Qualifications of a Naval Officer
It is by no means enough that an officer of the Navy should be a capable mariner. He must be that, of course, but also a great deal more. He should be as well a gentleman of liberal education, refined manners, punctilious courtesy, and the nicest sense of personal honor.
He should be the soul of tact, patience, justice, firmness, kindness, and charity. No meritorious act of a subordinate should escape his attention or be left to pass without its reward, even if the reward is only a word of approval. Conversely, he should not be blind to a single fault in any subordinate, though at the same time, he should be quick and unfailing to distinguish error from malice, thoughtfulness from incompetency, and well meant shortcomings from heedless or stupid.
In one word, every commander should keep constantly before him the great truth, that to be well obeyed, he must be perfectly esteemed.
Written by Augustus C. Buell in 1900 to reflect his views of John Paul Jones (from Reef Points: 2003-2004, 98th Edition [Annapolis, MD: U.S. Naval Academy, 2003])
—————————————————
Every midshipman at the U.S. Naval Academy knows these words. Obviously not every Naval officer lives up to them. That doesn’t diminish their importance. Why do I post this now? Simple… I invite all members of this committee of correspondence to strive to live by these words, especially those I put in bold, in our conversations with each other at SST.
I have noticed a few more rudely argumentative conversations on SST lately. I’m all for lively discussion, witty comebacks and even occasional ribald humor, but we can easily forget that we are, in effect, sitting in Colonel Lang’s living room when we do this. Being rude or smart assed to the host or other guests should be seen as an unthinkable breach of etiquette and a smear on our personal honor.
TTG
Comment: I posted this back in June 2013. I thought about it during this week’s especially heated verbal skirmishes. Apparently Barbara Ann was thinking along the same lines. Back then I called on us to live up to something more like an 18th century sense of honor and decorum. Of course that 18th century sense of honor and decorum was punctuated by frequent duels settled with cold steel or hot lead. So maybe our occasional rough verbal jousts aren’t too bad.
As Barbara Ann reminded us, Colonel Lang saw both SST and Turcopolier as a virtual salon. In my original post, I pointed out that that we were, in effect, invited into Colonel Lang’s living room and that we should act accordingly. I’m not inviting you into my living room. At best, I’m inviting you into my gazebo at the edge of the woods. As such, I tolerate a higher level of coarseness. Still, that coarseness becomes corrosive if it becomes pervasive. I have no intention of banning anyone unless they prove themselves to be truly unworthy of engaging in this committee of correspondence. I may delete a comment, maybe admonish a commenter or even benevolently edit a comment. The choice is mine. As Colonel Lang often reminded us, this blog is a hobby, a hobby I chose to continue in memory of my dear friend. I also enjoy the banter and know such mental engagement is good for one’s health.
TTG
To start the discussion, I will share Barbara Ann’s suggestions for guidelines for commenters:
– All informed, constructive comment is welcome, regardless of one’s views*
– Ad hominem (personal attacks) of any kind are not tolerated – Gratuitous racist language is not acceptable
– Wit/amusing sarcasm are to be encouraged (in small quantities) to lighten the tone
– Per post comment length and frequency limits ought to be set
*Col. Lang did not tolerate anti American sentiment. I always took this to mean views that denigrated or attacked the Constitution or all Americans collectively. This should be respected.
I like these guidelines. And I do see them as guidelines, not rules. I do expect everyone to have the self-discipline to live up to these guidelines as best you can, even if you occasionally fall from grace. I have a forgiving soul.
I have no problem with wit and amusing sarcasm. Nor do I mind biting sarcasm.
Comment length and frequency is not something that can be done automatically. Long and frequent comments do not particularly bother me and I’m not going to waste a lot of time policing this. Colonel Lang tried this once and it didn’t work. Besides, I often enjoy a long yarn. Just be reasonable. Some of these long threads eventually tease out some good points, even if the slog to reach them is tedious.
Lars also suggested adhering to the subject of the post as being helpful. Even I’ve breached this suggestion in my own posts.Yes, it could be as a general guideline without specific limits. However, we would then run the risk of missing some important idea or bit of news. To make it a little easier to adhere to the post subject, I will endeavor to have an open post at least once a week.
So what does the committee think.
Generally agree, but…
As for the ad hominem attacks, they bring more shame to the attacker than to the one whose character is being impugned. It shows a lack of logic and sloppy thinking. IMHO let the insults and the offenders splutter and hiss. So please don’t edit out any slurs or disrespectful barbs pointed towards me personally. I’ve had worse. It’s similar to the old idiom “water off a duck’s back” in the pond out back of your property you’ve mentioned.
Ad hominem attacks invite a reciprocal answer and then it quickly turns into an ugly mess. IMO, better to discourage them with a warning followed by a ban.
I’d add these recommendations:
– don’t feed the troll
– if you encounter some1 who cannot see your point of view or rubs you the wrong way, take the high road and don’t waste your time and energy
Ad hominem attacks invite a reciprocal answer and then it quickly turns into an ugly mess. IMO, better to discourage them with a warning followed by a ban. Why
wiz, if someone insults me, why should I take the bait? If I do, my opponent succeeds. Why should I give whomever that chance? … Look, I have a slightly choleric temper, and I know it sometimes ain’t easy. But it makes a lot more sense to take a very, very long and very, very deep breath. …
I am with Leith on the issue, basically.
But around here, or on the internet generally, it may also work as a signal to one’s camp. Look, I do it for you. That fucking a**!!! … A different type of steam releasing valve then humor/irony/sarcasm?
LeaNder
Who said you have to take the bait. That’s why I used the word invitation. You do not have to answer the call.
That said, most people do, and then we end up with endless threads going in circles.
Allegedly, even germans have human emotions so if I were to package the insult cleverly, you might take the bait despite yourself.
even germans have human emotions
you are misguided. We only pretent to have as everyone else. We basically remained Neanderhals, that’s why we singlehandedly started two wars. But you have a point. 😉
Although, do you have an example where my snowflake soul triggered a longer ad-hominem-thread throwing the comment section out of balance? I doubt this snowflake ever had the patience. 😉
Artists vs Bureaucrats? Interpretations?
OK, ok. Evidence of glaring anti-Americanism?
Hopefully most commenters here can self-regulate. Moderation is a thankless chore.
Having lived in Annapolis (my wife did a tour on USNA staff — computer services in Ward Hall) have been to the crypt a few times. A bit over the top but I guess it’s OK to have something like that. I do note that JPJ ended up working for Catherine the Great and Potemkin in Ukraine against the Turks.
Sounds good to me, especially the “Gratuitous racist language is not acceptable.” We can all do better in the points listed and I will try to do so myself. When the points are enforced I think it will make things easier on every one.
Jane, you ignorant slut – 😉
All good. Thx for your work keeping this going!
And plz just let me know if I get too snarky or long-winded.
TTG,
Concur with the spirit of your post. Devil is always in the details, of course.
Definitely think the anti-American/anti-Constitution rule should be in effect. Ad Hominem attacks should not be tolerated either. Violations of either rule should result in banning.
Other than that, too many people are way too sensitive these days; too easily offended – and their state of feeling offended is wielded, like a mighty weapon, to take control and to silence others with whom they disagree. IMO, this forum should avoid any sanctions based on claimed offense beyond clear ad hominem attacks.
Eric Newhill
Strongly agree re your second paragraph, one person’s views cannot end at another’s hurt feelings. Snowflakes should be encouraged to hang out elsewhere (leith’s point I think). But in an open forum like this racial slurs will inevitably be interpreted as a sign of bigotry and ignorance. It ought to be possible to get pretty much any point across without language designed to insult rather than inform. Col. Lang adopted the name of a “wog” warrior poet as his nom de guerre. The spirits of Antar, Brigadier Ali and others abide with us still in TTG’s gazebo.
Barbara Ann,
I am going to stop using the term “wog” and similar terms (e.g. “camel jockey”, “goat funkers”), but not because some finger wagging, moralizing, holier than thou, know it all, snow flake demanded that I cease.
I’ll choose other terms because you suggested it and out of respect for TTG, who doesn’t need the trouble.
Dear Eric Newhill,
“Finger-wagging,” “holier than thou,” “know it all,” and “snowflake” have been placed on the temporary restricted review list until further notice.
Might we dare to suggest that many of the peoples who catch your special attention once burned alive widows, and sacrificed 13 year old virgins so that the sun would rise whereas in jolly old England not so long ago an eight year old child could legally be executed by hanging for stealing a crust of bread.
Were you visited by a frightening to behold reptilian waiter after dining out on grilled clawed crustaceans while on your date with two beautiful matinee idols? Then call our easy to remember toll-free number: 1-ANTI- AD-HOMINEMUM
http://tinyurl.com/466r7pjz
Waiter; “Do you dine on lobster out of a strong disdain for their views on human rights?”
Diner on right: Yes, in fact I do.
Diner on the left: No, not really, I just think they’re very tasty.
Diner on the right: Any further questions Waiter? By the way, did anyone ever tell you that you’re not fooling anyone with that cheap costume-party mask?
Barbara Ann –
I made no such point. My understanding of the term ‘snowflake’ is that it’s used as a put-down for anyone who does not agree with the extreme right. I’ve been called snowflake in my hometown based on my support for a candidate running against a Trump wannabee. I wear that moniker proudly. Interestingly, the same guy who called me a snowflake does the loudest whining.
Apologies for misrepresenting your point leith, I was not aware “snowflake” had acquired such connotations. The rate at which our vocabulary is succumbing to political partisanship is unsettling.
Barbara Ann,
There are snowflakes, and then there are precious snowflakes….
good move. may increase quality & encourage new commenters.
TTG…and All Teams…First…I have Always Appreciated That Col..W Lang set this Community up…Its Been a Fascinating 20 Year Tour Here…He Had so many Fascinating Things Going On…As you an See on the SST Side Bar…and His Own Background..and Life Experiences.. With His Wife and Daughter Maureen..
He Was a Fascinating Moderator…Tough..Sensitive..Patriotic..Gifted..He got mad at Me nce because He put up a Photo of a Giant Prime Rib..And I Suggested Sides Dishes,,Phew…Ever Trip Here was an Adventure..Every Comment and Poster..Took Reading to a New Level..One could only Get Here..
I Agree with the New Pause…An Evaluations how we should proceend..Civil..
Stay on Topic…Do n Open Thread every week if your want to Bring Your Own Train
To the Station…Do Not Hook up a Three Mile Train..With Ten Cut and Paste Links…
I research First…Make Notes. Condense to the Main Items..and Post..
I Like The Way TTG Adds Variety,,Like This Start with the Photo Of John Paul Jones
Tomb..I Have Never Been able to see anything Of Monuments or Memorial..or Any of That on The East Coast..Any where…Just Being up Here Prompts Me To Research M any of the Topics ..Places ..People or Events I Read Here..
This Pause for Re Evaluation..is Timely..Mature..And Worthy .To Carry on…The
MISSION..
jim
Quite reasonable.
I agree.
I use sarcasm too often when I’m annoyed by certain posts. I’ll try to correct myself.
Traditional values.
Nikki Haley Had Brazen Extramarital Affairs, Sworn Witness Claims.
https://youtu.be/e8xGt9XA8zM
That is a qualification with the Trump Party.
Indeed. The knives are out for her apparently – I just spotted this on my way to read Thomas Friedman’s piece today on Netanyahu and Biden. I personally don’t care for Nikki too much at all, but then again I’m negative on most of these politicians.
———–
Nikki Haley Could be the Most Dangerous President.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/20/opinion/nikki-haley-trump-foreign-policy.html
In the alternate timeline where Ron DeSantis proved to be a capable campaigner and looked poised to defeat Donald Trump in New Hampshire and beyond, we would be facing a multitude of left-leaning essays on a single theme: “Why DeSantis is actually more dangerous than Trump.”
In this world, the only threat to Trump in New Hampshire is Nikki Haley, and her candidacy doesn’t look built to last much beyond that primary. But in the spirit of slipping in your controversial opinions while you can, and because she might yet be Trump’s running mate, here is my own fear: A Haley presidency could be more dangerous than a second Trump term.
This is not because I think that Haley is an authoritarian threat to American democracy. She is obviously not, and her nomination and election would have the salutary effect of re-normalizing Republican politics on important questions like, “Should you contest a lost election by pushing for a constitutional crisis and whipping up an angry mob?”
But when the history of 21st-century American decline is written, the crucial chapter will focus not on Trump but on one of his predecessors, George W. Bush: a better man than Trump, a capable politician with a number of sound policies to his credit, but also the architect of a hubristic foreign policy whose disastrous effects continue to ripple through the country and the world. (More at link)
What’s the qualification with the Barack party?
10%
So who put out the hit on Nikki? Donny or Ronny?
Anonymous person: I’d just like to clarify that I won’t stop using ad-hominem attacks, racist comments, hateful invective or demonstrate through use of language my concern or care for any human being’s welfare if the request to do so comes from anyone who I personally determine to be moralistic, polite, concerned with human dignity and its protection or to be a leftist, a pacifist, antiwar, or anti-American. No way.
Interviewer: But suppose Al Capone, while holding a loaded sub machine gun and standing over the bodies of several people who he had recently bludgeoned to death with a baseball bat – suppose he asked you to behave with more culture and consideration – do you see yourself modifying your behavior in response to that? Or would the prospect of being thrown into a cage of hungry leopards and crocodiles – could you possibly bring yourself to publicly acknowledge that an external influence such as that could modify your tendency to express yourself with hostility and implied cruelty and indifference to human suffering?
Anonymous person: I just want it understood that I don’t do anything because a liberal or humanist asks it of me, never.
Interviewer: Very well. Understood. If you have any questions we will be available. But we have no further questions at this time.
Ah hell no!
hehe just kidding.
I have a tendency to like rubbing against the grain. I also like cutting off tailgaters, but due to my advancing age (and what… wisdom) need to slow that down.
Lately..Alll This Discussion…and Values..Communication here are
The Current Topics…My Mind wanders back..To Colonel Langs..HQ….SST..Community Center With An Open Bar..and What Was Discussed..Phew./..Heavy Stuff..
I Was Amazed when I went Back and looked at His Alpha List of Sites etc on Side Bar..
I FOUND….The “WHATEVER”…Page,,,75 TopicsRandom Thoughts……The First One I Read…
on April 23rd..2019..by PL..Quote,,,” My Oldest Dog,Lola The Magnificanta Norwich Terrier Bitchis almost 16 years Old…She went through a bad patch yesterday,,,She went
Comatose for Four Hoursand then Suddenly WOKE up….The TeeVee Room,,and then
peed in the Middle of a 120 year old Kazak Caucasian Soumak rug….She bright eyed and bushy tailed this morning…She gobbled her breakfastand went for a stroll around the landscaped back garden in a survey of her domaine…Ah Well..Rugs can be cleaned…and I Like her better than the rug…She is pretty Frisky Today…PL”
I commend this to everyone heartily. She discusses America, it’s unique political system and its jarring encounter & intersection with criminality born during her life with the national security state, assassinations, Watergate etc. It’s stunning to even encounter such a person that day, stunning and sobering.
The Last Interview With Hannah Arendt (1973 English & French)
https://youtu.be/8FkoMm1hs1g
F&L
Thanks for the link. That one interview has enough material for discussion in a dozen posts.
Interesting that Arendt mentions Morgenthau. She talks about the fear of freedom and the corruption of politics, but also touches on the death of statesmanship. Morgenthau observed that politics, even in his time, was replacing informed decision-making by the Executive with the de facto abdication of this critical responsibility – via the delegation of decision-making to scientific ‘experts’ (Arendt mentioned McNamara too). This quote of Morgenthau’s from his indispensable 1952 work Scientific Man and Power Politics is more relevant today that ever, if we are to avoid the impending complete dissolution of politics into totalitarian technocracy:
What started with Kant was always bound to end in “trust the science”, the religion of Climate Change and the triumph of the quantification of everything. Even sin can now be measured by molecular weight.
Arendt’s Brecht quote is spot on too: “The great political criminals must be exposed and exposed especially to laughter”. This too has never been more important.
Barbara Ann –
McNamara was an economist, not a scientist. The US would have been better served if he had served in the Department of the Treasury instead of Defense. Or better served if he stayed out of government entirely.
Ash Carter was the SecDef with a scientific background. And perhaps William Perry?
Yuval Harari and Bill Gates are examples of the sort of truncated people who personify the truncated approach discussed by Morganthau. People forget that “prodigy” also meant “portent” or “monster.” My guess is it’s organic with them in the sense of say Asperger’s syndrome – however it is their social disconnection with other human beings is reminiscent for me of some of the fictional depictions of vampires such as Bram Stoker’s. It’s a royalty analogy too.
Couldn’t agree more. Misanthropcracy, guided by Ambivalent Insanity. I’d quite like to avoid that.
Barbara Ann –
I’m greatly appreciating your art in wordsmithing. I’m stealing that word “Misanthropcracy”. And it needs to be entered in the Oxford English Dictionary, or at the least in Wiktionary if the OED turns it down.
Always been a unique site. Always a privilege to be permitted to comment on it. Still is. Magnificent that you’ve kept it going. Vote of thanks, TTG.
No misprints have been committed in the making of this comment. Damn, just seen one. Corrected. Apart from that slight contretemps, I believe this is the first comment I’ve submitted I’m not going to look at later and say “Oh Hell …”
E&OE