Color Coding the Enemy

On the Hugh Hewitt radio broadcast not long ago, I heard a guest summing up his plans to save the West which aligned so nicely with the goals of the Last Crusade, that I regret being unable to recall his name or find him by looking up the published guest lists of the show. Would that I could give credit where credit is due.

Allow me, nonetheless, to summarize his remarks:

He started, first, by saying it was the duty of every man to recognize that we were at war, and to rouse both public and political leaders to that fact.

At war with whom? He color coded the enemy for ease of discussion: Green is the Jihad of Islam, their traditional hue; Blue is the color of the United Nations flag and helmet, and stands for the Globalists; White, the flag of surrender, stands for Isolationists and Uniparty GOP; Red are the Socialists.

Be not deceived at the current lack of bullets flying and bombs dropping. Such is the final stage of war, hot war or kinetic war. War is still war when it is cold war, a matter of proxy fights on foreign soil, espionage, economic blockade or financial sabotage, degrading and undermining enemy will to fight, interference with voting results, entwining laws by treaty with hostile foreign institutions, invasions disguised as slow motion migrations, and so on: Law War, Econ War, Culture War, War by corruption of the youth, and brainwashing, War by Interfaith Dialog, War by NGO, and War by WHO were all battlefronts.

These battlefronts are not occupied by rivals, competitors, nor adversaries to the West. Great Britain or France might be adversaries, or Canada or Australia or Japan. An adversary seeks to overcome a rival and win an advantage. An enemy seeks destruction of a foe.

Stumbling into a hot war, when the enemy could so easily be cowed into peace beforehand, curtailed and robbed of ability to harm, is a shameful failure of foresight and resolve.

The example of the Hitlerian War should stand ever before the eyes of the Western Powers: no less a statesman than Winston Churchill observed that World War Two was “the unnecessary war” — there was never a war more easy to forestall.

The counterexample of World War Three should loom large in the imagination of anyone who ponders what might have been had it not been for Regan, whose policies cut off economic support for the Soviet Union so neatly, and allowed the logic of its own illogical evil to turn inward and destroy it.

The global thermonuclear holocaust was foretold as inevitable to my generation in every public speech and political paper, every science fiction story, funnybook, or prediction of things to come, sober or frivolous. One reason why STAR TREK was regarded as optimistic was the prediction that spacemen rather than cavemen or corpses would rule our tomorrow.

The fortune tellers were false, thanks be to heaven. Regan’s handling of the USSR was like seeing a demolitions expert topple a skyscraper to fall directly in on itself, without marring any building to either side of it: an evil empire with global hegemony vanished into rubble without a shot fired.

Currently, China, having been supported and funded by the West for over a generation, having a much larger population and better technical base than Russia ever enjoyed, is a far more deadly enemy than the Soviet Union, and has far more options for cold war, indirect warfare, economic warfare. The release of the Wu Han virus, whether it was by negligence or malice, shows their indifference to losses among their excess proles, and their willingness to murder myriads indiscriminately.

It also displayed, to any with eyes to see, the imprudence of relying on avowed and implacable enemies for necessary supplies and manufactured goods.

The rapidity and ease with which major sports and entertainment industries, shoe manufacturers, broadcasters, computer industries, all kowtowed to the Communist Despots, bowing, whimpering, licking the floor, and flouring their buttocks to their masters’ boot, was also instructive, if appalling.

The lure of myriads of consumers thronging the endless Chinese hinterlands was too great for the capitalists to resist, not to mention the lure of slave labor. Slaves need no wages, no funds need go to safety regulations, nor to  antipollution measures. If a slave is starved, or maimed, or a slave camp is befouled with smog and sewage, the Mandarins of Peking are unconcerned, and pass the savings on to you, the customer.

Unless you, the customer, had a factory job, of course, in which case DC politicians and New York investment bankers have sent your work to China.

Each of the flags of the enemy, the red of socialism, the white of defeatism, the blue of globalism, the green of Islamic Jihad, had both forces aboard and agents ashore, well funded and well organized, often acting in concert despite their innate differences.

Each approaches the Cold War with several strategies and invades on several fronts, so the alert defender of the West must pay heed to a dozen or a score of battlefronts: in the spheres of politics, entertainment, academia, espionage, sabotage, propaganda, migration, energy policy, infrastructure, cyberwarfare, and so on.

A recurring strategy is to bind the Gulliver of capitalism with ten thousand Lilliputian regulations and restrictions, strictly enforced on the West, to which the Enemy pays lip service only. The Paris Climate Accords are only the most obvious example.

In diplomatic struggles, binding the West by arms treaties never enforced on the Enemy act by the same logic: the West will help the Muslim World develop nuclear arms, in return for nothing. China and Russia will develop and proliferate bacteriological and chemical and nuclear weapons a western nation will strictly forbid to herself, and so on.

The Interfaith Dialogs between Church and Islam are just such a Lilliputian tactic: the Christian silences criticism of Muslim oppression and atrocities against Christians lest these dialogs be imperiled. Meanwhile the dialogs themselves only act as one-way bridges, to bring Islam to Infidels, never to bring Christ to the Faithful.

One note of hope enters in the discussion of the Academic Wars. Republic governors and lawmakers, at the state and local level, can and should institute universal school choice, and free the minorities from the mental slavery of the Enemy, whose captain on this battlefront is the Teacher Unions.

As for higher education, this requires federal action: Congress once in conservative hands should revoke the tax exemptions, fiscal aid, grants, loans, and so on offered to all institution of higher learning, since they frankly are institution of higher learning no longer. For decades all or nearly all have been indoctrination and recruitment centers for political activists.

Once a center for political activism can prove, by means of a clear and objective test, that it has returned to the nonpartisan task of teaching Western values and traditions to the young, perhaps its tax status and fiscal benefits can be restored.

In color coding the enemy, the suggestion was to assign yellow, the hue of sunlight, to Christendom and the West, which I would not prefer: yellow is the hue traditional for cowardice, not Christendom.

In any case, the colors of Red, White and Blue together would be a better symbol for the West, as the flags of England an America attest, and the tricolor of France:

Red, as we are more generous to the poor than the communists, White, as we provide more security at home than the isolationists, and Blue, since an America global order provides more peace and liberty than any global order issued from Davos, or Brussels, or Paris, or from the coffers of malign international banks, or United Nations bureaucrats.

As for the Green of Islam, it is incompatible with the West, for it comingles secular and spiritual power, and makes opposition to the political totalitarianism of Shariah law a matter of mortal sin.

The West rests on three texts: the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the papers of the Founding Fathers, including the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

Freedom of conscience, which Islam forbids, is strongly attested in all three. First, the Old Testament confirms that the Lord accepts no gift from an unwilling giver, and the Levites, the priesthood, is separate from the kingship in days of old in the Holy Land.  Second, the New Testament instructs the faithful to render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s. Finally, the US Constitution forbids the state to meddle in Church affairs, set doctrine, compel worship, not even by so much as allowing a taxman to mulct a churchyard.

Any attack on one of these three is an attack on the other two. There is no Declaration of Independence without the New Testament, for if all men are not created equal, nor endowed by their Creator with natural rights, then there is no law above human law, and no justification for democratic forms of government; and there is no New Testament without the Old Testament; and where the Koran triumphs, the Old Testament submits or converts or dies.