1. US Foreign policy since about 1898 has followed a pretty consistent pattern:

Step 1: “The US has gone into X:” “Yay! USA! This is a righteous and noble crusade!”
Step 2: “The US has left X:” “Yeah, that whole thing was a stupid idea; why did we do that?”
Step 3: Repeat

2. To put it another way, my reading of pretty much every American war since the end of the Indian Wars has been a matter of either engaging in short-sighted and ill-planned intervention in foreign affairs or dealing with the long-term consequences of our previous short-sighted and ill-planned interventions in foreign affairs.

3. Our involvement in World War I (or at least the carving up of Europe afterwards) was an example of the former, World War II of the latter. Or rather, the European theater was an instance of dealing with the consequences of our own prior stupidity: the Pacific War was (so far as I know) more just a run-of-the-mill matter of competing empires, forming an exception to the above rule.

And in that case it was Japan who made a short-sighted and bone-headed foreign policy decision by going after the Philippines and picking a fight it couldn’t possibly win with the United States. Though to be fair to them, we must recall that Japan had previously fought and beaten two massive land empires (Russia and China), so I can sort of see how they might have failed to realize that America was a very different beast. But I digress.

4. This week’s movie was Rear Window, which was a big hit with the students. They were almost losing it during the big suspense scenes.

I’m also not sure the boys were quite prepared for Grace Kelly; they were smitten from the first frame she appeared. Understandably, of course, since she was one of the most beautiful women to ever grace (so to speak) the silver screen.

Though this wasn’t just a matter of her face and figure. Like many of the best leading ladies of that era she exuded a glamorous charisma and powerful femininity. It wasn’t tittilation, like Miss Torso; it was the calm authority of a woman who knew her power and had it under control.

5. Last night some friends and I went to see a high school production if Fiddler on the Roof. It was a very well-done production, with a lot of clever staging (such as the drunken revelers running through the aisles during To Life) and pretty good acting and singing for high schoolers. It’s also, of course, just a really good show.

Fiddler is very much a product of the ’60s; a story of the idealistic youth challenging the ways of their elders and finding happiness through unconventional romance. Though it’s better than many such stories in that it also shows a great deal of affection and respect for the old ways of Tradition! and even shows that an arranged marriage done out of pure duty may be every bit as romantic as youthful rebellion (Do You Love Me? is my pick for the best song in the show). In other words, it’s a much more intelligent, thoughtful, and nuanced exploration of the idea than most such stories.

6. The other element of the show that stands out is how it depicts a kind of cross-section of life as such, with its ups and downs; a family existing in a small community, all bound together by culture and religion, buffeted by social and political forces far outside their control. In this I almost feel the Jewish element is secondary: yes, this particular play is about Russian Jews, and that is essential to this particular story, but the core concept only really requires a strong ethnic and cultural identity. You could do almost the same story with the same beats in an Irish or Korean village (though you would need a definitely ruled culture, not a ruling culture).

7. Fighting honorably is a virtue, but it is not the highest virtue. To do one’s duty towards one’s charges is, I think, the higher point. If that can be done honorably, then so be it. If fighting honorably endangers those we are responsible for (due to the nature of the fight or of the enemy), then it ceases to be a virtue.