in danger."
IIRC, the plane Bush flew was a particularly unsafe one. But none of them are safe, and peacetime military pilots routinely die in accidents.
There's a lot of bad things you can say about GWB. But claiming he "got a safe sinecure" is not one of them
An all volunteer military does lead to better soldiers, of course. (The brass, who seemingly are incapable of winning a war, are another story.) But it also increases the gulf between classes. How many Ivy League, or even State U, grads ever sign up? It completely absolves the upper class of thinking about defending their nation. And so they don't, not even intellectually any more.
Great question. The Ivies never supported ROTC but State U did. Lots of kids from State U go through ROTC and enter the military. If the Ivies supported ROTC, I suspect they'd see applications from the kid who is a great student and wants to use ROTC to pay their way through school. Interestingly, the current Chief of Staff is a Princeton grad.
They can't afford to pay for it? Our European NATO allies should "lend" them the money. Germany, et al., are the nations most at risk from Russian expansion into Europe. They are the ones who have benefited from American generosity for most of the last century, and declined to meet their obligations even when gently reminded by Pres. Trump.
Ukraine is not a NATO country, and should not ever be.
To be clear, I think that Russia is the villain here, and should not be allowed to succeed in their invasion. The Ukrainians have fought bravely and well, and should be supported by their neighbors. As it stands now, the material and financial support given to Ukraine by USA will be paid by my grandchildren, with German (et el.) citizens and their progeny again getting a free ride.
"Yet, other connected people like President Bush actually served in the military but were given plum jobs stateside which never put their lives in danger."
I'm no great fan of the Shrub, but his job in the Texas Air National Guard wasn't exactly easy - and flying the F-102 was never a safe job. And the slander that he got out just when his squadron was going to be sent to Vietnam was just that; slander. No F-102 squadron was ever deployed to Vietnam, and never would be.
Sep 27, 2022·edited Sep 27, 2022Liked by Jeffrey Carter
But he was never in any war danger, was the point I took.
And he never did volunteer to go to Vietnam, did he? They certainly could have used more good pilots.
And wasn't Senior in the CIA at that time? (Update: it was after) Ironically, it was probably the CIA that was largely behind getting us there in the first place.
THIS cycle? Yes, but back then, I lived in Cacafornia, and we both know what the result was. Me voting for Shrub in 2000 or 2004 wouldn't have made any difference.
But the Libertarians have destroyed their party; now, it's just pro-weed RINOs. But I moved to Texas in 2020, and was proud to vote for Trump. And if he's on the ballot in 2024, I will again.
Yup, get it and I knew I'd get some flak. President Bush wasn't the only connected person that received the treatment he got. He was never going to Vietnam and what he did was far different than flying an FB-111, F-105, or F4/F5 over Hanoi. I do give him credit for being in uniform, which was far more than Clinton did (or Trump) or Da Nang Dick Blumenthal.
I've come to believe that all of politics are defined by the need to control others. My left/right spectrum is driven by one question: "Do you feel the need to control other people, all outcomes and society itself? Do you want to make rules for every situation?"
If you do, I consider you to be a Leftist, of the political Left. The Constitution makes these people uncomfortable or downright hostile, because it takes the power of control away from government and yields it to individuals and their local representatives and governments.
If you don't, I consider you to be of the Right, like libertarians. The Constitution is your guiding document, and the rights enshrined are sacred to you. You are satisfied with a Free Market and individuals self-sustaining as long as they respect your own rights and others' rights. Your terms of coexistence with others are happier and more accepting.
So I always look through this lens to figure out who a person is, and whether they are hostile to me or someone who is friendly.
Interestingly, the Classical Liberal is someone I deem very friendly, even though I am someone of the "Far" Right (as is popular in our modern lexicon). "Live and Let Live" is very comfortable to me. I am not hostile to or threatened by someone who just wants to live peacefully and surf on the ocean like a hippie. I don't care either way. I also believe this is why we can easily identify Leftists and Democrats by simply listening to them. The lockdowns, vaccine requirements and mask requirements were revealing of everyone who couldn't contain that inner desire to control everyone else. Leftists wanted to force you to be vaccinated, wear a mask and stay in your home -- away from them. People of the Right felt it should largely be each person's own decision.
I like to read the humanities through this lens. Think of obvious ones like 1984, or Lord of the Flies, or Shakespeare. It's all there.
This to me, is Friedman's essence, and your essence, Mr. Carter. It's why I continually read every piece of yours, and I feel at home, as if you were a family member.
I listen to Gavin Newsome, and Joe Biden and AOC, and Rashida Tlieb and I feel very aggressive, uncomfortable even. These people don't wish for me to live freely, but want to control my life and every aspect of it until they achieve some sort of utopian outcome that they will define. Somehow we've never reached it, as they keep trying, with ever greater vigor.
That's how I see things, and wondered if others see it the same way?
Excellent comments, thank you. They help to clarify my thinking. You also help me to process the lingering trauma I feel from covid. Being in the bay area, CA during this time was brutal. Little tlieb's, aoc's and newsome's everywhere. These people relished in taking away freedoms and aggressively punished any offender with rude behaviors. The whole ordeal was a leftist utopian wet dream. Every fiber of my being felt the sadness of it all. But covid did expose the fact that I was going to the wrong church and I found a freedom loving one -- that was a gift.
https://twitter.com/RetiredatKnight/status/1574819170583076864?s=20&t=6ajKC5JtZYVCiynExqLvAw never forget
In the 1960s, the draft was composed primarily of young men who didn't go to college. College was a four year deferment and in the early years longer than that. A lot of guys went into the reserves, and had limited active duty and a continuing obligation. For someone who grew up during the draft, the important thing is whether or not you served -- not whether or not you were in harms way. A lot of guys who were drafted wound up in Europe or Alaska and not Viet Nam. It's a false dichotomy to use Viet Nam as the measure of service. Once you put on the uniform, you go where they tell you. Putting on the uniform, doing unpleasant things while the college guys were eating pizza, honored an obligation that so many never fulfilled. And this continues for reservists today. George Bush may have been rich and privileged but he put more time into serving this nation than most of his contemporaries.
that is a fair point. I stand corrected to a point. My friend Bill Shepard was drafted, couldn't finish college and wound up in Germany. Another friend, drafted could have gone but luck of the draw assigned to Japan. Another, going to get drafted and enlisted, OCS, wound up in the Brown Water Navy and saw action every day. I still in my gut think strings were pulled for Bush. What about people like Dick Blumenthal? https://www.leftyliars.com/the-lefts-freudian-slip-regarding-vietnam/ Does all he can to stay out of the war, deferment after deferment, joins the USMC but looks like he makes a deal to stay out of harm's way. At any rate, the lesson is an all-volunteer army is the way to go.
"Yet, other connected people like President Bush actually served in the military but were given plum jobs stateside which never put their lives in danger"...GWB flew the F-102 Delta Dagger, an airplane that had a fairly poor record for safety. Not comparable to front-line ground or air combat, but significantly more dangerous than a desk job.
Right, but he defended the Texas border which back then was less dangerous than it is now. Very different than flying bombing missions over Hanoi.
The F-102 was an interceptor, designed to shoot down enemy bombers. It was totally unsuitable for the ground attack role, and not really designed for an air combat role against other fighters.
The actual plane doesn't matter much in the broader theme of things does it?
Yeah, it does. You wouldn't use a drag racer to deliver packages, and if all you've ever driven is a drag racer, then you're probably not going to be assigned to deliver packages.
The F-102 is the aircraft equivalent of that drag racer; go fast in one direction. It's not a fighter, DEFINITELY not a bomber, and would be useless at close air support. Even if Shrub had WANTED to go to Vietnam, it wasn't going to happen. And the Air Farce wasn't about to retrain him to fly F-111s or or B-52s.
The point is, he never really was at risk for going to Vietnam due to his connections.
Outstanding! I hope our military isn't too far gone to the woke, imbecile side. We're seeing a sharp drop in re-enlistment and recruiting numbers. Milley and Austin need to either quit or address that asap and learn how to execute war plans instead of worrying about toxic masculinity and "white rage," whatever that is.
"Yet, other connected people like President Bush actually served in the military but were given plum jobs stateside which never put their lives in danger."
Whatever you know about economics, you clearly don't know jack about history or the military.
Bush was flying military planes. This has NEVER been a safe task that "never put their lives in danger."
IIRC, the plane Bush flew was a particularly unsafe one. But none of them are safe, and peacetime military pilots routinely die in accidents.
There's a lot of bad things you can say about GWB. But claiming he "got a safe sinecure" is not one of them
An all volunteer military does lead to better soldiers, of course. (The brass, who seemingly are incapable of winning a war, are another story.) But it also increases the gulf between classes. How many Ivy League, or even State U, grads ever sign up? It completely absolves the upper class of thinking about defending their nation. And so they don't, not even intellectually any more.
Great question. The Ivies never supported ROTC but State U did. Lots of kids from State U go through ROTC and enter the military. If the Ivies supported ROTC, I suspect they'd see applications from the kid who is a great student and wants to use ROTC to pay their way through school. Interestingly, the current Chief of Staff is a Princeton grad.
Give stuff to Ukraine?
No, thank you.
Sell it to them?
That's a good idea.
They can't afford to pay for it? Our European NATO allies should "lend" them the money. Germany, et al., are the nations most at risk from Russian expansion into Europe. They are the ones who have benefited from American generosity for most of the last century, and declined to meet their obligations even when gently reminded by Pres. Trump.
Ukraine is not a NATO country, and should not ever be.
To be clear, I think that Russia is the villain here, and should not be allowed to succeed in their invasion. The Ukrainians have fought bravely and well, and should be supported by their neighbors. As it stands now, the material and financial support given to Ukraine by USA will be paid by my grandchildren, with German (et el.) citizens and their progeny again getting a free ride.
No, thanks.
"Yet, other connected people like President Bush actually served in the military but were given plum jobs stateside which never put their lives in danger."
I'm no great fan of the Shrub, but his job in the Texas Air National Guard wasn't exactly easy - and flying the F-102 was never a safe job. And the slander that he got out just when his squadron was going to be sent to Vietnam was just that; slander. No F-102 squadron was ever deployed to Vietnam, and never would be.
But he was never in any war danger, was the point I took.
And he never did volunteer to go to Vietnam, did he? They certainly could have used more good pilots.
And wasn't Senior in the CIA at that time? (Update: it was after) Ironically, it was probably the CIA that was largely behind getting us there in the first place.
I guess some sons are more important than others.
No, Bush doesn't get a pass.
An F-102 pilot is NEVER going to go to a place like Vietnam, not without a year or two of retraining to fly a different airplane.
But I am proud to be able to say that I never voted for either Shrub; I voted for the Libertarian candidates.
Good for you. Voting Libertarian in this cycle is tantamount to putting a gun to your head and pulling the trigger.
THIS cycle? Yes, but back then, I lived in Cacafornia, and we both know what the result was. Me voting for Shrub in 2000 or 2004 wouldn't have made any difference.
But the Libertarians have destroyed their party; now, it's just pro-weed RINOs. But I moved to Texas in 2020, and was proud to vote for Trump. And if he's on the ballot in 2024, I will again.
Yup, get it and I knew I'd get some flak. President Bush wasn't the only connected person that received the treatment he got. He was never going to Vietnam and what he did was far different than flying an FB-111, F-105, or F4/F5 over Hanoi. I do give him credit for being in uniform, which was far more than Clinton did (or Trump) or Da Nang Dick Blumenthal.