A reader who had attacked me on Bush now agrees with me

Last winter I published an exchange with a reader who was outraged at my frequent criticisms of President Bush and especially at my use of satirical nicknames for him such as “Boilerplate” and “messiah from West Texas,” for which the reader put me in the class of Bush haters with Michael Moore. I replied by explaining my language and saying that the reader’s indignation was over the top. He then sent me another e-mail (not posted at VFR) so fierce and furious, describing me basically as a traitor, that I was sorry I had replied to him at all, and I ended all contact with him. A few months later he wrote to me apologizing for his attacks on me. And now, in reply to my article this week entitled, “The Return of George W. Boilerplate and his amen corner,” he’s written again:

Mr. Auster,

I’m not sure if you want to hear from me anymore after my unprofessional behavior, but I felt compelled to comment on your recent entry in which you refer to midshipmen as “ready-made yes-men.” Having been through four years of military school myself and enduring many of these kinds of speeches, I can offer a likely scenario.

Before the speech, the cadets would have been assembled in formation outside of the auditorium and briefed by either school staff, unit staff, or perhaps both. This briefing would be more of a warning than anything else. The officer giving the briefing would make it clear in no uncertain terms that no dissent, disorderly behavior, or question challenging the speaker’s views (if questions were allowed at all) would be tolerated. This would be an order. Cadets essentially have few rights and all enjoyable activity is seen as a privilege, so if protocol is broken the chain of command can make your life very miserable for quite a long time. Also noteworthy is the fact that such speeches are usually mandatory for all, so the probability that there is someone in the audience who doesn’t agree with the speaker is higher than you might think. So for all intents and purposes they would be made to behave like yes-men, but not by choice.

I personally know a few West Point graduates who went through during the Clinton Presidency. When Clinton came to a graduation, they told me that they were very strongly considering not shaking his hand, as every graduating cadet was required to do. Among the audience at this latest speech at Annapolis it wouldn’t surprise me to find not a few traditionalist conservatives.

Otherwise, I agree with nearly everything you’ve been saying for some time. I no longer support the war or President Bush.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 02, 2005 11:22 AM | Send