What is CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME?
CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME is a condition which compels its victims to render themselves defenseless in the face of gathering or imminent threats.
Named for Neville Chamberlain, British Prime Minister from 1937 to 1940, CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME differs from more conventional Fear of Conflict disorders in the degree to which it drives its victims in their efforts to avoid conflict, often to the point of exhibiting behavior essentially suicidal. Oddly, victims often become extremely combative toward lesser or non-existent threats (e.g. Neo-cons, Global Warming) while inexplicably bending over backwards to appease the primary threat(e.g. Islamic Fascism); effectively feeding the monster most certain to kill them, or as Mr. Chamberlain’s successor, Sir Winston Churchill, put it, “one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”
What are the symptoms of CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME?
*Inordinate focus on the worst in the best, and the best in the worst
*A belief that the only requirement for “peace” is lack of conflict
*Hyper criticality of irrelevant minutia
*Rationalization of one’s own bald-faced cowardice
If you or someone you know exhibits one or more of these symptoms, you may suffer from CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME.
What does CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME have to do with the September 11th Attacks?
Throughout the 1990s, Islamic terrorists carried out a number of direct attacks upon the United States both at home and abroad. Most notably these included the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center; the 1996 attack on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia; the 1998 attacks on U.S. Embassies in Africa; the narrowly averted 1999 "Millennium" plot; and the 2000 attack on U.S.S. Cole. The United States response to these attacks was virtually nothing. The excuses are many, the fingers of blame point in all directions, but the fact remains – inaction in the face of gathering threat brought about catastrophe of Biblical proportions. Behold the fruits of CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME.
* World War II. Though traceable really throughout history, the very human failings that comprise CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME were most pointedly embodied in the person of Neville Chamberlain. Mr. Chamberlain’s championing of Britain’s policies of non intervention and appeasement in reaction to the gathering threat that was Nazi Germany resulted not only in Britain’s near extinction at the hands of the Nazis, but also her dishonor, demonstrated best, perhaps, in Mr. Chamberlain’s speech delivered after having sold out Czechoslovakia to the ascending Hitler via 1938’s Munich Agreement:
Less than a year later, the whole of Czechoslovakia was under brutal Nazi control, England and all of Europe had been revealed as politically and militarily impotent, and Hitler’s monstrous appetite for power was whetted immeasurably. So much for peace.
* Vietnam. Despite the lessons of World War II, this exquisite blend of apathy toward “far away countries with people of whom we know nothing” and callous self-righteousness in the name of “peace” - i.e. CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME – continued its disastrous march through the remainder of 20th Century. In the later 1960s and early 70s, to tune of “What are we fighting for” , “peace” activists demanded America’s pullout from Vietnam. With the aid of a powerful yet naive media, they eventually proved successful. The price for this “peace”, “was paid by millions of innocent citizens, whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like 'boat people,' 're-education camps' and 'killing fields,' " as Bushie recently recollected.
* The Cold War. After Kennedy and until The Ronald, CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME caused the West to behave with increasing timidity, self-loathing, and defeatism in response to advancing Soviet Communism, ensuring utter humiliation at home, and imprisonment, torture, and death for millions behind the Iron Curtain.
* Gulf War 1. In deference to the United Nations, the First Gulf War was – in retrospect - ended prematurely, leaving Sadaam and his charming sons free to kill thousands more in Iraq and decimating any legitimacy America had built up among pro-democratic forces there. Following this then, of course, was the 12 year circus of multiple U.N. Resolutions calling for Sadaam’s compliance with the terms of ceasefire and his complete disarmament – including “establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction and all missiles for their delivery and the objective of a global ban on chemical weapons.” This brings us to our current dilemma in Iraq.
* Iraq today. Bushie is accused of imperialism, of beginning a “preemptive war”, of invading a sovereign country, mass murder, abuse of power etc., etc., etc.. In truth he was making good on the conditions set forth by the United Nations (above). Further more, the lesson he – and several others – drew from the September 11th attacks was that ALL threats are to be regarded seriously and dealt with as appropriately and expeditiously as possible within the parameters of the Constitution. Thus, Bushie wisely heeded the words of his predecessor:
"If he (Sadaam) refuses or continues to evade his obligations through more tactics of delay and deception, he and he alone will be to blame for the consequences. Now, let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who's really worked on this for any length of time believes that, too."
- President William Jefferson Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
Of course, we all know that, true to form, President Clinton did virtually nothing to back his own very prescient words; issue a limp Iraq Liberation Act , lob a few bombs , but take no decisive action in the face of gathering threat for fear of political reprisal– classic CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME.
Bushie took action. Sadaam is no longer a threat. Thus we are able to focus on the root of the problem - Islamic fascism – wherever, whenever, and however it presents itself. And yet, Bushie and the others fighting the fight must contend with daily caterwauling and sniping from the Left. One suspects that had Sir Winston been in a position to neutralize Hitler in the mid-1930s as he advised, he too would later have been derided as a preemptive imperialist warmongering bully. And millions of lives would have been saved.
- Sir Winston Churchill, Second World War (1948)
How Can we Fight CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME?
Throughout modern history, the only effective antidote to CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME has been Churchillianism.
A quintessential example of Churchillian reaction to CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME is provided by author John Keegan in his biography, Winston Churchill. To paraphrase, in late May 1940, French units collapsing wholesale to German forces, and the Belgian army capitulating altogether, recently deposed Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and others proposed to Churchill that the British government consider seeking terms from Hitler. Churchill considered their arguments and rejected them in these words…
“Nations which went down fighting, rose again. But those who surrendered tamely, were finished. If this long island story of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground.”
"We shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air. We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing-grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!"
Do we note a difference here? Do we recall the result of this attitude in face of almost certain defeat? The word is “victory.” Victory for England. Victory for Western Civilization. Victory for mankind.
In truth Churchillianism is as much good policy for individuals as for civilizations. Consider the following:
-Sir Winston Churchill
The alternative, as we note now each and every September the 11th, is more than bleak. As Former U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright confessed before the Congressional 9/11 panel, March 24, 2004:
"I do think -- this is my personal opinion -- that it would be very hard, pre-9/11, to have persuaded anybody that an invasion of Afghanistan was appropriate. I think it did take the mega-shock, unfortunately, of 9/11 to make people understand the considerable threat [posed by Al-Qaeda]."
Let us see to it that such “mega-shocks” are never “necessary” again.
How Can I Make a Pledge to the Frst Annual Churchill’s Parrot’s September 11th CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME Blogathon?
Your fiduciary pledges are not sought at this juncture (however anyone feeling the urge to wire a few bob our way will nary be discouraged!). All we ask is that you pledge to do your part in confronting CHAMBERLAIN’S SYNDROME where and whenever you encounter it, reject it, and expose it for the diseased, demoralizing, defeatist poison that it is.
As in the face of past threats, we can afford nothing less.
For additional brilliance on the matter at hand we highly recommend Steven Haywards’ A Churchillian Perspective on 911. Also Jonathan Gurwitz’ War on Terror Loses Focus.