On John Wayne

You have to love classic Western movies. There's just something so perfect about the scenic settings, the less-than-fully developed characters, and the tales of honor among men. I'd nearly forgotten all that, having been over here in London for so long. As if it weren't bad enough that I haven't been on a horse in six months, I haven't seen any Westerns aside from McClintock in that time either. At least until today, that is. Apparently the Brits have some fascination with American Westerns. This afternoon, they aired one I'd never seen before--a standard John Wayne Western called Chisum . Maybe because I grew up watching John Wayne movies with my dad or maybe because I feel drawn to the characters that brought order to the West, I've always loved John Wayne movies. The thing that strikes me these days more than ever before is just how principled his characters tended to be. From McClintock to Chisum to The Quiet Man (which admittedly isn't a Western), he always tried to avoid violence and take the high road until ultimately being pushed over the edge by the dishonorable tactics of his foe. And of course, then, being John Wayne, he kicked someone's ass.

But this got me thinking. That kind of honor, which used to be the stuff of legend, barely seems to make it into the movies these days. Maybe we as a society are less focused on honor or maybe movies are becoming more realistic, documenting the lack of honor that seems to surround us. But there is something distinctive about honor that has enabled it to weather the test of time, spanning ages and cultures. And while every age and culture has established its own unique code of honor, the concept never fades. It always has been and always will be something to strive for.

Strangely (or not so strangely given the fact that I Google everything these days), I checked out the Wikipedia page on honor (or honour--see spelling differences) and found an interesting section on cultures of honor and cultures of law. Now while most developed countries and cultures today are ruled by law, there used to many and still are a few cultures which have no recourse to law enforcement or government. Rule of Law requires some sort of social contract between the people and the government. The people give up the right to take matters into their own hands, knowing that transgressors will all be subject to punishment by laws that govern everyone equally. In other cultures, such as the old American West, many nomadic peoples, those who are for some reason "above the law" (like the rich and famous), or those whose activities do not lend themselves to seeking assistance from law enforcement agencies (such as the Mafia and other gangs), there must be rule by a code of honor. Frequently, this is a simple matter of vengeance, retaliation, vendetta, et cetera. According to Wikipedia, the two types of rule cannot coexist. Friedrich von Hayek, in The Road to Serfdom, highlights the need for Rule of Law in a society to ensure that everyone is subject to the same treatment under law and that consistent systems are in place to prevent abuse of power or seizure of control. While I agree with him that establishing the Rule of Law is essential to the development of a sound society, the romantic in me is still drawn to the nobility found in such honorable characters as those played by John Wayne. Even under Hayek's Rule of Law, it is not enough to act in a legal way; we must still strive to act with the honor that distinguished our forefathers. Play nicely for as long as possible, but if pushed too far, do as the Duke did and kick a pilgrim's ass.

Now I could take this to another level--that of foreign policy. It's pretty clear from both historical and current events that the Rule of Law doesn't exist at an international level (as nice as it would be if it did). At the present moment, countries can only be governed by a code of honor, not by a code of laws. The US has had incredibly poor foreign policy recently. Now there are many reasons for this, but one that really stands out is that our leaders (even if they are characterized as cowboys) have forgotten the code of honor that we like to imagine ruled the West in the absence of laws. In fact, there were probably as few men with John Wayne-like honor back then as there are now. But that makes it all the more important to act like the ideal that he portrays. We should play nicely for as long as possible, be honest with other countries, talk to "vermin" only when necessary, and only if pushed too far, fight back with all the intensity of John Wayne and all the strength of the US armed forces.

That said, I'm still not hawkish overall and think that there is no good reason for the US to spend as much money on its armed forces as the next six countries combined. Overall, I'm long honor and short retarded allocation of resources (especially when they're paid for with my money).