the first air strike against North Vietnam, a reprisal for what Irnknew to be the false alarm. It was true that I had helped repulsernan actual attack three days before and that I thought it likely thatrnanother real one would occur in the future. But what to do,rnknowing that hours before Washington had received the falsealarmrnmessages and that it would be none other than I whornwould be launching a war under false pretenses.rnI remember sitting on the side of my shipboard bed, all alonernin those predawn minutes, fully conscious of the fact that historyrnwas taking a major turn, and that it was I, Jimmy Stockdale,rnwho happened to be in the Ferris-wheel seat that was just comingrnover the top and starting its descent…. There was no questionrnof getting the truth of that night out: that truth had been outrnfor hours. I was sure that there was nothing I could do to stoprnthe “reprisal” juggernaut pouring out of Washington. Myrncourse was clear: to play well the part I had been given. The Authorrnhad cast me in a lead role of a Greek tragedy. Who else tornlead my pilots into the heavy flak of the city of Vihn and blowrnthe North Vietnamese oil storage tanks off the map?rn—from James Stockdale, “Epictetus in Uniform,” March 1987rnCHRISTENDOMrn. . . [Tjhere is a fundamental point of intersection between therntheory of a just government and much of the underpinning ofrnwhat we know as Western civilization. Just as there is a necessaryrnnonrational element in the former, so is there a powerful,rnordering rational element in Christianity. The start of thernGospel of St. John reads, in English, “In the beginning was thernWord, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”rnThe blending of Platonic elements with Ghristianity is evident,rnbut the process becomes much more so in the Greek text fromrnwhich the translation is made. In the Greek, “beginning” is notrngenesis which means a start in time, as used in the first book ofrnthe Old Testament, but arkhe, which means the beginning notrnso much at a particular point in time at which things start, butrnas the foundation principle out of which being comes. “Word,”rnof course, comes from the Greek logos, which includes the notionrnof reason, the inner essence of meaning. Thus, we have thernidea that in the beginning, as the foundation principle of thernuniverse, was meaningful reason, and the Word —/ogos—wasrnwith God, the Word was God. That is to say, the universe asrnconceived by this Gospel is not arbitrary, not a matter of chancernor accident, but a reasonable world following a reasoned orderrnwith God.rnIt is this interpretation of the meaning of reality, taken fromrnand developed from the Greek philosophers, that runs throughrnthe great tradition of Ghristianity. It is expressed once more byrnthe greatest of all poets at the height of the Middle Ages, byrnDante, when he writes, in The Divine Comedy, “In the greatrnseas of being, all things preserve a mutual order and this it is thatrnmaketh the Universe like unto God.”rn—from James Bumham, “To See the World and Man,”rnApril 1984rnPerhaps the best lesson that Americans can learn from Yugoslaviarnis that there is no such thing as a multicultural nation.rnCertainly what has made the United States a great nation is itsrncultural heritage. The talents which immigrants brought tornAmerica from various cultures blossomed in the context of ourrnculture.rnWe are a product of Western civilization and Christianity,rnboth of which evolved in Europe. Our own derivation of thisrncivilization emphasizes individual rights and responsibility,rnstrong family bonds, limited representative government, religionrnseparated from state, a strong sense of community, free enterprise,rnprivate property, the rule of law and reason, and a commonrnlanguage with which we communicate this culturalrnheritage. To be an American citizen (or, as an immigrant, to aspirernto be one) is to join these cultiiral bonds, not import alternatives.rnThe only real alternative is the eventual dissolution ofrnAmerica—which, if history is any guide, will likely occur underrnconditions of savage hostility.rn—from David Hartman, “Reflections on arnTexan’s Visit to Bosnia,” January J999rnPerhaps there is another, more subtle form of colonialism withrnwhich the United States has not been reproached. West Europeanrncountries have equally contributed to this cultural andrnspiritual colonialism in the name of a certain Marxism andrntechnology. I’m speaking about Far Eastern countries that, havingrnbecome Marxist, have broken their attachments to thousand-rnyear-old spiritual traditions. In this way, the new culturalrncolonialism is contrary to that of the past, in which the Asianrncountries’ cultures were left intact. For example, Indochinarnunder French colonization was allowed a spiritual liberty becausernthe colonizers did not tamper with their culture. Nowadays,rnChina, Korea, and other countries, having forgotten theirrntraditions so as to adopt technology and an excessive politicization,rnare no longer free, in spite of their political independence.rnNational independence is not always synonymous with liberty,rneither physical or moral. Poland, Czechoslovakia, East Germany,rnHungary, and Rumania are subjected to a single way ofrnthought, to a cultural tyranny, which, far from being simply political,rnis above all an ideological tyranny.rn—from Eugene lonesco, “Realism and the Spirit,”rnFebruary 1986rnAll we need is to keep one important thing in mind: The UnitedrnStates, Europe, France, and a few other countries are byrntheir very nature inseparable, as they are part of the same Westernrncivilization. If it is still allowed to say so, without offendingrnanyone, this Western civilization was made by the white race. Itrnhas even been called the white man’s burden. This civilizationrnwas born out of the Greek and the Roman civilization, the Biblernand the Gospels, Renaissance humanism, and most of the greatrnscientific discoveries. The rights of man stem directly fromrnGhristianity, in which Western civilization is steeped. Our spiritual,rnmoral, family, and aesthetic values have their sources inrnthe ideas developed during the course of our long, shared history-rn—from Jean Raspail, “Defending Civilization,” April 1998rnBut—and I can hear the question despite my disavowals—whatrnare you suggesting? Are you suggesting that one must be a believingrnJew or Christian to write good novels? Certainly not—rnthough one is tempted to make the case and indeed present thernevidence that the Jewish novelist, secular or religious, has a certainrnadvantage, what with his unique placement in a strictiy lin-rn52/CHRONICLESrnrnrn