House of Eratosthenes

What kind of infamy, I wonder. I’ve often complained of the “bubba” syndrome in which something bad happens to one person, and within the friends & family it is broadly and forcefully felt that the disaster is nothing more or less than bad luck. When the spot of bad luck turns into a streak, it gets a little awkward, especially when evidence emerges that mistakes are being made that cause (or allow) these bad things to happen. But of course, the guy pointing this out looks kind of like a dick, and might very well be one…and people would much rather concentrate on the tragedy that fell on poor ol’ bubba. So they turn a blind eye to the plain and obvious fact that bubba is causing his own problems.

And a little bit of casual research will expose the fact that he has always been treated this way right back to the cutting of the umbilical. Poor, poor bubba, bad things just keep happening to him.

Once World War II started, it didn’t keep going like that for the United States. Our country lost more battles but won the war. Couldn’t afford not to. See, that’s the real Pear Harbor lesson; that’s how it works. It’s all about being able to afford bad decision-making. People get the feeling they can’t afford it anymore, and they start making winning decisions.

Maybe enough time has passed now, that we can honor the lives lost in the tragedy, and still achieve some more specific understanding about the infamy. Twelve-seven is an observance, whether people realize it or not, of human folly; of pretending the future is as clear as the past, when we know it isn’t so. Of failing to prepare for the worst while hoping for the best.

And, of choosing scapegoats in the aftermath. When all’s said & done, of allowing bureaucracies to hurt us as much as possible, both before the big event and afterward.

On a cold Thursday evening in Washington, DC, in 1941, leaders in the nation’s capital met for dinner and discussion of the problems facing them.

One attendee was Frank Knox, Secretary of the Navy. Knox told his dinner companions,” I feel that I can speak very frankly, within these four walls…We are very close to war. War may begin in the Pacific at any moment…But I want you to know that no matter what happens, the United States Navy is ready!”

Knox added, “We’ve had our plans worked out for twenty years. Once it starts, our submarines will go in to blockade them, and sooner or later our battle fleet will be able to force an action. It won’t take too long. Say about a six months’ war.”

What was the date? December 4, 1941. Three days before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Needless to say, the United States was not ready for the coming war, one which would last for three years and eight months and take the lives of more than 400,000 Americans.

Fast forward to today. When our leaders tell us that a national healthcare program is going to work well and benefit all Americans, we should remember the track record of the government on past projects. If the nation’s defense can be as vulnerable and unprepared as was the case in 1941, what does this say about a government-run healthcare system?

Lesson from December 7, 1941: Bureaucrats tend to think like bureaucrats. Bureaucracy doesn’t bring out the best in human behavior, it brings out the worst. It causes lack of foresight. It causes lashing out, rushed exuberance and eagerness to assign blame, it elevates process over outcome, and it tends to elevate persons of low character over their colleagues with better character. The crisis that follows tends to do the opposite of all these things. But it’s a mistake to place faith in bureaucracy just by default, and then hope it’ll all work out.

Real people get hurt.

Let us never forget that the actual cause of the war was Wilson, who, in that special Democrat way, turned our WWI ally into a frenzied enemy going into WWII.
- Robert Mitchell Jr. | 12/07/2013 @ 11:30
ON second thought let’s forget that since it is merely intellectual preening.
- vanderleun | 12/07/2013 @ 11:54
I don’t think so. There is something in the Democrats that seems to love turning allies into enemies, as we saw with Japan, Vietnam, Iran, and if Obama has his way, England and Israel.
- Robert Mitchell Jr. | 12/07/2013 @ 12:38
I dunno. Japan was our “ally” in WWI the same way Mexico, say, was our ally in WWII — nice to have on board, I guess, in a moral sort of way, but what did they do for the Allied war effort?

Japan did a lot for the Japanese war effort in WWI. They wanted the German South Pacific colonies turned over to them at the end of the war, and, crucially, the German concessions in China. They got ’em, and then refused to give ’em back, enraging an entire generation of young Chinese commies (the May 4th Movement). They also jacked the South China Railway off the Russians when they went communist and backed out of the war.

As always, Japan was in it for Japan. I don’t think they cared about Wilson much one way or the other.
- Severian | 12/08/2013 @ 07:41
They were more Allies of the British then ours, but very solid allies they were, pretty much stopping all German resupply efforts in the Pacific. They cared about Wilson because America was the top dog at the end of the war, and treated them with contempt, like the Racist he was. I believe that snub caused the collapse of the Democratically elected government of Japan, and put the Fascist one we had such problems with, in power. I mean, read your own post. “Refused to give them back”? Why would they have to give them back when they were on the winning side. None of the European winners had to make concessions, did they? I believe we all agree that being too harsh on Germany at the end of the war was one of the great causes of WWII……..
- Robert Mitchell Jr. | 12/08/2013 @ 15:00
You really need to bone up on your Asian history.

The Republic of China certainly expected to get the German concessions back at Versailles, as they actually helped out on the Western Front to the tune of a quarter-million laborers. The Japanese, meanwhile, marched into a few Pacific island fueling stations the Germans had no intention (or ability) to defend. Their contribution to victory was a drop in the bucket compared to China’s.

The various changes of government in the 1920s in Japan had nothing to do with Wilson.

Try S.C.M. Paine’s The Wars for Asia: 1911-1949 for a pretty good overview of military developments.
- Severian | 12/08/2013 @ 18:39
I think you are overlooking the dynamic of “Great Power” status, which Japan felt they had earned, coming so far after Perry. Rather like the “Nuclear Club” of today……
- Robert Mitchell Jr. | 12/08/2013 @ 18:44
I really, truly don’t think so. Japan had far more on its plate — the Russian civil war and the collapse of the Republic of China, just to name two — than the opinion of a guy who couldn’t even get his own country to sign on to the League of Nations.

Not everything bad in the world is traceable to Woodrow Wilson. Liberal Fascism was a good read, but it’s not the secret decoder ring to 20th century history.
- Severian | 12/09/2013 @ 08:02
“pretending the future is as clear as the past” and “failing to prepare for the worst while hoping for the best”: that’s the sort of thing I mention to “Progressives” when they’re praising Obama and proposing to expand governmental power and curtail individual rights. I remind them that their messiah will only be president for another few years, and ask them if they really believe there will never be another Bush/Cheney-type administration. How would they feel about the distribution of rights and power in that situation?
- IcelandSpar | 12/14/2013 @ 08:16

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Pearl Harbor Plus Seventy-TwoSaturday, December 7th, 2013

Pearl Harbor Plus Seventy-Two
Saturday, December 7th, 2013