Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Excerpts: American Grit

posted at 2:45 pm on January 12, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Tony Blankley has a new book out this week, American Grit: What It Will Take to Survive and Win in the 21st Century, offering a prescription of nationalism and strength for American prosperity. I’ve been reading a galley copy of the book, and it’s certainly going to be controversial, and not just with liberals. Conservatives may have some issues with Blankley’s positions as well. His publisher has provided me with a few excerpts from the book:

A CALL FOR NEW AMERICAN NATIONALISM TO SAVE OUR COUNTRY
Patriotism is a love for one’s country; nationalism is a call to action, a commitment to make the difficult decisions on behalf of what will make America strong—both spiritually and materially—even at the expense of what might make us momentarily more comfortable. A nationalist recognizes that each citizen owes the country something….A nationalist program, such as I propose, seeks to restore America’s prosperity, military strength, and sense of patriotism. Above all else, it places the interests of the country first….(6)

BRINGING BACK THE DRAFT COULD ENSURE AMERICAN SURVIVAL
The bottom line is that despite all our technological advantages, troop strength matters… the lack of available ground troops has led some officials and analysts to conclude that if the United States found another unavoidable military conflict, we would have to rely on air power and even, if it was serious enough, nuclear weapons. (p. 28)

National service is a call to renew the self-sacrifice, patriotism, and stoicism that once animated our country, but that today seem too often shelved in favor of a self-centered veneration of personal happiness. [Bringing back the draft] would undoubtedly provoke libertarian outrage from a number of eighteen-year-olds who’ve become estranged from the very idea of a citizen’s obligation to his country. But the question is this: is enlarging America’s military to defend our vital national interests and renew our sense of national unity worth the price of a national service program? I think the answer is undeniably yes. More than that, I believe it’s inevitable, if we are to survive and prosper as a free and independent nation. (p. 39)

CONQUERING AMERICAN DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL WITH NATIONALISM
Our national security is being held hostage by our reliance on foreign oil….We need a new, nationalist energy policy that harnesses both government power and private industry to achieve the crucial national goal of energy independence. The biggest domestic obstacle we face is liberals like President Obama with their petulant opposition to drilling for oil off our shores and in Alaska, with their superstitious fear of nuclear power, and with their emotional, apocalyptic belief in global warming that has created a mania for cutting our carbon emissions—even to the point of bankrupting our entire coal industry. (p. 57)

The trend away from international free trade in energy presents a direct challenge to our well-being and our influence in the world. When so many major energy suppliers are openly hostile to the United States…it is the height of folly for us not to exploit our own reserves of energy. As others have noted, we are likely heading into a world of “resource wars”—a world for which America, right now, is woefully unprepared. (p. 56)

Tony Blankley will join me on Wednesday’s Ed Morrissey Show at 3:30 pm ET to discuss his book and debate the controversial nature of muscular nationalism that he presents. As always, Blankley gives us a rich, dynamic work that will prompt thinkers across the political spectrum, and will make for great interviews. Don’t miss it, and don’t miss out on ordering your copy.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

nationalism is a call to action, a commitment to make the difficult decisions on behalf of what will make America strong—both spiritually and materially—even at the expense of what might make us momentarily more comfortable. A nationalist recognizes that each citizen owes the country something….A nationalist program, such as I propose, seeks to restore America’s prosperity, military strength, and sense of patriotism. Above all else, it places the interests of the country first….

Uhhhhhh… that sounds very fascist… (And I mean that in the correct sense… not the crypto-liberal use it as a giant paintbrush on Republicans sense)

Skywise on January 12, 2009 at 2:49 PM

Certainly disagree with him on the draft. I would think quality matters more than quantity in a war unless we’re playing Risk.

Besides, with the draft, we have Vietnam all over again.

Esthier on January 12, 2009 at 2:51 PM

Skywise on January 12, 2009 at 2:49 PM

I was actually going to say much the same thing…in fact, this might be one rare occasion where one can legitimately say “just like nazism”.

No thanks Blankley, I’ll pass.

LimeyGeek on January 12, 2009 at 2:52 PM

I am not certain that nationalism means what he think it means.

BohicaTwentyTwo on January 12, 2009 at 2:52 PM

[Bringing back the draft] would undoubtedly provoke libertarian outrage from a number of eighteen-year-olds who’ve become estranged from the very idea of a citizen’s obligation to his country.

And Robert Heinlein. Who is, you know, very estranged from the idea of a citizen’s obl-oh wait.

Conscription is slavery. Does anyone have any quotes of an active duty general that actually supports the idea of a draft?

I’m pretty sure that volunteerism is a central pillar to our military’s training program. Every soldier in our military volunteered to be there, and, by extension, wants to be there. I think that fact is the foundation that our military is currently built on. That way you can train people harder – because they can quit any time they want.

apollyonbob on January 12, 2009 at 2:54 PM

A nationalist recognizes that each citizen owes the country something…

I don’t know about this guy, but I pay taxes.

If the country is getting anythimg more from me, it’s only because I volunteer it.

apollyonbob on January 12, 2009 at 2:55 PM

I’ll wait for the interview and the book, but I don’t like where these excerpts lead.

Weight of Glory on January 12, 2009 at 3:05 PM

Please please please don’t bring the draft back. We do not need another large shipment of American lefty nutroots up here.

ProfessorMiao on January 12, 2009 at 3:07 PM

I’m not averse to Heinlein’s idea that voting should be restricted to those who have served in the military.

MarkTheGreat on January 12, 2009 at 3:08 PM

That kind of nationalism isn’t American. The American Ideal (capital I) puts the individual first. It recognizes that there really are no groups but are in fact only collections of individuals. The distinction between the two concepts is profound and generally incomprehensible to people outside of the United States. It remains in fact the primary distinction between European and American culture. Socialism after all is about the interests of the Group as a singular entity. Concepts like the right to bare arms or freedom of speech only make sense when the individual is recognized.

As to the draft, it is actually the most destructive force ever unleashed on American society. As a democracy no war should be fought that cannot be fought with volunteers. If Americans don’t love their country enough to individually offer their lives to the cause or respect the cause enough… then America has voted with it’s feet. If that means America loses, then it chose to lose. If that means that the state dies, then that means the people have chosen for it to die. The underlying point is that we do NOT live for the state. The State lives for us! The government is the literal servant of the people or it is a tyrant.

As to energy independence, as it stands the US gets almost all of it’s energy from the Americas. American foreign policy suffers when tyrannical regimes are flooded with cash to spend on trouble. So not only must we break our own addiction on oil, but we must break the whole world of that addiction. Anything short of that goal will prove of little use on the international stage. To that end, I suggest we continue to invest in technological innovation in energy. EEstor for example has recently come up with an ultra capacitor that has a higher energy density then a laptop battery. For the scientifically ignorant, a capacitor can recharge and discharge almost instantly with no wear. That means you could have electric cars that recharge in a couple minutes, can out race the fastest gasoline cars, and run on grid power. You can also do some other interesting things like catch lightning in a bottle… literally. As to solar, it’s all about concentrating solar (mirrors and lenses). The cost of solar is so high because silicon chips are expensive. Focus 3 square feet of light on a one inch chip though and you’ll produce MORE energy then 3 square feet of solar panels at a tiny fraction of the cost (solar collection efficiency goes up with intensity. So a smaller cell with more light on it produces more then a proportionately larger cell with proportionately less light.).

In short, I’m not impressed by his argument if this quotation is representative. I’m not sure that he even understands the uniqueness of American culture or appreciates the complexity of our place in the world.

Karmashock on January 12, 2009 at 3:08 PM

Those points make me nervous – especially when coupled with the Amazon.com product description that shows him arguing for a foreign policy that “avoids the mistakes of both the liberals and the neo-cons,” and “Why we need stricter laws to prevent the media from compromising our national security.”

Doesn’t bode well.

emailnuevo on January 12, 2009 at 3:12 PM

A nationalist recognizes that each citizen owes the country something

Yeah, uh, no. First of all, I pay taxes and my family has paid with blood. Second of all, if I owe anyone anything, it’s the soldiers who’ve fought for this nation.

BRINGING BACK THE DRAFT COULD ENSURE AMERICAN SURVIVAL

Yeah, because nothing says “American survival” like putting the future protection of the nation in the hands of the next generation of John Kerrys — people who don’t want to serve and will do whatever possible to undermine those who do.

Who wrote this, Mussolini?

amerpundit on January 12, 2009 at 3:12 PM

Fascism is also a form of nationalism. What kind are we talking about here? The author forgets that many of the wave of late-19th-early 20th century immigrants came here to escape military conscription. Their seeking this land of opportunity is a big part of what built this nation. Shall their motives be called into question because they didn’t like being drafted?

A call to national civilian service is one thing, and can take many forms, or could spread out over a lifetime. A military draft will more easily enable the kind of reckless military adventurism against which our Founding Fathers warned us. By all means have a strong national defense, but a draft should only accompany a formal declaration of war.

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 3:14 PM

I’m not averse to Heinlein’s idea that voting should be restricted to those who have served in the military.

MarkTheGreat on January 12, 2009 at 3:08 PM

Yeah, we have a little phrase for that policy. It’s called “Taxation without Representation”. There was a war to stop that or something at some point. I think a nation was even founded on the principle that people would have a say in who governs them. Consent of the governed or something.

amerpundit on January 12, 2009 at 3:15 PM

Was this book written by Obama?

And Robert Heinlein. Who is, you know, very estranged from the idea of a citizen’s obl-oh wait.

Conscription is slavery. Does anyone have any quotes of an active duty general that actually supports the idea of a draft?

Leaving Robert Heinlein’s pedophilia [which partially motivates his legal system] completely aside ;-), he was a socialist who proposed that only those who voluntarily served the state had civil rights (including a right to vote). We are, for better or worse, quite a bit different than Heinlein’s society.

I’m pretty sure that volunteerism is a central pillar to our military’s training program. Every soldier in our military volunteered to be there, and, by extension, wants to be there. I think that fact is the foundation that our military is currently built on. That way you can train people harder – because they can quit any time they want.

No they can’t quit anytime they want. That’s called desertion (or, at a minimum, missing movement). Enlistment for the duration is the norm in times of war.

I don’t know about this guy, but I pay taxes.

If the country is getting anythimg more from me, it’s only because I volunteer it.

apollyonbob on January 12, 2009 at 2:55 PM

If you are in the ready reserves, your country might be able to ask for more — and get it.

unclesmrgol on January 12, 2009 at 3:15 PM

I’m not averse to Heinlein’s idea that voting should be restricted to those who have served in the military.

MarkTheGreat on January 12, 2009 at 3:08 PM

I am. We vote on issues that deal with far more than just how we use our military, things that those involved in the military may not even understand much about, especially those currently overseas.

I can see a benefit to requiring service of some kind to gain citizenship but not just military service.

Esthier on January 12, 2009 at 3:15 PM

Me thinks,Nationalism might be getting a bad rap,
I mean,if its Hopey/Changey Nationalism,

like Obama’s planned ‘National Civilian Secruity Force’,

then I think,that kind of Nationalism could be bad!

canopfor on January 12, 2009 at 3:16 PM

Tony Blankley will join me on Wednesday’s Ed Morrissey Show at 3:30 pm ET to discuss his book and debate the controversial nature of muscular nationalism that he presents.

Ask him what he’s been smoking. Oh, and if he’s ever taken a basic history course.

amerpundit on January 12, 2009 at 3:17 PM

somehow our leaders have to figure out how to get the Left and Right, united against the Islamo-fascist and that Nationalistic minded foes like Russia and possibly China in the coming years.

If they don’t do this, we are screwed. We’d be better off in this direction already if not for the shameless Dems/libs politicizing this stuff, the MSM and widespread outbreak of BDS.

jp on January 12, 2009 at 3:25 PM

i think voting should be restricted to people who file tax returns. i won’t even ban people who don’t pay taxes.

but, i think the problem is that liberals (always) mistake being liked for being respected. i don’t think there’s a country in the world that actually likes Russia, but they respect Russia and its power and its non-hesitation to use force. liberals in America have mistaken other countries liking us for those countries respecting us, and what’s happened as would with any sucker, is that countries will feign liking you…which is a form of blatant disrespect. but liberals don’t get that.

nationalism is a great start, however…what really needs to change is this belief of like vs respect. we should do what’s right, and not ask the rest of the world what they think is right. we have principles that have raised this nation from the 1800 version of a third world nation to the strongest nation on earth…and we did that with great success, without asking for world opinion. i see no reason we need to get their opinion now.

bloghooligan on January 12, 2009 at 3:26 PM

from the posts here it appears that Blankley is right our nation is doomed.

Before you all runoff saying no to a draft and comparing blankey to hitler etc. Remember this it was the ideas expressed in the founding documents that have given you the government you have. Yes your rights are God given but it takes a government to protect those rights. You would not have the dsame rights if you lived in the UK or canada or france. It is only in this nation this USA that you have the rights you have. Without nations and the desire to defend that nation those rights would not exist.

The neocons forgot that and instead of bringing Ameriican democracy to Iraq and Afgansitian we brought some twisted form of freedom where women are still second class citizens of their nations.

The idea of nationlism is at the root of anti-illegal immigration because if you do not like nationalism you do not like borders and laws of that nation.

There are only two outcomes if you do away with nationstates. One is anarchy and the other is world government. I for one do not what Russians telling me how to life nor do i want New yorkers telling me what to do. I want the most freedom I can have with as much security as that freedom allows without sacrificing that freedom.

I want consitutional limited government which does not really exist except in the USA.

Therefore nationalism needs to occur in trade policy, ,military policy, immigration policy. We must ensure the ideas of America survive and to do that we need the USA to survive and to do that we need the ideas of nationalism to survive.

We have tried the neocon new world order of free trade, oopen borders, and free flow of capital and it has been a complete failure. It is time we try what worked for 200 years the idea of nations and soveignty.

unseen on January 12, 2009 at 3:27 PM

we need a type of nationalism, that has both major political parties and their key operatives, refraining from repeating Enemy Propaganda, lies and conspiracy theories and in which both sides agree that our culture is Superior, not equal but superior, to that of other cultures. The Moral Egalitarianism has got to go.

problem is the Secular Left have formed their own religion and its the anti-thesis of the Judeo-Christian founding base the right generally adheres to. It really has more in common with the Islamo-fascist.

jp on January 12, 2009 at 3:28 PM

If you are in the ready reserves, your country might be able to ask for more — and get it.

unclesmrgol on January 12, 2009 at 3:15 PM

Only if they are actually stupid enough to bring back the draft.

I actually asked a national guard outfit about the pros and cons and his response was, to paraphrase, “No fatties.”

Trust me man, if the Government is relying on me to get the job done, you and us and this country, far from saved as Blankley would suggest, is screwed.

apollyonbob on January 12, 2009 at 3:30 PM

Some of you need to go back and read Starship Troopers (which was just one of Heinlein’s ideas of a political system) because you didn’t “get” it the first time around.

MarktheGreat: Starship Troopers’ universe did not have voting connected to military service. It had voting connected to civil service. You worked for the government for a set amount of time, you got your voting rights. If you couldn’t physically do any of the jobs the government had, they had to create one for you. In the book it is mentioned that the military service and the infantry was the ‘worst’ way to get a vote, and was looked down upon by people who couldn’t vote.

unclesmrgol: You’re wrong too. In the book citizens had full rights except for voting. You could protest, petition the government, do everything a normal citizen could do except vote (which truth be told bears little difference to today. Most people do everything but actually vote). He also illustrates a whole bunch of different legal and governmental systems in his books (just a note).

If you’re going to comment on a book, it helps if you’ve not only read the thing but comprehended it too.

Spade on January 12, 2009 at 3:32 PM

Please please please don’t bring the draft back. We do not need another large shipment of American lefty nutroots up here.

ProfessorMiao on January 12, 2009 at 3:07 PM

They are, however, cheaper than patriots.

But not as good.

unclesmrgol on January 12, 2009 at 3:34 PM

Yes your rights are God given but it takes a government to protect those rights.
unseen on January 12, 2009 at 3:27 PM

No. It takes force to protect those rights. The agent of that force, the organization of that force, the distance of that force from the individual, and the extent of that force are the finer points to be hammered out. Blankely is pushing one direction in trying to solve the problem; I would hope that there would be an equal movement pushing in the other direction.

Weight of Glory on January 12, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Only if they are actually stupid enough to bring back the draft.

apollyonbob on January 12, 2009 at 3:30 PM

We have people here who are on their fourth tour in the Middle East, and they are not regulars — they are ready reserve.

If you have that certain skill and they need you, you are going.

unclesmrgol on January 12, 2009 at 3:38 PM

I wish you just had a section related to your book reviews. Some of the best books I’ve read in the past few years were ones you reviewed.

DrewVT6 on January 12, 2009 at 3:49 PM

Wow…..the draft is evil, huh? No good comes of it, huh?

I’m sure the Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam would have been better off with sculpted alpha male volunteers instead of the rag-tag common man.

And quality vs quantity? Ever compared a Tiger to Sherman? Thought not. Half of us would have to commit seppuku if they took the GPS out of our cars as we wouldn’t be able to find our way to work.

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 3:51 PM

“American Grit”… the real thing and not the book (I assume based on the quote above, I can’t know until I’ve read it.) is based upon rugged INDIVIDUALISM not stalwart collectivism.

This nation is an aberration in human history. As some of the posters have pointed out, the state is required to protect our freedoms. However, that does not mean that the state is more important then those freedoms. The paradoxical fact of the matter is that if the state forces us to protect it, it violates the contract. No man should be forced against his will into combat. Every individual has the “divine right” to say no and walk away. If the state can’t convince him to join based upon the merits and can only compel him to fight at the point of a sword or muzzle of a gun… then the war is already lost. You cannot force the free to save themselves.

A truly patriotic people would sooner have it die with dignity then survive in corruption. Further, if the tyrants within our own culture know that absolute power is only one crisis away, we’ll lose our freedoms in a generation.

Karmashock on January 12, 2009 at 3:52 PM

I’m sure the Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam would have been better off with sculpted alpha male volunteers instead of the rag-tag common man.

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 3:51 PM

First of all, I wouldn’t compare those generations of unwilling fighting-age generations to the unwilling fighting-age generation of today. To quote that George C. Scott parody, much of today’s youth wouldn’t understand a real threat to their freedom unless it interrupted the power supply to their XBOX and killed a half-million people.

Second of all, just because something good came of it at one point doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. America made quite a bit of money and built some major infrastructure through the practice of slavery. Doesn’t mean it was right or should be continued.

amerpundit on January 12, 2009 at 4:00 PM

amerpundit on January 12, 2009 at 4:00 PM

Sorry, you’ll not change my mind with comparing slavery to conscription. Do I think an all volunteer military is superior in quality? Sure I do. Do I think ALL wars can be fought and won with qaulity and not quantity? Nope. Some of the best troopers I ever served with just wanted to go home. Duty, honor, justice. If you do not have a duty to the society you choose to live in then you don’t have a claim on bitching.

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 4:04 PM

response held up in moderation….

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 4:06 PM

America made quite a bit of money and built some major infrastructure through the practice of slavery

Some good songs too

LimeyGeek on January 12, 2009 at 4:08 PM

amerpundit on January 12, 2009 at 3:12 PM

Sigh, so many “interesting” views in this thread…

There was no RIGHT for all to vote in the origional Founding Father’s plan… with poll taxes, and no universal sufferage, many did not have the PRIVELEGE of voting… Heinlein’s idea, as premised in Starship Troopers, was that to gain the Privelege of voting, you had to serve (and had the right to serve to gain it). He just used Service, instead of a Poll Tax, or land ownership, as a criteria for voting (actualy closer to the Constitutions Framers than we are today). We were created as a Republic, NOT a Democracy… and with 50% of the Voters no longer paying Taxes? DOOOOMMMMMEEEEEEDDDDDD…..

As to the draft… Civil War? WW1? WW2? Drafts. Quantity has a quality all its own. During WW2 our tanks were clearly inferior to German Tanks… we overwhelmed them with Logistics, and numbers (in fact, Shermans were known as Ronsons, like the Lighter, because they would burn at the drop of a hat).

As to Nationalism? There is nothing wrong with liking the America our Fathers had… and that we are squandering away. You can have pride in your country, and think its the best thing going WITHOUT having to appologise. Arrogance is Pride taken to extremes… but that does not mean that Pride itself is a bad thing. Multiculturalism is destroying this country… as we allow immigrants to bring the very viewpoints that have messed up their origional countries here. We are afraid to say that the American way is RIGHT… and if you don’t like it, then LEAVE.

Gonna have to read this book… won’t aggree with a lot of it, but don’t dismiss his ideas without first giving them some thought….

Romeo13 on January 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM

Hmm, draft, nationalism, heady words for this Vietnam vet. Draft? universal? without exceptions?… how’d that work when I was in Nam….. not well. nationalism…. this is harder…. I love this country, yep even to a level that quotes Stephen Decatur… and yes, I know the context he said it and what he actually said, so you anal desk sitters hush up.. … This does make me want to read his book. heck, if I read Saul Alinsky’s book… why not this one?

MNDavenotPC on January 12, 2009 at 4:14 PM

52% of the voters think that voting for Obama was the most nationalistic/patriotic thing they’ve ever done.

If we to get involved in a war to the extent that a draft was necessary, the 18 year-olds would be thinking it is the 30-35 year-old that should be drafted.

BigD on January 12, 2009 at 4:17 PM

I’m not averse to Heinlein’s idea that voting should be restricted to those who have served in the military.

MarkTheGreat on January 12, 2009 at 3:08 PM

Sounds nice on the surface, but I suspect a better idea would be the opposite: Voting rights should be suspended for any citizen whose primary source of income is the government (federal, state, or local).

Blacklake on January 12, 2009 at 4:22 PM

Wow…..the draft is evil, huh? No good comes of it, huh?

I’m sure the Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam would have been better off with sculpted alpha male volunteers instead of the rag-tag common man.

So, a draft is the answer in all cases, right?

The Civil War, WW1, and WW2 benefitted from a formal declaration of war, and the level of national resolve that accompanied it. Korea and Vietnam did not. Korea (to make a long story short) ended in a stalemate. Vietnam fell to Communism after we left, following what was certainly a lack of national resolve.

Now, what does that say about the draft?

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 4:24 PM

Now, what does that say about the draft?

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 4:24 PM

NAFT

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 4:26 PM

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 4:26 PM

I’ll admit this could require a gift for analytical thought. Breathe deeply, read the comparison I gave, and try again.

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 4:29 PM

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 4:29 PM

So my lack of analytical thought is preventing you from winning? TFB

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 4:33 PM

Now, what does that say about the draft?

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 4:24 PM

Oh, right. The draft was the common denominator. How could we not have figured this out before?

BigD on January 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 4:33 PM

No, it’s preventing you from thinking.

From what I’ve read so far, I probably don’t have to tell you of the importance of moral support from “the home front.” At least you have that going for you. You mentioned the superiority of German tanks. Many things helped us overcome that disadvantage; logistical superiority, yes, but also the righteousness of our cause, and the resolve to see it through. Surely the outcome in Vietnam would have been more to our favor, had people at home been more united, wouldn’t you agree? And isn’t it possible that a Congressional declaration of war would have prevented them from allowing politics to interfere with the course of military action?

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 4:38 PM

Oh, right. The draft was the common denominator. How could we not have figured this out before?

BigD on January 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM

Snarking takes a lot of energy away from seeing the obvious. Could happen to anybody. Really.

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 4:39 PM

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 4:38 PM

First of all you needn’t bother giving me lessons on Vietnam.

My point, to assist your analytical skills, is to put DUTY in the mix. All I’ve heard so far is that the draft is hobnailed boots. Maybe, just maybe, you have more of a duty then to go to work to pay your taxes. Just sayin’.

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM

I guess Tony assumes that military service is the only way to be patriotic. Many of our heroes in the fight for independence did not serve in the military, but we consider them patriots none the less.

My father as well as my ancestors going back to the Revolutionary War fought for their country. They were all patriots.
My mother and my female ancestors going back to the Revolutionary War did not serve in the military but they are all patriots too.

When Nixon eliminated the draft the war protest (which were really just a form of draft riots in my opinion) movement of the left fizzled. Let’s leave it that way because the military we have now is the best in the world, in part because of its professionalism. I don’t need a guy with a Bristish accent, who will never have to fight for our country telling us what we need to do to be patriotic, whether he is a conservative or liberal. Forcing people to serve in the military does not a patriot make.

Done That on January 12, 2009 at 5:12 PM

Karmashock on January 12, 2009 at 3:08 PM

+ 1

The draft would do far far more harm than good.

Throw a bunch of crazy lefties who don’t want to be there into boot camp, and you don’t just have an annoyance.

You have a dangerous situation that will get soldiers killed.

If not enough people are willing to fight and die for America, then as you said, it deserves to die.

Spot on about the importance of the individual, btw.

Hawkins1701 on January 12, 2009 at 5:27 PM

My point, to assist your analytical skills, is to put DUTY in the mix…

Limerick on January 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM

Exactly. We’ve both been talking about duty. It extends beyond the young men sent to die for their country. It extends to the old men who send them there. That was the part about the “home front.” Not to mention Congress.

I’m relieved you don’t need a lesson from me about Vietnam. That would make it easier to get this point across. (It’s already hard enough.) Just sayin.’

manwithblackhat on January 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM

“As others have noted, we are likely heading into a world of ‘resource wars’ — a world for which America, right now, is woefully unprepared.”

I’m afraid that this won’t happen. Under Obama it is clear that the US will capitulate on as many fronts as necessary in order to keep the resources flowing from countries and regimes that detest the West. He’s already prepared the way by his statements thusfar concerning off-shore drilling.

America will not be permitted to help itself, it will be kept dependant on foreign powers. It certainly will not be allowed to fight for resources. Capitulation and appeasement are the answers to America’s future foreign policy problems.

Under Obama, America will do whatever it takes to keep getting its energy – become a carbon copy of the EU – sell its soul if necessary. This fits perfectly with The One’s agenda to reshape American society.

Sorry.

Liam1304 on January 12, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Liam1304 on January 12, 2009 at 6:18 PM

And what really sad is that we already HAVE a viable, and economic alternative fuel source in Compressed Natural Gas.

We have an overabundance of it… and a standard engine can be modified to burn it… and it burns cleaner than gasoline.

Problem is its still not clean enough for the Ludites who will be running our energy policy…

Here is a little fact for ya… if you take the energy we use for transportation, and convert it to Kilowatt hours, we will need to increase our electric grid by 140% (yes, thats INCREASE, or much more than double what we currently produce) to use electric cars and trucks…

But thats that dang science and reality rearing its ugly head again…

Romeo13 on January 12, 2009 at 6:45 PM

If there is no border control, no preserving of the culture within, GRIT is only dust in the eyes.

profitsbeard on January 12, 2009 at 6:59 PM

I like Tony. I listen to him every week on KCRW’s “Left, Right, and Center” (more like “Left, Left, Left and Right”).

If he makes a case for conscription, I’ll totally listen. I may not agree, but I’ll listen. He’s a great guy and a great debater. =)

Summer on January 12, 2009 at 7:27 PM

I love the themes expressed in those excerpts. That is what America needs, but sadly, will never get. We need to take things far to the right and libertarianism only takes us to the middle. Nationalism stirs the soul whereas libertarianism is only about the liberty and greater glory of the individual.

keep the change on January 12, 2009 at 9:12 PM

Would you rather have a volunteer or a conscript watching your six?

ZenDraken on January 12, 2009 at 10:22 PM

Although I’m a bit skeptical of these quotes alone, my guess and my hope is that in context Blankley makes this key distinction: American nationalism is unlike any other nationalism in the history of the world. Unlike fascist regimes in which nationalism was an allegiance to a state or power, America was founded on principles, most fundamentally–liberty. Therefore, a call to American nationalism is a call for freedom and the protection and/or promotion of it, and a calling much more worthy of sacrifice than historic fascist nationalism elsewhere in the world.

Chi-town Conservative on January 12, 2009 at 10:55 PM

A nationalist recognizes that each citizen owes the country something

I thought that was a socialist.

The bottom line is that despite all our technological advantages, troop strength matters… the lack of available ground troops has led some officials and analysts to conclude that if the United States found another unavoidable military conflict, we would have to rely on air power and even, if it was serious enough, nuclear weapons.

Maybe if we actually limited ourselves to unavoidable military conflicts, we wouldn’t have such a hard time recruiting. It isn’t patriotic or nationalistic to die fighting another country’s battle or to die fighting a war that has nothing to do with defending your country’s borders.

National service is a call to renew the self-sacrifice, patriotism, and stoicism that once animated our country, but that today seem too often shelved in favor of a self-centered veneration of personal happiness.

So instead of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we are to embrace death, enslavement, and the pursuit of national spirituality? I’ll pass, thanks. I’ll put a bullet in the first person to come to my house and attempt to force me to fight for causes and principles I don’t hold to be true. My pride is not in America the country, America the government, America the military, or America the location. My pride is in American principles and ideals: Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Limited government and maximum personal freedom. Those principles hold true everywhere in the world, and irrespective of what color flag you fly in their name. Tony Blankley is advocating fascism — and I mean that in the most serious and non-hyperbolic way that I can possible convey. This is unabashed fascism painted red, white and blue.

Mark Jaquith on January 12, 2009 at 11:30 PM

I’ll put a bullet in the first person to come to my house and attempt to force me to fight for causes and principles I don’t hold to be true.

Mark Jaquith on January 12, 2009 at 11:30 PM

No worries. In your world people won’t come to your house to call for your service. You will all survive as strong individuals who owe nothing to the society you choose to live in. Thunderdome at it’s finest.

Limerick on January 13, 2009 at 12:12 AM

Summer on January 12, 2009 at 7:27 PM

Tony is a very sharp thinker. Thanks for the heads up on his Friday radio show. I found the archives at http://www.kcrw.com/news/programs/lr

Mark30339 on January 13, 2009 at 9:50 AM

As to the draft, it is actually the most destructive force ever unleashed on American society. enemies.

fixed…

max1 on January 13, 2009 at 12:43 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.