No Surrender

Bruce Springsteen writes well; one would hardly expect less. Being only passingly familiar with his work – I recognize a tune or two, but could not offer the complete lyrics to any – I cannot pass judgment on their content. Nor can I criticize the man for his lifestyle; I don’t know if he, like other rich liberals, tools around in private jets, resides in a huge mansion (or five, like the Kerry’s), etc. But I CAN assess the merits of his politics, as displayed in his recent New York Times piece.

And, here, the Boss needs to go back to school.

If memory serves, Springsteen came from no sort of privilege. Instead, he worked hard, developed his talent, and succeeded. The embodiment of the American dream, the proof of the American system. No guarantees; just opportunity.

How many millions of Americans are just like Bruce, albeit, perhaps, not to the same degree? Sure, there are the rags to riches stories of artists, athletes, and entrepreneurs. But vast numbers of people live solid, middle class lives they would enjoy nowhere else in the world because the American system offers them opportunity, not guarantees.

Springsteen employs words which should NEVER be uttered in close proximity, such as “economic justice”. And he entertains a cramped view of America’s mission to the world, it’s essential role as a beacon of freedom.

Bruce asks why we, as a society, cannot “see beyond the veil of race”. In part, that’s easy: liberals won’t let us. Just look at the Democratic convention. The delegates were chosen, in the first instance, NOT based upon their loyalty or service to the Democratic Party, but upon their group membership. They followed precise formulae: this many women, so many blacks, this percent Hispanic, that proportion gay, etc. If anything, that sort of racialistic bean counting will worsen under a Democratic administration. If Bruce wishes to help us get beyond race, the first thing he should do is stop talking about it as if it mattered.

Bruce asserts that we, as a nation, fail “to keep promise and faith with our weakest citizens”. If he’s speaking about the unborn, he’s right, although I rather doubt such was his intention. Although no more specific about his policy preferences than are Kerry or Edwards, it’s likely he means that society somehow fails when it does not guarantee everyone a job with benefits, “free” health care, and the like.

But the measure of a society is NOT the guarantees it makes, but the opportunities it offers. People seeking guarantees should move to Sweden. Bruce apparently fails to grasp that his professed love of freedom and his (apparent) advocacy for guarantees are mutually exclusive. The crushing tax levy government imposes to fund guarantees inevitably stifles investment, growth, and freedom. If he paid any attention to the inane policies adopted by the McGreevey administration in his erstwhile home state, he’d understand that.

Listening to Bruce (and Bill Clinton) moan that they don’t deserve tax cuts rankles a bit. Fine. GIVE IT BACK!! Indeed, donate ALL of your profits from your book, all your future records, etc., to the government. Just as Kerry and Edward pay not one farthing more than they must – indeed, go out of their way and employ strategies of dubious legality to avoid (or evade) taxes – so many of these liberals use (perhaps perfectly legal) dodges to avoid paying the taxes they contend are too low. It’s time they led by example.

On economics, the Left – often including artists (they are, after all, often pretty much divorced from reality) – is clueless. Bruce is entirely correct that we ran record, unnecessary deficits, but instead of condemning the culprit – vast increases in domestic spending – he complains that we don’t spend enough. In a true descent into rank silliness, he contends that the “division of wealth threatens to destroy our social contract and render mute (I assume he means “moot”) the promise of ‘one nation indivisible’”. What, pray tell, does that mean? That if “rich” people get to keep a larger percentage of what they earn, the masses will revolt, demanding their share? Please.

And on Iraq. Bruce considers the war “unnecessary”. Here, he couldn’t be more wrong.

First, there were numerous rationales for the war, each of them a sufficient justification of itself. Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, which it actually used. Every intelligence service in the world believe Saddam still had them; even his own generals believed that. He defied the saintly UN, daring the world to evict him from power. And – from my perspective, most importantly – he lorded over 25 million miserable slaves, whom he killed, tortured, raped, and oppressed with seeming impunity.

Saddam might have posed a threat to us, but he clearly and indisputably presented a threat to his neighbors, let alone his own people. Given the number of murder victims, Saddam was a walking weapon of mass destruction.

The world is better of without him. Let anyone say otherwise. The cost has not been low, in blood or treasure, to us, our numerous, courageous allies, or to the Iraqi people. But as John Kennedy said:

“The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission.”

This applies not just to our own shores, but stands as a promise to mankind in general. I don’t recall Bruce writing about the mission to Bosnia, Kosovo, or Haiti in these terms; is it only wars commenced by Republican presidents that earn his ire? Or only “wars” which aren’t cakewalks?

Bruce speaks of “American values”, but I don’t recognize the country about which he speaks. One which stands back and allows mass murdering despots to tyrannize whole countries? One which, having the ability to prevent harm, stands aloof, unwilling to make sacrifices for freedom?
Our boys fought and died around the world to end National Socialism, Fascism, Communism and other forms of tyranny. We could have withdrawn, allowed the Nazis – or, later, the Soviets – to dominate Europe and Africa, the Japanese to dominate Asia. Those weren’t our concerns, were they? We could have permitted the communist, crackpot North Koreans to conquer the south, allowed Berlin to fall, done nothing to help Israel.

And we would stand, now, ashamed before history, our high ideals revealed as nothing more than narrow, parochial conceits. Akin to certain formerly great European nations, content to do business with murdering tyrants, while turning our backs on their crimes, ignoring the suffering of their people.

Perhaps we can’t save the world. But it’s in our self interest to try. With help, if possible, alone if necessary. Peacefully, if possible, but not fearing to use the sword, when required. Iraq’s a good first step; freedom and democracy now have a toehold in one of the last great bastions of tyranny. Despots around the world quake; they know their days of oppression are numbered.

Just as freedom and democracy in Japan, Germany, Italy, Korea, and Russia – to name but a few – were worth the price, in blood and gold, to achieve them, so a free, democratic Iraq – and the nations which will inevitably follow – are worth the cost. If Bruce doesn’t understand, perhaps a trip to a police state like North Korea, Vietnam, or Cuba would help to demonstrate the consequences of losing, or failing to make the effort.

What could be more annoying than listening to rich socialists complain that our taxes are too low? And is there not a certain irony in artists – people living in the freest society in history – whining about the sacrifices necessary to preserve and extend that freedom, denying that we have any interest whatsoever in assisting others to attain that which should be every man’s birthright.

A concert devoted to raising money to raise taxes? A concert devoted to raising money to defeat efforts to extend freedom and democracy? We’ve come a long way since Boston Harbor in 1773 and from John Kennedy’s promise to “pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty”. Query whether the Boss has us moving in the right direction?