Herbert Meyer delivers Sophomoric lecture on National Security

On November 4, Jo-Ellen and I spent $40 to hear a lecture on National Security by Herbert Meyer, who once managed production of the U.S. National Intelligence estimates for President Reagan. We heard, at best, $2.00 worth of useful demographic information mixed with fear mongering and right wing propaganda, including cherry picked facts from history and the threat of Islam. The talk was skillfully coated with appeals to patriotism and to shoulder “the white man’s burden” of bringing the backward societies of Islam into the modern world before they drag us into theirs. He substituted the politically correct “Western Civilization” for  “white man.”

He repeatedly asserted that he “was just a messenger bringing data and not offering personal opinions; we would have to come to our own conclusions.” He usually made this assertion just after making one of his more opinionated remarks such as “we won the war in Iraq.”

Meyer started out by praising the accomplishments and benefits of Western Civilization, among them the Rule of Law― rather than the rule of Kings or Priests or mobs― which he credited with unleashing and supporting the innovations that brought us out of ignorance and poverty. However, during the Q&A session he was asked what he thought of water-boarding terrorists and of confining them in Guantanamo without due process. He passionately supported water-boarding (suspected) terrorists and, he added with authority, we wouldn’t want them moved to prisons in Oregon.  About 30% of the audience of 300 or so cheered and applauded.  I was embarrassed. So much for the rule of law

In all fairness, I must say that he emphasized the roles of contract law and intellectual property laws in unleashing innovation; perhaps he simply has no use for criminal law, the IV through VII Amendments of our Constitution or the Geneva Conventions, when they are inconvenient.

After many of his misstatements, I fidgeted in my seat and Jo-Ellen repeatedly glanced in my direction with a worried look. Her fears were finally confirmed during the Q&A session when Meyer was asked about taxes and tax rates. He began by stating with an air of discovery that families making less than $36 thousand per annum pay no income tax; suggesting that they’re not carrying their own weight. I raised my hand and when recognized pointed out that they (and employers) pay 17% in Social Security taxes on income from the first dollar. He started to argue, then admitted it was a tax on income and moved on to another subject.  I should have added Warren Buffet’s more holistically accurate statement: “I pay a lower percentage in income taxes than my secretary does.”

His pantheon of guys in white hats included Pope Benedict, Ronald Reagan, General McChrystal and General Patreaus.  I won’t bore you with the details of how he used them to support his conclusions, but I will say that of the four I have the most respect for― but not reverence and awe― General Patreaus as a relatively skilled and intelligent general. Sorry ladies, Golda Maier was the only woman he referred to by name and that was to quote her about how God led the Jews to the only part of the Middle East that didn’t have oil.

Among his more unintentionally humorous responses (other than we “won the war in Iraq” which he later qualified by “it could go to hell at any time though”) was to suggest that a good source of data on what’s going on in the political world is the Editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal. I took the WSJ for years, and it was pro-business and certainly not politically objective even then. Since Rupert Murdoch (News Corp, FOX News) bought the Journal it has become less objective and ever more right wing.

Perversely, I’m glad I went; it’s essential to remind myself how “reputation,” self-assurance and a skillful delivery can be persuasive even to reasonably well educated people; the audience included students and teachers from Central Oregon Community College, which sponsored his talk.  President Obama is continually inundated by both adversaries and supporters like Mr. Meyer, and I hope that he has enough strength and moments of quiet reflection to maintain his strategic focus and to filter valuable insights from their dross.

As luck would have it, I had profitably invested two hours earlier in the day watching and discussing two lectures of an outstanding 24 lectures series on The History United States and the Middle East: 1914 to 9/11. The contrast between this well researched and non-blameful view of how we got to 9/11 and Herb Meyer’s sophomoric one couldn’t have been starker.

All in all, it was an entertaining evening, but not intellectually satisfying. High on style points, low on content.

Related Posts on my blog at:   www.dismountingourtiger.com

The Science of Fear (Book Review)

Reason and fear about extremists, torture and Guantanamo

Stop whining about taxes, we’re in serious trouble!  

We cannot save other nations! We can only generate failed states

To Preserve our Bill of Rights we need a Bill of Obligations

About Edwin Lee

Retired electrical engineer, entrepreneur, and CEO. Co-founder of four companies (2 successful and two other learning experiences), author and speaker, inventor with 23 US Patents. More complete bio at www.elew.com
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Herbert Meyer delivers Sophomoric lecture on National Security

  1. dave says:

    Is it ironic or coincidence that you write that the “Sophomoric” lecture was given at a “community college”? Community colleges often cater to the first two years of higher education: the freshman and the sophomores.

    I’d expect lectures to top out at sophomoric at a junior college.

    Anyway, I found your blog today and rather enjoy your commentaries. I’ll be back for your insight and intellectual stimulation.

    Nice writing!

    Dave:
    Thanks. Didn’t think of the irony in my headline.

    Actually the talk was sponsored by a group at the community college… it’s a visiting scholars program which usually finds speakers of much higher quality.
    I sent a copy of my review to the sponsors, and reaffirmed my support of the program. I later received an email which said that they had more comments on this speaker than on any other in the history of their program. The comments were about evenly divided between support and criticisms. I’m not so concerned about extremist speakers as about the implications of broad agreement with them in relatively well educated audiences; to me, the applause and cheering for torture was the most disturbing element of the evening.

    By the way…. what are you studying or teaching at my old alma mater?

    Ed

  2. Miato says:

    Hi, Thank you! I would now go on this blog every day!
    Have a nice day
    Miato

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>