Radio Ga-Ga part XVIII; Also Why Chamberlain Was Really Wrong
Exhibit A in why I listen to less and less talk radio: Watch conservative talker Kevin James get pinned to the mat with ease by Chris Matthews over a wee historical point James had raised.
It's not that I expect everyone in the world to posses an encyclopedic command of every historical detail. But those who want to rant and demagogue over the appeasement of Neville Chamberlain should damn well crack open a book, or at very least consult Wikipedia, before attempting to lecture the nation about its applicability to a modern situation.
Chris Matthews is an intellectual lightweight about such things. But he toyed with James so easily before swatting him aside it was pathetic. Too many conservative talkers these days merely have the talk part. They replace intellectual firepower with a fair to middlin' stylistic aping of the genre's big dogs. Shall I name some names? Sean Hannity (obviously) is the king of this game. But Mike Gallagher didn't get the job due to his incredible intellect either. On the flip side Laura Ingraham is surely smart enough but she plays the role like a successful con job far too often. Michael Savage is so smart he turned an outright parody of the style into a hugely lucrative career.
But the act works. P. T. Barnum said no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the public, and this whole talk radio industry tests that more and more.
For the record, the answer to Matthews' cocksure assertion that, "What Chamberlain did wrong was give Hitler half of Chekoslovakia" is...
No, you idiot. Chamberlain allowed a weaker power in constant violation of international treaties to bully the stronger free world time after time after time, watching passively as this same weaker power built itself to military parity and eventually superiority to his own nation. By the time Munich came around in 1938 Chamberlain's political career was so deeply vested in appeasement he could not politically afford to take a firm stand. He felt compelled to prove appeasement worked, rendering war unnecessary. Chamberlain watched Germany renounce Versailles, march into the Rhineland, annex Austria, flaunt military re-armament agreements, and on and on and on. His continual unwillingness to forcefully stand up to this early on in favor of keeping relations warm and communications open was one of the leading causes of the Second World War. Post-war documents show how weak Hitler's cause was. Any of half a dozen major showdowns with the West might have deposed Hitler by internal German opposition, because he could not afford to lose any of them. But because of Chamberlain's constant caving in to Germany's increasingly outrageous demands and actions he made Hitler look stronger and stronger and stronger among the German people. Chamberlain watched a yipping pup the allies could have kicked to the curb easily grow into a fearsome monster capable of destroying civilization because he was so committed to the principle of appeasement that he could be played the fool by anyone who didn't share his personal devotion to peace at any price. Munich was merely the capstone on the grave of appeasement. The plot itself was dug over years and years by a constant policy.
This is stuff Democrats like John F. Kennedy considered a basic lesson of the Second World War. Neither America's pig-headed disengagement from the world, nor Chamberlain style appeasement must be allowed to enable another power-hungry dictator to threaten the world's peace again. The partisan opposition to this perspective used to come from the Taft wing of the Republican Party (who favored the isolationist rather than appeasement position it should be noted). Now this new Chamberlainism bubbles up from many in the Democratic rank and file who seem to believe, like Matthews, that anything short of a full-blown Munich sellout to aggressive dictators is not a mistake. Because it averts war and war is bad, mmkay? That this happens to be precisely Chamberlain's foreign policy (remembering that Munich came as a crisis that nearly drove even Chamberlain himself to declare war) totally escapes them.
But I doubt Chris Matthews wants me on his show regardless. And I'm sure as hell not wasting my time trying to educate the talker-pretender. So pass the word along if you care.
It's not that I expect everyone in the world to posses an encyclopedic command of every historical detail. But those who want to rant and demagogue over the appeasement of Neville Chamberlain should damn well crack open a book, or at very least consult Wikipedia, before attempting to lecture the nation about its applicability to a modern situation.
Chris Matthews is an intellectual lightweight about such things. But he toyed with James so easily before swatting him aside it was pathetic. Too many conservative talkers these days merely have the talk part. They replace intellectual firepower with a fair to middlin' stylistic aping of the genre's big dogs. Shall I name some names? Sean Hannity (obviously) is the king of this game. But Mike Gallagher didn't get the job due to his incredible intellect either. On the flip side Laura Ingraham is surely smart enough but she plays the role like a successful con job far too often. Michael Savage is so smart he turned an outright parody of the style into a hugely lucrative career.
But the act works. P. T. Barnum said no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the public, and this whole talk radio industry tests that more and more.
For the record, the answer to Matthews' cocksure assertion that, "What Chamberlain did wrong was give Hitler half of Chekoslovakia" is...
No, you idiot. Chamberlain allowed a weaker power in constant violation of international treaties to bully the stronger free world time after time after time, watching passively as this same weaker power built itself to military parity and eventually superiority to his own nation. By the time Munich came around in 1938 Chamberlain's political career was so deeply vested in appeasement he could not politically afford to take a firm stand. He felt compelled to prove appeasement worked, rendering war unnecessary. Chamberlain watched Germany renounce Versailles, march into the Rhineland, annex Austria, flaunt military re-armament agreements, and on and on and on. His continual unwillingness to forcefully stand up to this early on in favor of keeping relations warm and communications open was one of the leading causes of the Second World War. Post-war documents show how weak Hitler's cause was. Any of half a dozen major showdowns with the West might have deposed Hitler by internal German opposition, because he could not afford to lose any of them. But because of Chamberlain's constant caving in to Germany's increasingly outrageous demands and actions he made Hitler look stronger and stronger and stronger among the German people. Chamberlain watched a yipping pup the allies could have kicked to the curb easily grow into a fearsome monster capable of destroying civilization because he was so committed to the principle of appeasement that he could be played the fool by anyone who didn't share his personal devotion to peace at any price. Munich was merely the capstone on the grave of appeasement. The plot itself was dug over years and years by a constant policy.
This is stuff Democrats like John F. Kennedy considered a basic lesson of the Second World War. Neither America's pig-headed disengagement from the world, nor Chamberlain style appeasement must be allowed to enable another power-hungry dictator to threaten the world's peace again. The partisan opposition to this perspective used to come from the Taft wing of the Republican Party (who favored the isolationist rather than appeasement position it should be noted). Now this new Chamberlainism bubbles up from many in the Democratic rank and file who seem to believe, like Matthews, that anything short of a full-blown Munich sellout to aggressive dictators is not a mistake. Because it averts war and war is bad, mmkay? That this happens to be precisely Chamberlain's foreign policy (remembering that Munich came as a crisis that nearly drove even Chamberlain himself to declare war) totally escapes them.
But I doubt Chris Matthews wants me on his show regardless. And I'm sure as hell not wasting my time trying to educate the talker-pretender. So pass the word along if you care.
Posted by Doug Williams on
Thursday May 15, 2008 at 9:19pm
