The West won the cold war, and it has the scars to prove it:

From the soviet’s angle, the question was “what can you do against an opponent who is ahead in economic dynamism, world influence, worker motivation, and citizen optimism?”

They were plenty smart enough to recognize that military confrontation under any expectation of parity was not attractive from a costs vs. benefits standpoint. So the real question was “How to obtain a “kill ratio” superior to what you can get by shooting bullets?”

How about shooting ideas? How about demoralizing the opponent?

Let’s remember how effective the soviet propaganda has been: Back in the 60s, in particular, the erosion of moral standards in the US was more than a mere reflection of the cynicism and the dark humor that prevailed in the soviet union at that time, it was the outcome of a systematic campaign of finely targeted intellectual agression.

What does “demoralizing” really mean? Could it possibly mean “removing the morality”? The soviet propagandists understood that the US youth was more vulnerable to rethorical abuse than any other demographic slice. If you take a long term view, that’s a heck of a deal: Plant the seeds of moral weakness in the heads of the young, so your opponent will be weak in due course!

The hippies of the 60s are our leading class today, particularly in the pulpits of intellectual manipulation, the tenured professors, our dear journalists, our feared school principals! Some of these influencial folks are still brimming with thoughts of moral equivalence, etc…

Talk about living in a euphemistic age: We all say “Moral equivalence” while actually talking about “moral irrelevance”!

Climbing out of that hole is going to be difficult, but it’s still possible. Voices like that of Glenn Beck are heard by today’s youth. I still have hope.