A Friend Indeed

The inimitable Victor Davis Hanson, writing in National Review, makes an excellent case for a reevaluation of America`s alliances.

I agree wholeheartedly with VDH; he argues that we should strengthen our ties with those nations who show they are friendly to the United States, and should pull back from those who aren`t. This sounds like simple logic, but to the Washington establishment it is an unthinkable proposition. The Elite can`t imagine pulling troops out of Germany, or South Korea, despite the obvious lack of need. Yet one must ask the question; why are we maintaining a military (or economic, or cultural) presence in places which have shown they neither need nor want us? What practical benefit is derived from troops in Germany? Here we are engaged in a two-front war and are unable to reach our military recruiting goals, and we are tying up valuable troops in places which can defend themselves and which have made it clear that we are no longer welcome. A normal person (meaning a non-liberal, outside the beltway, outside of academia type) would conclude that it is time to bid the French Au-dieu, the Germans Guten Nacht, and should then move our troops (and our money) to a more welcoming, or more useful, place. Why station troops in an ungrateful Germany when we could move them to a welcoming Poland? It`s time to expect our friends to act like friends.

Here is the only place where I disagree with VDH:

Second, we must find a middle path to energy independence that embraces conservation, nuclear power, more exploration, alternative fuels, coal — anything other than sending billions more to god-forsaken regimes abroad that will only recycle those easy dollars in ways to weaken or destroy us as they deny that’s what they’re doing.

Conservation is a terrible idea. The problem with conservation is that it is a mercantilist-type, top down approach. The Government simply ORDERS people to use less; the market has no influence on the decision. We should understand by now that the free market should determine what and how much we use. Jimmy Carter tried instituting enforced conservation, and drove prices through the roof while killing economic growth (stagflation). I think his ``energy policy`` was largely responsible (along with his loose money policies) for the economic catastrophe that occurred in the late `70`s. If you force conservation of anything on the market, it will recoil in ways you may not have expected. Conservation of gasoline reduces travel-thus hurting the tourism business. It raises prices on all items thanks to increased transportation costs. Why are SUV`s so popular today? Because the Station Wagon became too expensive as a result of CAFE standards, and the minivans and SUVs were exempt because they were classed as trucks, which were exempt from the government MPG standards. I agree that we want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but conservation is not the way to go. We need to unleash the free market, to develope better alternatives-hydrogen comes to mind (with hydrogen production plants powered by nuclear.)

Aside from this criticism, I agree with VDH; America has got to get over this worldview which says everyone should love us. We have got to face the fact that we are going to be unpopular, if for no other reason than that we are so much stronger than everyone. The wealthiest people are resented, the prettiest girls unloved, the best and brightest are rarely approved of by their neighbors; this is a quirk of human nature. We have to learn to accept this, and not fall for the liberal canard that we somehow earn our dislike by our actions-this simply isn`t true. Were we to behave the way our ``friends`` want, we would face even more contempt for our weakness. We have to recognize our position in this world, and act according to our needs, and in the interest of those who really are our friends. It`s time to stop sucking.