Hmmm......

Is this yet another sign that the Apocalypse is nearly upon us?  A poll commissioned for The Foundation for Liberty and American Greatness revealed that among millennial respondents, 44% believe (I hesitate to use the word "think" because anyone who "believes" this surely isn't "thinking") that Barack Obama had a "bigger impact" on the US than George Washington.  That defies my own belief!

Even if one thinks Obama was a good President (I most certainly do not!), he hardly compares with Washington or many others for that matter.  I don't know what to make of this.  Is it a reflection of the state of history education in our schools?  of the students' teachers?  of the current media?  of sheer ignorance and lack of concern?  Of course, what else might one expect of a group only 16% of which can identify what rights are guaranteed by the First Amendment?

I once read an essay by Lech Walesa, the head of the Polish union Solidarity.  He urged Americans not to take their Bill of Rights for granted.  He knew how precious our individual rights were.  After all, look at the sacrifices he made attempting to secure what he urged Americans to treasure.  He was beaten and imprisoned.  His family was threatened and, if I recall correctly, forced into exile in another country.  And there was always the fear of what lay ahead from the commies.  "'Lech' who?"

There are some other disturbing trends demonstrated in the poll's results, among them ignorance of American history and greatness coupled with a lack of knowledge of the world, past and present.

In a way, perhaps the millennials can't be blamed.  They are fed a constant barrage of garbage that is reflected in their views.  They hear Bernie Sanders laud socialism and, without knowing a thing about socialism, claim to favor it over capitalism.  Yet ask these same ignoramuses about "free enterprise" or private entrepreneurs and they favor them too.  Huh?  Only one thing can explain that.  It's not complimentary.

I was thinking of Catherine t. Great, the Russian Empress of the 18th Century.  (I was so moved to think of her following a short e-mail from my Russian history professor at AC.)  Catherine bore a strong resemblance, at least in governing style, to Augustus, the first and perhaps greatest of the Roman Emperors.  Both were absolute rulers; they weren't democratic/republican (small d and small r) in the least.  Yet, in claiming and holding such autocratic authority, both let others think they were in charge.  Catherine, whose reign as been called "The Golden Age of the Russian Nobility," allowed the nobles to think they were running Russia or, at least, had the final voice.  Augustus allowed the Roman Senate to think it was still in charge, as it had nominally been during most of the almost five centuries of the Republic (different from the Empire).  Nope.  Catherine and Augustus, in different times and with different methods, held the reins of government in their hands.  I wonder if anyone but me things about weird things like that.