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The bravery of heroes past has been replaced by dirty looks for those who dare to go outside without a mask - even in their own cars – where mask wearing, at best, can only be justified as a sign of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 didn’t 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

Lies We Tell in Government, and Our Debts to Truth

HBO’s mini-series,  Chernobyl ,  is a drama depicting  the disastrous  1986  explosion ,  and  hero ic efforts to control the  resulting  meltdown ,  of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine  (then part of the Soviet Union ).  A flawed man, but true hero,  Valery  Alexeyvich   Legasov , worked tirelessly to ameliorate the disaster’s consequences and  chiefly  investigated its cause. He was  Deputy Director of the  Kurchatov  Institute of Atomic Energ y , a Soviet elite, who  is portrayed at the end of  the  series making a dramatic speech at a trial about how the nuclear reactor exploded, when  such an explosion in that type of reactor  should not have been possible. In the course of the series, the audience  learns  that the reactor had a design flaw that had been covered up by the Soviet State (true).  The audience also learns  that...
Read more

When It Comes to the Cox Center, “What if I Get to Meet a Movie Star?” Isn’t Good Enough

In a recent   post , 1889 Institute expounded on the fiduciary duty of elected officials “to act in the best interest of the people of the state as a whole,” a “high duty, executed as a public trust … wherein one puts the people’s interest above one’s own.” This fiduciary duty must not stop with elected officials. Once an elected body or an elected official – the legislature, a city council, the governor, or a mayor – has taken final action, the faithful implementation of each enacted law, policy, or program falls to an army of bureaucrats. Thus, a fiduciary duty to execute laws and policies with diligence and integrity, tantamount to that of elected officials, must extend to government employees. Recently, I had a few moments to sit down and watch a show with my children. Unsurprisingly, my son picked a series entitled “The Stinky and Dirty Show.” I was naturally skeptical that the show would yield any real value. However, as I watched, I found myself pleasantly surprised. Each ep...
Read more

AG Hunter Lowers Boom on Barrier to Entry; Legislature Should Follow His Lead

Even as the Oklahoma Supreme Court  struck down  a recent alcohol distribution law, the Attorney General paved the way for the state’s Alcoholic Beverage Law Enforcement Commission (ABLE) to remove an obstacle from the expansion of liquor store competition - finding that Oklahoma’s five-year in-state residency requirement before one can own a liquor store likely runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution and recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent.  The AG’s  opinion , issued at the end of December, informs the state’s alcohol commission that portions of the state constitution (Article 28A, Section 4(A) & (B)) are unenforceable. These provisions require that ABLE issue a Retail Spirits License or Wine and Spirits Wholesaler License only to someone who has been a resident of Oklahoma for the previous five years. Presumably ABLE, who requested the opinion, will now begin issuing licenses to otherwise qualified applicants regardless of how long they have lived in Okl...
Read more

The Problem of Diffuse Costs and Concentrated Benefits

Do you ever find yourself observing a seemingly illogical government program , spending decision, or other strange practice and ask “how is it that no one has fixed that?” If you are like me, you encounter this phenomenon regularly. This often takes the form of a curious headline (Save Federal Funding for the Cowboy Poets!) that most people see and can’t believe is real. I would like to suggest that this phenomenon often results from the problem of diffuse costs and concentrated benefits. To understand this concept, consider a hypothetical law that assessed a $1 tax on everyone in the United States with the proceeds to be given to one individual for unrestricted use as he sees fit. The people harmed by such a law—the individual taxpayers—will not be very motivated to spend the time and effort to convince Congress to change the law. They might resent the dollar taken from them for a silly cause they don’t support, but the lost dollar isn’t worth the trouble of doing something about i...
Read more