Monthly Archives: March 2007

Update # 3: ‘300’: The Real Spartan Supermen (And History’s Deniers)

Critique, Film, The Zeitgeist

Namby-pamby libertarians and Objectivists are forever waxing silly about the comic book creations of Superman or Batman as the quintessential American heroes. How sad and what philosophically childish twaddle. How can any person with a brain take seriously the symbolism that has been squeezed from these characters?

I don’t give a dried camel’s hump for the above nonsense, but the 300 Spartans who, the Battle of Thermopylae, took on over 200,000 Persians intent on invading and enslaving the free Greek city-states —now that’s an entirely different matter. I seldom visit the cinema anymore, but this is a film I intend to see on the big screen. Even if it disappoints —and with a great deal of animation involved, and having already been immortalized as a comic strip, it has the potential to be cartoonish.

The story is nothing short of inspirational and is, quite plainly, the reason for Western Civilization. For if not for those 300 Spartans and 700 Thespian volunteers who placed themselves in the way of the mighty people the historian Herodotus called the “Barbarians,” Western Civilization as we know it would not have come into being.

Whether this film makes this point (as a similar film made in 1962 did) I do not know. If anyone of our readers has seen it, do tell us too whether Herodotus’ appellation for the Persians was used, or whether the screenplay writers reverted to modern-day political correctness.

Ultimately, the 300 and their Thespian brothers-in-arms are not only Greek heroes; they are ours. A nation’s heroes, even mythical, reveal a lot about that nation. Superman and Batman showcase the frivolity of the American psyche.

Update: Debbie Schlussel reviews “300.” “This is a man’s movie,” she writes, which is fine by me. I hate chick flicks. I’ve never seen “Pretty Woman,” or that other film about two all-night drunks or insomniacs engaged in a pity fest, turned love affair. Or something along those soporific lines. The Indian, immigrant-experience film Schlussel raves about above her “300” run-down would make me snooze. I certainly would not inflict it on Sean. The rest of her comments, however, indicate “300” is short on history and long on porn and other grotesqueries, aimed at “the video-gamer slacker dummies,” as she puts it. I was hoping just this time Hollywood would deliver. What a shame. Perhaps we should just all stay home and rent “The 300 Spartans” (1962).

The Deniers Strike/Update: Historical deniers are everywhere with their brand of deceit. I’m no historian, but I certainly don’t intend to give a platform to the pseudo-historians who’ve tried to post comments propounding their idiosyncratic version of the Battle of Thermopylae, positing, first, that the Spartans were just “jerks,” whose strange faith mandated that they stay and fight until the end. Of course, this slight is a non sequitur. Someone can posses a balmy belief system and still exhibit courage and heroism. Moreover, if the Spartans’ faith obligated them to all die if victory was unobtainable, why did Leonidas dismiss the army and retain a select few to stay and fight?

The other misleading statement —or rather outright lie —was that the Spartan’s “stopped nobody and saved no Western civilization whatsoever. They lost, the Persians forwarded, and that was pretty much that.”

The Greeks won thanks to the brilliant strategy Leonidas and his seafaring Athenian colleagues devised. According to Wikipedia:

The fierce resistance of the Spartan-led army offered Athens the invaluable time to prepare for a decisive naval battle that would come to determine the outcome of the war. The subsequent Greek victory at the Battle of Salamis left much of the Persian navy destroyed and Xerxes was forced to retreat back to Asia, leaving his army in Greece under Mardonius, who was to meet the Greeks in battle one last time. The Spartans assembled at full strength and led a pan-Greek army that defeated the Persians decisively at the Battle of Plataea, ending the Greco-Persian War and with it Persian expansion into Europe.

I have a special detestation for the assaults on truth by assorted historical deniers (scroll down to follow other entries on the topic. My Junk Science Archive is useful too, and in particular this and this). This is not the forum for them.

Update # 3: Not that I didn’t know it, but comments on the blog confirm that honorable men aspire to be heroic. Part of the tragedy of modern, metrosexual manhood is the breakdown of more traditional gender roles —a dissolution championed by feminism, its assorted permutations, and the state. Good men have been denied —and denuded of —their need to be defenders.

Damned Spots & Global Warming

Environmentalism & Animal Rights

My WND colleague Doug Powers comments on his blog about the documentary the Great Global Warming Swindle. The Great Global Warming Swindle page on Channel 4 is here.

I’ve been communicating with the author of “Global Warming: CO2, SunSpots or Politics?” Phil N. Baldwin, Jr. is an applied mathematician and chemist. The book

Discusses and analyzes the impact of greenhouse gases and sunspots on weather dating back to 1750. A newly devised Sun Cycle Power Index (SCPI), discovered by The LrnIT Institute, is described with demonstration on how the SCPI has a powerful and controlling impact on grand global weather patterns. This digital book is full of data yet is simple to understand and makes straightword points. This is a reference book, with many weather data sources referenced as well as substantial data included. This book is also entertaining and fascinating to read.

Some of the boffins I know ran the numbers and were impressed with this work. Phil has promised to pen an op-ed for BAB.

Damned Spots & Global Warming

Environmentalism & Animal Rights

My WND colleague Doug Powers comments on his blog about the documentary the Great Global Warming Swindle. The Great Global Warming Swindle page on Channel 4 is here.

I’ve been communicating with the author of “Global Warming: CO2, SunSpots or Politics?” Phil N. Baldwin, Jr. is an applied mathematician and chemist. The book

Discusses and analyzes the impact of greenhouse gases and sunspots on weather dating back to 1750. A newly devised Sun Cycle Power Index (SCPI), discovered by The LrnIT Institute, is described with demonstration on how the SCPI has a powerful and controlling impact on grand global weather patterns. This digital book is full of data yet is simple to understand and makes straightword points. This is a reference book, with many weather data sources referenced as well as substantial data included. This book is also entertaining and fascinating to read.

Some of the boffins I know ran the numbers and were impressed with this work. Phil has promised to pen an op-ed for BAB.

A Triumph for Individual Rights

Individual Rights, Rights

From Breitbart.com:

“A federal appeals court overturned the District of Columbia’s long- standing handgun ban Friday, rejecting the city’s argument that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applied only to militias.”

Here’s an excerpt from the decision, courtesy of Volokh Conspiracy:

“In determining whether the Second Amendment’s guarantee is an individual one, or some sort of collective right, the most important word is the one the drafters chose to describe the holders of the right — ‘the people.’ That term is found in the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments. It has never been doubted that these provisions were designed to protect the interests of individuals against government intrusion, interference, or usurpation. We also note that the Tenth Amendment — ‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people’ — indicates that the authors of the Bill of Rights were perfectly capable of distinguishing between ‘the people,’ on the one hand, and ‘the states,’ on the other. The natural reading of ‘the right of the people’ in the Second Amendment would accord with usage elsewhere in the Bill of Rights.
The District’s argument, on the other hand, asks us to read ‘the people’ to mean some subset of individuals such as ‘the organized militia’ or ‘the people who are engaged in militia service,’ or perhaps not any individuals at all — e.g., ‘the states.’ These strained interpretations of ‘the people’ simply cannot be squared with the uniform construction of our other Bill of Rights provisions….
The District points to the singular nature of the Second Amendment’s preamble as an indication that the operative clause must be restricted or conditioned in some way by the prefatory language. However, the structure of the Second Amendment turns out to be not so unusual when we examine state constitutional provisions guaranteeing rights or restricting governmental power. It was quite common for prefatory language to state a principle of good government that was narrower than the operative language used to achieve it.
We think the Second Amendment was similarly structured. The prefatory language announcing the desirability of a well-regulated militia — even bearing in mind the breadth of the concept of a militia [which the court had earlier concluded ‘was a large segment of the population’ rather than just a government-selected National Guard-like subgroup -EV] — is narrower than the guarantee of an individual right to keep and bear arms. The Amendment does not protect ‘the right of militiamen to keep and bear arms,’ but rather ‘the right of the people.’ The operative clause, properly read, protects the ownership and use of weaponry beyond that needed to preserve the state militias….
[I]f the competent drafters of the Second Amendment had meant the right to be limited to the protection of state militias, it is hard to imagine that they would have chosen the language they did. We therefore take it as an expression of the drafters’ view that the people possessed a natural right to keep and bear arms, and that the preservation of the militia was the right’s most salient political benefit —” and thus the most appropriate to express in a political document.”