Posted on 07/23/2007 9:06:06 PM PDT by jazusamo
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
"Moral paralysis" is a term that has been used to describe the inaction of France, England and other European democracies in the 1930s, as they watched Hitler build up the military forces that he later used to attack them.
It is a term that may be painfully relevant to our own times.
Back in the 1930s, the governments of the democratic countries knew what Hitler was doing -- and they knew that they had enough military superiority at that point to stop his military buildup in its tracks. But they did nothing to stop him.
Instead, they turned to what is still the magic mantra today -- "negotiations."
No leader of a democratic nation was ever more popular than British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain -- wildly cheered in the House of Commons by opposition parties as well as his own -- when he returned from negotiations in Munich in 1938, waving an agreement and declaring that it meant "peace in our time."
We know now how short that time was. Less than a year later, World War II began in Europe and spread across the planet, killing tens of millions of people and reducing many cities to rubble in Europe and Asia.
Looking back after that war, Winston Churchill said, "There was never a war in all history easier to prevent by timely action." The earlier it was done, the less it would have cost.
At one point, Hitler could have been stopped in his tracks "without the firing of a single shot," Churchill said.
That point came in 1936 -- three years before World War II began -- when Hitler sent troops into the Rhineland, in violation of two international treaties.
At that point, France alone was so much more powerful than Germany that the German generals had secret orders to retreat immediately at the first sign of French intervention.
As Hitler himself confided, the Germans would have had to retreat "with our tail between our legs," because they did not yet have enough military force to put up even a token resistance.
Why did the French not act and spare themselves and the world the years of horror that Hitler's aggressions would bring? The French had the means but not the will.
"Moral paralysis" came from many things. The death of a million French soldiers in the First World War and disillusionment with the peace that followed cast a pall over a whole generation.
Pacifism became vogue among the intelligentsia and spread into educational institutions. As early as 1932, Winston Churchill said: "France, though armed to the teeth, is pacifist to the core."
It was morally paralyzed.
History may be interesting but it is the present and the future that pose the crucial question: Is America today the France of yesterday?
We know that Iran is moving swiftly toward nuclear weapons while the United Nations is moving slowly -- or not at all -- toward doing anything to stop them.
It is a sign of our irresponsible Utopianism that anyone would even expect the UN to do anything that would make any real difference.
Not only the history of the UN, but the history of the League of Nations before it, demonstrates again and again that going to such places is a way for weak-kneed leaders of democracies to look like they are doing something when in fact they are doing nothing.
The Iranian leaders are not going to stop unless they get stopped. And, like Hitler, they don't think we have the guts to stop them.
Incidentally, Hitler made some of the best anti-war statements of the 1930s. He knew that this was what the Western democracies wanted to hear -- and that it would keep them morally paralyzed while he continued building up his military machine to attack them.
Iranian leaders today make only the most token and transparent claims that they are building "peaceful" nuclear facilities -- in one of the biggest oil-producing countries in the world, which has no need for nuclear power to generate electricity.
Nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran and its international terrorist allies will be a worst threat than Hitler ever was. But, before that happens, the big question is: Are we France? Are we morally paralyzed, perhaps fatally?
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
Any students of history here?
What was the role of the European media in advocating negotiation over action in the years 1936 to 1938?
Sewell makes so much sense with his parallels between then and now. I just wonder why so many in this country cannot see the handwriting on the wall as well?
It wants sex on TV as a way to stave off its incompetence... so America should broadcast the latest “Sex in the City” to save Tehran.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
In my view, we need to stop drawing parallels between Nazi Germany and present day affairs e.g. Iran et al.
In short, totalinarism was the end of an era of Social Darwinism (Hitler, Mussolini, et al.) that started back in 1852 with Herbert Spencer (Darwin never said "survival of the fittest" that came from Spencer).
Did you know that the US practiced eugenics in the late 1890s.
Who “practiced eugenics” in the US(A)? Make your point.
Well, go back an look at what was done to mentally retarded children during late 1800's in the US. It was a consequence of the works of Galton and Binet (IQ testing).
I'm surprised that I should have too make such a follow up post. The point is clear in the previous post (mkay).
I asked who? Answer please.
>>Did you know that the US practiced eugenics in the late 1890s.
Heck, we’re practicing it today. Look at the roots of Planned Parenthood and Margaret Sanger.
Hold on here... Are you telling me that you don't know what happened to mentally retarded children in the US during the late 1800s and early 1900s?
Man, this is a depressing column. God Save Us from ourselves.
P.S I still love you, Mr. Sowell. You’re one of the few that tell it like it is.
“Are you telling me that you don’t know what happened to mentally retarded children in the US during the late 1800s and early 1900s?”
Or to Rosemary Kennedy for that matter in the 1940’s. Ask Fat Teddy what they did to their own sister!!
I also wonder, it seems many think the threat will evaporate if we leave the ME but they’re not going away, the cancer will spread.
Well said! The lack of concern by the libs is appalling, hopefully we survive it.
You’re right about it not being an uplifting commentary. Maybe he and others will wake up some of the nay sayers by speaking out like this, there’s always hope.
This is one man who is just brilliant and right.
He’s one of the great thinkers of out time and there doesn’t seem to be many.
I forget the rest.
:0(
bttt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.