Skip to main content

The Bravery of Those Who Died to Defend Us Highlights Our Cowardice


Memorial Day commemorates those who died in military service to our country. These people died not for a chunk of land, for the natural resources available on that chunk of land, nor for any such simple material possession. They died for an idea, a way of life, as well as for each other. We used to be the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave. Now we're the land of the lockdown and the home of the trepidatious. 

The bravery of heroes past has been replaced by dirty looks for those who dare to go outside without a mask - even in their own cars – where mask wearing, at best, can only be justified as a sign of solidarity. But solidarity for what? Certainly not freedom. That solidarity happens when people stand shoulder to shoulder against the jackboots who would take someone to jail for what now appears to be the shocking desire to earn a living to feed a family.

What follows are three stories of heroism, and four contrasting acts of cowardice. May the deeds of the past awaken in us a spirit of true courage, or at least help us to remember where our spines are located. 

During the American Revolution, everyone who fought was risking not only death in war, but worse, being branded a traitor to Britain, which would end in hanging, drawing, and quartering. These heroes fought for basic freedoms. They believed in freedom of movement, freedom to protest, freedom to worship, and the duty of the people, after every peaceable measure was extinguished, to throw off the yoke of tyranny. They would be appalled at the draconian measures implemented by one-man fiat in states and cities to prevent a disease that may prove less deadly than the flu, when all is said and done. They would also be embarrassed at the timid responses of many willing victims, who want nothing more than for government to stroke their hair and tell them everything will be okay. 

During WWI, Sergeant Alvin York was part of a patrol charged with capturing a German machine gun nest. After losing several of his comrades, including the commanding officer, and being pinned down by German fire, then-Corporal York took command, single handedly capturing the machine gun, as well as dozens of soldiers. A hero who acted both bravely and decisively under extreme pressure when seconds counted, I doubt Sgt. York would look favorably on government officials who jumped the gun so significantly - overreaching, trampling liberties, and then coming up with the excuse that they didnt have time to make the best decisions. 

In Sergeant York’s case, seconds mattered. With Covid we had days and even weeks of warning, and we still scrambled like decapitated chickens when the disease finally reached our shores. We still made the wrong choices, acting out of fear rather than a presumption of liberty, treating everyone as if we are all equally at risk and neglecting taking the right precautions to protect the truly vulnerable. Italy recently reported that over 99 percent of the Covid dead in that country had pre-existing conditions. This vulnerability was known early on.

It takes incredible bravery to go into long odds with an uncertain outcome, doing your job in spite of the danger. The early landing parties on D-Day’s Omaha beach during WWII exemplify this kind of courage. But it takes another kind altogether to accept certain doom, especially to volunteer for it. The airmen of the Doolittle Raid on Tokyo fall into this latter category. There was no uncertainty as they took off - they flew land-based bombers off an aircraft carrier, a purpose for which the planes were never intended, knowing full well that the best case scenario would be running out of fuel behind enemy lines, on a volunteer mission. If they could see the shortsightedness with which we have condemned more people to death as a direct result of the virus, and even more from the expected poverty bomb, they would surely dismiss us as frightened children hiding under the blankets from ghosts. 

One last note: in all fairness, not every tyrannical act undertaken during Covid can be attributed to cowardice. There are also those who have found that a dash of fear sweetens the flavor of their power. We should not be surprised if they are trying to maintain it by whatever means they can. They bring a different shame to heroes past. 

Mike Davis is a Research Fellow at 1889 Institute. He can be reached at mdavis@1889institute.org. 

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.

Popular posts from this blog

School Choice: I Have Erred

I should point out, before the reader gets into this piece, that these are my personal thoughts. Right around last Labor Day, I suddenly had a thought. I quickly made a calculation and realized that, as of the day after Labor Day, I’ve worked full-time in public policy for 25 years – a quarter of a century. While there really is nothing fundamentally more special about a 25 th anniversary than a 24 th or 26 th one, it is a widely-recognized demarcation point. Therefore, it seems worthwhile to take time and write down reflections on my career. My work has touched on several policy areas, but I’ve been thinking a lot about public education lately. That’s the area I practically swam in when I started my career, so here are my thoughts. On the day after Labor Day in 1994 I started work for a member of the Texas House of Representatives. He was the member who always carried a voucher bill, an issue for which I was thrilled to work. By that time, my wife had homeschooled our dau...

Top-Ten in Low Taxes, But Oklahoma Still Has Much Room for Improvement

In a comparison of states’ total taxes as well as spending in certain broad categories that the 1889 Institute has just published ( Oklahoma Government Revenues and Spending in Perspective – Update ), some interesting facts arise. Using federal data, we compared states by looking at the percentage of personal income collected in state and local government revenues. We also looked at the percentage of personal income spent in six broad spending categories: higher education, public education, public welfare, hospitals, highways, and corrections. The data shows that in 2017 Oklahoma’s state and local governments: Extract 13.2 percent of Oklahomans’ personal income in taxes and fees, moving Oklahoma into the Top Ten lowest-taxing states, ahead of Texas.   Spend 12.38 percent of personal income on the six featured spending areas (which include federal dollars), only a little below the national average of 12.7 percent. While 9th overall (least spent being first), Oklahoma is n...

Present Reforms to Keep the Ghost of State Questions Past from Creating Future Headaches

Oklahoma, like many western states, allows its citizens to directly participate in the democratic process through citizen initiatives and referendums. In a referendum, the legislature directs a question to the people — usually to modify the state constitution, since the legislature can change statutes itself. An initiative requires no legislative involvement, but is initiated by the people via signature gathering, and can be used to modify statute or amend the constitution. Collectively, the initiatives and referendums that make it onto the ballot are known as State Questions.   Recently, there have been calls to make it more difficult to amend the constitution. At least two proposals are being discussed. One would diversify the signature requirement by demanding that a proportional amount of signatures come from each region of the state. The other would require a sixty percent majority to adopt a constitutional amendment rather than the fifty percent plus one currently in place. ...

Religious Freedom and School Choice in the Nation's High Court

When the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) begins its term next week, one of the many important cases it will consider is that of Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue , which addresses Montana’s Tax Credit Scholarship program, and gives the high court an opportunity to decide whether Blaine Amendments (which generally prohibit any state money from going to a “sectarian” purpose) violate the establishment and free exercise clauses of the first amendment, as well as the and equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. At the very least, the justices should rule on whether Blaine Amendments (like Section II-5 of the Oklahoma Constitution) can be used to exclude religious schools from school choice programs which insulate the state from direct subsidy of religious organizations through the “genuine, independent choice of private individuals.”   The question presented to the court is “Whether it violates the religion clauses or the equal protection clause of th...