On June 6, 1944, thousands of young Americans went ashore or parachuted into enemy fire.
And in 2023, a survey found that 29% of young Americans (18-29) said they would favor the government installing surveillance cameras in every household to reduce domestic violence, abuse, and other illegal activity.
Here is the survey detail. Note that the desire to exist in an Orwellian world is far stronger among those 18-40 than among those older. Interestingly, people who identify themselves as ‘liberal’ or ‘moderate’ are more likely to desire perpetual surveillance than those who call themselves ‘conservative’, ‘very conservative, or ”very liberal.’
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
—Benjamin Franklin
Given the recent actions of the military hierarchy, I doubt we could win even a localized war now. I see signs that China agrees with me. One factor that may help to avoid a war in the Pacific is the fact that China has bought sufficient politicians to obtain its desires without risking its shrinking male population. If I remember correctly Allan Drury’s last novel ended with a lost war by the USA. We have already dismantled the industrial base that won World War II. Now we are dismantling the military itself.
The industrial base that won WWII was great for building B-17’s; the one we have now is decent at building F-35’s and Abrams, vastly more capable and complex weapons. As for China, last I looked, we have 10-11 deployable nuclear carrier groups: China has zero and if they did, they don’t have any decent planes to fly from them. The last war they fought, they got trounced by Vietnam. Those Chinese tires that failed so miserably on the road to Kiev, bet the ones on Chinese fighting vehicles came from the same factory.
The only thing we have evidence of in terms of the PLA is that they do a wicked goose step. I’d wager that there isn’t anyone in China that could guess within 20% how many soldiers actually exist only on paper.to allow senior officers to bank their wages and allowances or how many tanks. You know who’s even more disappointed by the Russian performance in Ukraine than Putin? It’s all the contractors and generals using Russia to push their pet boondoggle. Now, China is all they have and panic is good for cost+.
The industrial base that won WWII was great for building B-17’s; the one we have now is decent at building F-35’s and Abrams, vastly more capable and complex weapons.
Let me fix this for you: The industrial base that won WWII was great for building an astonishing variety of capable and complex weapons such as the B-17, B-29, B-24, P-47, P-51, F4U Corsair, Essex class aircraft carriers, Cleveland class light cruisers, DD 445, DD 692, and DD 710 class destroyers, and on and on. The industrial base we have now produces F 35 aircraft at astonishing expense over many years, requiring 48 states and ten foreign countries, with yet more vast cost overruns. The Abrams tank is a product of the late Cold War, as is the Arleigh Burke class destroyer, even though updated versions of both are still being produced.
For the hundreds of billions of dollars a year spent on defense, I would expect new designs at least every decade or so. But it turns out our glorious industrial base is so incapable that the navy’s attempt to replace the Arleigh Burke design was a miserable expensive failure, as was the attempt to create a large surface warship to replace the Ticonderoga class ships.
As for China, last I looked, we have 10-11 deployable nuclear carrier groups: China has zero and if they did, they don’t have any decent planes to fly from them.
I just looked. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_aircraft_carrier_programme
China now has two in commission and two under construction. In any case, China has an active and commercially viable shipbuilding industry and the worlds largest navy, while US has neither. I suspect that’s a more important fact than what the US built in the last century- most of those aircraft carriers and a significant fraction of their escorts, which can no longer be replaced.
The last war they fought, they got trounced by Vietnam.
Which was late in the last century, and that war ended quickly. The last war we fought, we got trounced by Afghanistan, after wasting many billions of dollars over decades. Advantage: China.
Those Chinese tires that failed so miserably on the road to Kiev, bet the ones on Chinese fighting vehicles came from the same factory.
This reminds me of T. E. Fehranbach’s book about the Korean War, which recounted the myriad difficulties the unprepared US army faced, including dry-rotted tires, and I’ve also read lately that various Western vehicles sent to Ukraine have much more severe issues than that.
It’s all the contractors and generals using Russia to push their pet boondoggle.
“Russia” is an odd way to misspell “United States,” I think.
I note the actual Russia has a working hypersonic missile for example, while the US doesn’t, despite of course spending billions of dollars on one or more programs over many years. China also has an anti-carrier missile- the DF-21- based upon the US Pershing missile which was withdrawn from service in 1988- thank you wikipedia.
I could go on, for thousands of words. But no one would read it- perhaps no one is reading this either, for that matter. MCS, I certainly respect your commentary here, but I also think you are terribly wrong in this particular instance.
Note that the desire to exist in an Orwellian world is far stronger among those 18-40 than among those older.
I think every election everywhere indicates that at least 29% of people are idiots. Especially young people.
Interestingly, people who identify themselves as ‘liberal’ or ‘moderate’ are more likely to desire perpetual surveillance than those who call themselves ‘conservative’, ‘very conservative, or ”very liberal.’
My take: people who identify as liberal or moderate are clueless, but think identifying as liberal or moderate in surveys sounds smart and will hide their ignorance of the policy questions they have no interest in or understanding of.
The war in Ukraine seems to be artillery-intensive on an almost First World War scale. Could the US increase the production of shells by, for example, 5X? What would be the critical resources and where would they come from?
Let me know when one of those “carriers” departs sight of land.
For something more responsive to the post. My first inclination was to think people say a lot of stupid things to polls. Then I started to think of things like Alexa, Siri and Google Assistant. Not all of them have cameras attached so some just amount to eavesdropping. Ring just payed a biggish fine for letting employees troll through all the feeds and pick out the good stuff. So it looks like, for now joining the surveillance state is voluntary. One wonders for how long.
DF: “Could the US increase the production of shells by, for example, 5X?”
Big considerations would be the supply of raw materials (many imported) and the availability of trained skilled labor (very limited). But the major consideration would be the willingness of the US Political Class to cancel most of the Environmental Impact Statements that would take years, and to cancel the requirements for awarding contracts to women-owned businesses and hiring large numbers of women & minorities regardless of qualifications.
But forget about shells. If/when our Political Class starts a war with China, the first impact would be that the shelves at Walmart & most other stores would become empty as Chinese imports ceased. We would also lose most of our supplies of medications, along with supplies of nuts & bolts and all sorts of other components build into “American-made” products. The home front would collapse.
Sadly, the US is no longer the industrial colossus our ancestors had built by the time of WWII. Our Political Class needs to stop acting like we still have those capabilities they took political contributions for off-shoring.
Let me know when one of those “carriers” departs sight of land.
I think this might perhaps be a response to me so I shall respond.
Your argument appears to be that a large populous country with an active and successful shipbuilding industry and also an active and successful espionage operation is unable to produce ships capable of carrying aircraft that can leave the sight of land.
I find this argument to be… unconvincing.
Fit only to be slaves, and soon enough they will be.
Pardon me. “Enslaved persons.” No, slaves was the mot juste.
More seriously, I wonder how prevalent they assume these various abuses actually are, and what things they define as these abuses at the margins, and how likely they think these abuses are to occur in a typical domestic environment.
Is this one of those things where they have been raised to think every more or less middle class or upper working class father is beating and raping his wife and violently and sexually abusing his children while the wife drinks wine all day, he knocks back cheap beer, and the kids are on drugs to cope? My impression is they think that is what goes on in every household now.
I’m wondering if I should take some comfort that 71% of 18-29 year-olds did not support placing camera in homes.
I always take survey survey data that deals with a generational opinions with a healthy of skepticism, especially when it’s not annotated with longitudinal data. 29% of 18-29 support surveillance cameras in the homes, that number drops to 20% in the 30-44 age bracket, and 6% in the 45-54. Is that drop a function of age and life experience (i.e. the current 18-29 will follow a similar decline as it ages) or is it a function of a greater radicalism? Also there are different distinctions in age brackets, one part of the survey dealt with 18-29 while another measured 18-34 with the result that the numbers dropped slightly; I have very strong reservations about using the 18-29 age bracket for any sort of observations.
I was amused by the CBDC numbers and Cato’s imputation that there was a correlation between support for digital currency and installing surveillance cameras when nearly 72% of the respondents admitted they weren’t very familiar with the topic.
However this is not about being fair, it’s about the future.
We all have pretty strong feelings about the younger generations, it’s less than ideal adherence to natural rights and preference for an administrative over a constitutional state, wacky post-modern ideas, and that many in that cohort cannot reason their way out of a paper bag. Yet we coddle them and tell then they are the future. Every May I have to sit through several college commencement ceremonies and I find it harder every year to endure because we kiss the rear-end of budding authoritarian know-nothings that they will bring us into a better world . Unfortunately I am no longer allowed to speak at such events
I’ve got an idea. We could try to address the problem through reforming the educational system (vouchers and razing the K-12 system to the ground) but that will take a long time. Why not steal a leaf from the Left’s playbook and create a youth group with the proper identity? Imagine 100,000 members of that 18-29 cohort rallying on the National Mall promoting the American ideal of Liberty? Reading the preamble to the Declaration? Having speakers get up in front of that massive crowd and talk about why the young generation must rise up and claim their inheritance in the face of those who would, I don’t know put surveillance cameras in homes? You cannot argue with the Left, so bypass them. Create an opposing group using the rally to catalyze their own identity, that’s what the Left would do.
This is the perfect time for such a rally. We are just starting the GOP primary season and I think about everyone of them, including Trump, would give their right arm to address their crowd. I bet you could a whole bunch of the LGB part of the alphabet people to do so as well. Get one of them to lead the opening Pledge of Allegiance,.
Focus on and organize the 71%, not the 29%
Xennady,
I don’t want to hijack David’s thread that I think is important but… An effective carrier force has a lot of moving parts. Building something that looks like a carrier and doesn’t sink might be the least of them. So far, four navies have managed to put all the pieces together: us, the Brits, Japan (long ago when things were simpler) and France. The Soviets tried repeatedly and failed, as have the Russians. China may succeed if they have time (My bet is they don’t have it.) but they are a long way away. There are indications that their latest hull is just that and little more.
As far as Chinese anti ship weapons are concerned, there are various claims, but until they are demonstrated in actual combat, claims are what they remain. We also have some capabilities in that regard. I have said here, that those Chinese missiles may put any effective carrier defense of Taiwan out of reach.
Mike…”Why not steal a leaf from the Left’s playbook and create a youth group with the proper identity? Imagine 100,000 members of that 18-29 cohort rallying on the National Mall promoting the American ideal of Liberty?”
I like the positive thinking. How could this be done so as to be more effective & broader in its appeal than groups like TPUSA and YAF?
MCS: “An effective carrier force has a lot of moving parts. Building something that looks like a carrier and doesn’t sink might be the least of them. So far, four navies have managed to put all the pieces together”
In earlier days, putting an effective cavalry force together was also a complex task. Poland was one of a number of countries which created a world class cavalry army. But when Polish cavalry charged German tanks in World War II, the outcome was never in doubt.
The world is always changing. Aircraft carriers wiped out England’s pre-war investment in battleships. Now aircraft carriers are themselves yesterday’s news in any kind of peer conflict. Perhaps China’s carrier-killing missiles would work — perhaps not. But we have already seen a stealthy Chinese submarine surface inside a US carrier task force … just to smile & say hello.
Let’s hope our Political Class is not so stupid as to ever start a war with China, so that we never find out just how vulnerable our carriers really are.
A carrier group is a set of the newer Chinese anti ship missiles, for conventional war, or one nuke for more practical carrier group elimination.
Attack the forces reclaiming Taiwan and they nuke your carrier group, what are you going to do?
David,
I think the necessary first step is to think about what the the goal of an initial rally of this sort both can and should accomplish. Let’s steal something from the Left’s playbook. A “protest” rally accomplishes a number of different goal. First it delivers a political message that can be amplified by sympathetic 3rd parties (media) to accomplish political ends, that’s not what we’re talking about here, at least not at first.. What we are talking about are the two other effects; that is getting people to think about themselves in a certain way (creating a common identity) and providing a place for mutual belonging and support.
We are not talking, at least at this stage, is political action because it’s dangerous to get enmeshed into existing agendas for groups rather I think we need to change the framework. I think a combination of the old “Spirit of 1776” civics presentation with a diverse Rainbow Coalition of people getting up an proclaiming both their love of country, importance of our Republic, and why they feel it’s under threat. Get some people up there from the grassroots who can talk about how the challenges they are facing and what they are doing. Where the Left has overreached, like Biden using Jim Crow in Georgia and his Philadelphia Speech, or using the IRS to intimidate Matt Taibbi, don’t let those episodes disappear down the memory wel. Start with everybody saying their Pledge and finish with the Anthem. Goals? Have everybody leave having been alerted to the threat, inspired to take action, and know we are all in this together. Isn’t that what the March for Life was about?
That’s the official motive. There’s also another motive concurrent with the official one (an action plan built on the event separate from any politician would be a derivative effect) I think it’s absolutely vital that this at the National Mall. I have been spending time down there as of late and I think in terms of the troubles to come it is the center of gravity. The western part has the monuments and the civic religion, the eastern part the political institutions and the swamp. I can walk 15 minutes from the Lincoln Memorial and be on K Street, 15 minutes from the Washington Monument and be at the FBI building. There’s a reason why the March for Jobs and Freedom, where King gave his”I Have a Dream” speech, took place in DC
Since January 6th, the anti-statist forces have stayed away from the Mall and thus ceded all of that symbolic space. A large rally on the western part of the Mall, say by the Lincoln Memorial would provide a vivid image that the exile has ended. It would give strength to all of those who live in fear of being canceled, it would give lie to “white supremacy,” and it would show that the future doesn’t bend to the Left
I have been playing with a metaphor for this other motive, that of a show of force. I almost want to use the term “punitive raid” but that has violent connotations, we would have to be very careful of security and that there not be any violence, let alone hijacked by false flag operations. A show of force would be a symbolic reclaiming of the nation’s civic spaces after Jan. 6. It, through its diversity, dare the Left to call it Far Right and extremist. It would happen in the very belly of the Beast, in fact I would recommend post-rally a stroll up Connecticut Avenue to trail the colors, on the way to the Zoo of course, to really drive the point home. In other words we want to cause a major league freakout on part of the Left and in turning the tables, we want them to overreact. We want to put the “skeer” into them.
What would a post-rally action plan look like? First, I think we will need two groups for the event. The first would be independent of any post-rally action, its aims is to simply prepare the way for those who will follow. As far as actions go I expect other groups and politicians will look to capitalize and that’s fine, though in retrospect I would probably keep the presidential candidates away at least as far as speakers go. What would be a good non-partisan action plan? Why not a 21st Century version of Committees of Correspondence across the country to provide coordination and mutual support for local action? Initially it could be to fight radicalization in schools and promote civics-minded curriculum, fight intrusion of the administrative state at the local level, and provide both counter-narratives and local media auxiliaries to fight the Leftist media. As with the school voucher programs, start small and modest, build some initial successes and them use those successes to replicate the model. We should have done this 2 years ago after Loudoun County
How much would the event cost? $15, 20 million? Get me Elon on line 1. This could be fun.
Everyone is correct about the Chinese navy!
China has developed a tremendous amount of naval power; however, it doesn’t have much capability to fight much beyond its littoral. Given that its historical imperial ambitions don’t extend much beyond that littoral that limited capability might not be a problem especially given that it can probably deny entry of American carrier forces west of the Marianas.
However China is, non-withstanding many of its Asian BRI projects, very reliant on maritime trade especially for oil and food. To secure those supplies it needs a true blue-water capability and that’s going to take time. How far out does it need to operate? Africa? South America? My guess is it’s going to take the Chinese a while, perhaps the better part of a decade to really figure out how to do such far-flung operations. Also with those long transit times, the Chinese navy will be limited to the 1/3 rule (1/3 of fleet on station, 1/3 in transit, 1/3 along the pier) so it’s going to have to change its force structure with many more carriers and nuke submarines; one of the reasons the Aussies went with the Virginia-class subs is the superior performance in regard to transit times.
Oh yeah and area denial along the Chinese littoral works both ways. Marines have just deployed their first littoral combat regiments which are designed to use missile batteries throughout the various island chains in the area to sink Chinese shipping.
The problems with subs and missiles is that they are excellent for area denial, but quite poor for force projection. That’s where capital ships come in and why they have survived as the mainstay for fleets as long as they. A Virginia-class sub has 12 VLS (and about 20+ torpedoes), a carrier can generate around 180-200 stories per day (one of the reasons for the Ford-class was to increase sortie rate.) You just cannot project firepower with any persistence with subs.
The missile- carrier debate is eerily similar to not only the pre-WW I torpedo/dreadnought debate but also the pre-Aegis debate in the late 70s and early 80s. This isn’t the first time that somebody has sounded the death-knell for large capital ships as innovations work both ways; keep in mind all those hulls have a lot of capacity for innovation.
Is this the end of the carrier? Maybe… but there will always be need for large capital ships (i.e. fat, juicy targets). What the Chinese have achieved is deterrence of entry to American carrier task forces west of the Marianas, in other words a threat-in-being. If you believe the recent simulations that the we will lose two carriers in a war then any combat is unacceptable simply because we don’t view them as expendable. Carriers… cannot live with them, cannot live with out them,
If you can solve the force-projection/missile defense puzzle you’re better than me.
David,
A friend of mine read the comment and suggested a modification regarding K-12. The advent of various school choice/voucher programs at the state level means that parents as concerned citizens can now separate their children’s education from the public school system. We can now take the authority for inculating our children’s civic values, I think that would be a great speech and would be a great part of any future action plan
Mike: “Marines have just deployed their first littoral combat regiments which are designed to use missile batteries throughout the various island chains in the area to sink Chinese shipping.”
Ummm — Has anyone told the Marines that the Chinese shipping they are preparing to sink is carrying imports to the US of Chinese manufactured items which the de-industrialized US can no longer make for itself?
Don’t ignore the immediate economic harm the people of the US would suffer if our Political Class starts an unnecessary war with China.
if youve read ghost fleet by p w singer, you get a notion how this first engagement would occur, a combination of hacking, anti santellite warfare and ghost transports that cause a lightning attack,
So far, four navies have managed to put all the pieces together: us, the Brits, Japan (long ago when things were simpler) and France.
Brief research reveals that eleven countries operate air capable ships today, so I think you are mistaken to believe that this is some sort of task beyond the capabilities of most nations including China.
The Soviets tried repeatedly and failed, as have the Russians.
The Soviets were quite able to build a large and expensive navy, which they needed about as much as Wilhelmine Germany did- and about as much as China does today. The USSR collapsed before they were able to build much of a carrier force- and my evaluation of the Kiev-class ships is that they weren’t designed or intended to be US Navy style vessels. I wouldn’t call that failure.
China may succeed if they have time (My bet is they don’t have it.) but they are a long way away.
I’ll disagree here as well, although I admit you may be correct. I think China has the wealth, the ability, and the intent to create any navy they want, including large aircraft carriers that may already be obsolete. Time will tell.
But I’d also like to note that China has quite likely stolen every detail of every bit of US military equipment they happen to desire, and also can send Chinese citizens to the US to enlist in the US Navy, learn all about air group operations, retire, and then return to China to teach them how to do it. And they’ll get a US military pension, too.
As far as Chinese anti ship weapons are concerned, there are various claims, but until they are demonstrated in actual combat, claims are what they remain.
Of course. But I’ll note that the US navy hasn’t faced any significant naval combat since WWII, so this also applies to US weaponry.
Worse, I think the evidence suggests the rulers of the United States have essentially no interest in the US navy, its weapons, capabilities, fate, or future. I note that while the present US regime wastes money with reckless abandon, it never seems to find even an extra fifty billion $ to build more ships or better maintain those already built.
China, on the other hand, is investing in long term development of its navy, including the development of myriad new weapons and the construction of hundreds of new ships, including aircraft carriers.
Hence, I’d bet that in ten years no one will be able to pretend that the US navy is still superior to the Chinese- and I’d further bet that the people ruling the US still won’t care.
YMMV.
Imagine 100,000 members of that 18-29 cohort rallying on the National Mall promoting the American ideal of Liberty?
Sure. Let’s imagine.
I think the regime would attack them as fascists, arrest the leadership, have its media condemn them as white supremacists- and the putative opposition party would want nothing to do with such an event or the organization that sponsored it.
That last is a problem, I think. Until that is solved, rallies on the National Mall or anywhere else will come to nothing.
There used to be an organization like that, targeting a somewhat younger demographic. I wonder whatever happened to the Boy Scouts?
If it’s really true that the US is not willing/cannot afford to lose two carriers in the first real great power war in nearly a hundred years, and the first war in all that time with real stakes for the US, then those ships are not truly a useable asset anymore. They are too few, too large, too expensive and wider US foreign policy must place far too much reliance on having a fixed number of them for them to be actually used in war.
random observer,
You are obviously laboring under the misconception that things like carriers and air craft are built with some sort of military object in mind. Their true purpose is to spread graft around to enough congressional districts to keep those stars and bars coming. Having them sunk or shot down disturbs the optics.
Related thoughts:
https://reactionaryfeminist.substack.com/p/devour-me-mummy