Tuesday, September 03, 2019

Slave Trade

Can Europeans, and European women in particular, become objects of trade? The idea seems laughable, since the term ‘slave trade’ almost always brings Africans to mind. Yet there was a time not so long ago when Europe exported white slaves on a large scale to African
These slaves were taken during hit-and-run raids by either Crimean Tatar horsemen or North African corsairs. A raiding party would typically descend on an isolated village and carry away its inhabitants—or rather those who were commercially useful, particularly young women and young boys.
There was a time farther back when Europeans were accomplices in this trade and when it provided most of their foreign exchange. This was during the Dark Ages and the early Middle Ages, specifically the 8th to 12th centuries.
The Slave Market, painting (c. 1884) by Jean-Léon Gérôme
5th CENTURY
The slave trade was a godsend for the elites of France, Germany, and Italy. With the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century, they had to dip into their gold reserves to buy foreign luxury goods from the Middle East, generally clothing, upholstery, tapestries, carpets, and other precious fabrics (Skirda, 2010, pp. 56-57).
8th CENTURY
By the 8th century, these reserves had been almost completely exhausted. Gold was giving way to silver, and even that medium of exchange was being debased. Western Europe had largely reverted to an economy of autarky, its shrunken towns and cities no longer major centers of trade. Most people produced everything they needed within their local village or manor.
Would Western Europe have eventually returned on its own to an international trading economy? Perhaps, although revival of trade would have become more difficult once the elites had become accustomed to autarky. As things turned out, they found the means to buy foreign luxury goods almost at the same time their gold reserves ran out.
ISLAMIC EXPANSION TO EUROPE
The 8th century brought the rapid expansion of a new civilization, Islam, into the Middle East, North Africa, and Spain. Its Arab elite was darker-skinned than the Greco-Roman or Visigothic elites it displaced. It was also more polygynous. A new market had come into being, a market for wives and concubines. European women were especially sought after, not because they were exotic but because their fair skin and fine facial features corresponded to notions of beauty that were indigenous to Arab culture. Initially, this trade involved prisoners of war captured during the Islamic wars of expansion. Soon, however, a peaceful trading relationship developed.
It was officially prohibited by Christian emperors and popes alike, but in reality, people closed their eyes and everything was tolerated in exchange for good gold dinars. Needless to say, this trade would have been impossible without the active collaboration of local elites. They were the main beneficiaries.
JEWS IN MUSLIM SPAIN
Jews played an extraordinarily important role in the development of medieval European society. Besides of popular engagement in the slave trade, the significant advances in agrarian techniques and the resulting agricultural surplus led to the rise of cities and increased urban populations. This in turn paved the way for the opening of international trade routes and the creation of wealth on a scale not seen since the heyday of the Roman Empire. Jewish merchants occupied a critical segment of this international trade, facilitated by the far-flung networks of friends and family connections inherent in the broad geographic distribution of Jews in the Diaspora. The earliest Jewish trading routes extended from the Atlantic shores of France to the Pacific shores of China. Jewish merchants primarily carried commodities that combined small bulk and high demand, including spices, perfumes, jewelry, and silk.
Under Islam, Jews were allowed to practice their faith and live according to the laws and scriptures of their community. During most of the 10th and 11th centuries, a period known as the “Golden Age,” Jewish community flourished in Islamic Spain. Jews achieved hitherto unknown heights in fields of philosophy, astronomy, mathematics, and linguistics. Under Muslim rulers, Jews served in prominent governmental and military positions. However and it should be noticed, Jews were influencial part of european society long before Muslim conquered Spain. Long before 10th century Jews ruled the Khazar Khaganat that was later annexed by Russia in the 9th century. Khazars were Jews. Their correspondence with Spanish Jews in Hebrew language is still kept in archives. All correspondence was written in Hebrew language obviously.
Old Bible was written in Hebrew language. In the first millennium the Bible was translated from Hebrew to Latin and to Greek and it had the impact to the formation and development Latin language and later to development of all Slavic languages. Jews was only the nation in Europe that had a total literacy in the medieval history therefore they was in charge of chronicles all over Europe and Middle East. They translated Bibles to European languages and to Greek language. Hebrew speakers hold all key positions in the medieval period. All Christian monks and other Christian clerks have studied Hebrew in seminaries, many of them were Jews that have had converted to Christianity, Hebrew was their mother tongue.
Jewish financial success was particularly due to the enmity between Christianity and Islam. Since Islamic states of the Middle East and Christian kingdoms of Europe often banned each other's merchants from entering their territories, the Jewish merchants and traders functioned as neutral intermediaries and translators, keeping open the lines of communication and trade between the lands of the old Roman Empire and the Far East. The question is how people communicated during the medieval trade?
Hebrew was a lingua franca
Hebrew was an international language in medieval period. Here is two linguistic examples show the impact of Hebrew language during middle ages:
  • Hebrew root of Russia. The word [Rus/Ros] is Greek form of Hebrew word [ראש] means the head, the leader, the ruler. Kievan Rus practiced Judaism before adopted Christianity. Rus as the name of the country had appeared in chronicles only after Kiev was conquered by Ruriks in 9th century. At the time of Rurikis conquered Kiev in 9th century, Novgorod still practiced paganism. However Kiev was Jewish already for centuries before Ruriks defeated Khazarian Kaganat and conquered Kiev, the city practiced Judaism. Kiev was jewish city because Khazars, owners of Kiev, were jews
  • Etymology of the word slave. It came from the Hebrew word [צלב - tzlav] meaning “the cross” referred to the Christian cross and to Christianity. In arabic the cross is pronounced [slab] similar to Hebrew. From that root two Latin words has been delivered: slave and celebration. 1400 years ago the terms “christianity”, “christians” as definition of people who believed in Jesus were not widely spread in Europe yet. So when African and Arabic pirates captured european people from the shore areas of Italy or Spain they identify them according to the presence of the cross on the chest [tzlav or slab]. However at the same time for the word glorification in English we have synonym Latin word celebration that shares the very same Semitic root [Heb:- tzlav] or [Arab: - slab] with slave that mean the cross as a symbol of Christianity. Later, to all slavic languages that word was reflected as theGlory - [Rus. - Slava] .
Map of Cologne, Hartmann Schedel, Liber Chronicarum, Cologne, A. Koberger, 1493.
SLAVE TRADERS JEWS AND VIKINGS
There were 3 groups of European slave traders:
  • Vikings. The northern route, via the Baltic, was run by Viking traders. While the Vikings are perhaps best known for accumulating wealth through plunder and conquest, they were also skilled and successful traders. The Vikings developed several trading centres both in Scandinavia and abroad as well as a series of long-distance trading routes during the Viking Age. The Viking economy and slave trade network also effectively helped rebuild the European economy after the fall of the Roman Empire.
  • Radanites. Jewish medieval merchants were known as “Radanites.” Radanites were the ones who controlled the western overland route from the Eastern territories to Muslim Spain via Germany and France. In the Western Europe most medieval Jews resided in Spain. The term “Radanites” was derived from the name of the Muslim-Christian border along the river Rhone (in Latin Rodanus) because of an intense slave trade which was conducted across it. An alternate origin of the term “Radanite” was a Persian word for those who “knew the way.” This explanation was related to the leading role of Jewish merchants in trade after the fall of the Roman Empire.
  • Khazars. The various eastern routes, via the Dnieper, the Don, and the Volga, were run by either Viking or Khazar traders. Khazars were Jewish also. The capital of Khazaria, Itil, was an important Jewish trading center. Jewish merchants played an important role in international trade after the fall of the Roman Empire. For two centuries they made Hebrew the only language of world commerce.
All three trading groups worked with each other, particularly the Radanites and the Khazars (turks who converted to Judaism).
From the 7th century to mid-10th century Radanites controlled the trade which encompassed Western Europe, Africa and China. It was a period when Hebrew was the only language of world trade. Slavery, which was the foundation of the Roman economy, was important in the Arab Empire in which the Jews became the main merchants, trading with the infidels
SLAVE TRADE IN THE EASTERN EUROPE
Poland. Commonwealth. Russia
In 11th century in Poland, Jews in service of Boleslav the Great minted his coins and inscribed on them the name of the Polish sovereign with Hebrew letters. Besides such highly valued craftsmen business Jews were engaged in profitable slave-trade business.
The Catholic Church
The Catholic Church fought against slavery and this fight is documented in the treatise “Infelix Aurum” by the first patron saint of Poland, and since A.D. 997 the first bishop of Gdansk, Adalbert or Wojciech . In the struggle against the slave trade the family of St. Adalbert lost the Czech throne in Prague to their opponents supported by Jewish slave traders. One of 18 sculptures on the 1170 bronze door made for the cathedral of Gniezno depicted the scene of redeeming manacled Christian slaves by a Polish bishop from Jewish merchants in the presence of the son of King Boleslaus the Great, the second formally crowned King of Poland, Mieszko II (990-1034).”
As described in the book "Sulejman the Great", the constant Tatar raiding and counter-raids by Cossacks and Polish magnates were everpresent issue in Polish-Ottoman relations in XVI century. While reading the description, it's almost boring: the year so-and-so Tatars raided villages, they cavalry hit them and recaptured part of captives; the same year conterraid hit Oczakow, killing Tatars and recapturing slaves. The next year another Tatar raid hit so-and-so areas... and so it went for a hundreds of years... Tatar raiding to Poland and to Russia continued till 18th when Catherine The Great annexed Crimea and ended slavery practice.
One of such kidnapped girls was Hürrem Sultan
Photo: Hürrem Sultan in the popular Turkish TV series.
Hürrem Sultan, the wife of Süleyman the Magnificent was Russian girl, daughter of the Orthodox priest, was kidnapped and sold to the slavery from her little town in the Kingdom of Poland. She became the wife of Ottoman emperor. Her original name was Alexandra Lisovska. Raised as a Christian Orthodox, he was made to convert to Islam to enter the harem, the royal household in which hundreds of women were held in servitude to the sultan. She was kidnapped by Crimean Tatars. The typical business of Crimean Tatars until 18th century was kidnapping people to sell them to the slavery.
200 years later another remarkable woman, the Russian empress Catherine The Great came to power, she liberated thousands enslaved Russians from Tatar yok by annexing Crimean peninsula. She ended up that degraded slave-trade business once and forever
Paintings by Johann Baptist von Lampi der Ältere. Catherine II. Despite being born Lutheran, after convertion to Orthodox Christianity she became most fervent defender of Russianness everywhere she stepped her foot .
SLAVE TRADE IN THE WESTERN EUROPE
In the 11th century the main slave market was in Arabic Spain, then the most civilized country in Europe.
France and Italy
The white slaves were castrated in Verdun, Venice, and Lyon and sold by slave-traders to Spain. This slave trade also included girls and small boys who were properly indoctrinated in order to be used later by Arab rulers as bodyguards, slave soldiers and bureaucrats.
Only the adolescent boys and girls were spared, enslaved, and immediately sold to the merchants accompanying the armies. The Barbarian was able to get gold by trading in slaves. These objects of servile trade and commerce would be integrated into harems and used as military slaves or eunuchs. Adults and children were eliminated for obvious reasons. They did not correspond to the Muslim demand for young virgin girls and beardless boys and it was out of the question to gather children and raise them. The traders had neither the time nor the willingness and more importantly it would not have been cost-effective. Later, they would spare the lives of more captives, by selecting them according to their capacities for productive work and by using them to the limit of their strength at laborious physical tasks (Skirda, 2010, pp. 85-86).
The captives were taken overland by various routes: through Germany and France to Muslim Spain; through Venice and by ship to the Middle East; or down the Dniepr, the Don, or the Volga to the Middle East via the Black Sea or the Caspian. How many were traded? It’s difficult to say, but Skirda (2010, p. 6) advances a figure between several tens of thousands and several hundreds of thousands for the period extending from the 8th to 12th centuries.
It was this trade, more than any other, that revived the old trading networks not only between Europe and the Middle East, but also within Europe itself. The balance of foreign exchange also shifted in Europe’s favor, thus giving the elites of France, Germany, and Italy the means to buy not only foreign goods but also local products, thereby stimulating a long economic recovery that would take Europe out of the Dark Ages. As Skirda notes ironically:
“The Italians who were the “great initiators of Europe” became the promoters of trading companies, creators of credit, restorers of currency. It is easier to understand why almost all historians and commentators have silently observed this phenomenon. It is difficult for them to acknowledge that the economic renaissance of the West of the 10th and 11th centuries was achieved through human trafficking! “ (Skirda, 2010, p. 112)
Islamic Spain was the main market for slaves (eunuchs, girls, and young boys). Slavery which was the foundation of the Roman economy was important in the Arab Empire. Some slaves were sold as far away as China, which also bought furs, beaver skins, silk, and weapons. Exports from China to Europe included cinnamon, spices, musk, and camphor.
Western Europe exported over a million slaves between 1530 and 1780 (Davis, 2004). Between 1500 and 1650 Eastern Europe exported 1.5 million slaves to Africa, the Middle East and Asia (Fisher, 1972; Kolodziejczyk, 2006).
England
Slavery existed in England in the 11th century - Domesday book records how many slaves in each village. The Norse and Vikings had their 'thralls'. In 11th century Bristol shipped English slaves to the Viking city of Dublin - the then Bishop of Worcester, St Wulfstan, preached against the trade.
Scandinavia
Enslaved by Vikings people were called thralls in Old Norse language. As many as 10% of the population of Scandinavia were thralls, according to the Norwegian researchers. Most of thralls were local Scandinavian people. They can have been kidnapped or captured during Viking raids and forced into slavery. Or they can also have simply sunk into debts and had to meet their obligations by entering into lifelong slavery. Thrallhood was inherited by maternal bloodline: if mother was a thrall then child will be a thrall even if father was a freeman; if mother was a free woman then child will be freeman even the father was a thrall. Scandinavia abolished thralldom the 14th century
Some thralls were imported to Scandinavia from the Islamic world. In Viking Raids, slaves and captives were usually of great importance for both the monetary and labor value. In addition to being bought and sold, thralls could used to pay off debts as well, and were often used as human sacrifices in religious ceremonies. A slave's price depend on their skills, age, health, and looks. Many pagan and christian thralls were sold by the vikings to the Caliphate because of the high demand.
Vikings called themselves Rus and they were founding fathers of Kievan Rus'. The Arab traveller ibn Fadlan described these Vikings as follows:
I have seen the Rus as they came on their merchant journeys and encamped by the Itil. I have never seen more perfect physical specimens, tall as date palms, blond and ruddy; they wear neither tunics nor caftans, but the men wear a garment which covers one side of the body and leaves a hand free. Each man has an axe, a sword, and a knife, and keeps each by him at all times. The swords are broad and grooved, of Frankish sort.
Ireland
In Northwestern Europe in the Viking Age Dublin was the center of the Slave trade,
Iceland
Guðríður Símonardóttir was an Icelandic woman who was one of 242 people abducted from the Westman Islands, Iceland in a raid by Barbary pirates. These raids came to be known as the Turkish abductions and Guðríður became known as Tyrkja-Gudda. After being held as a slave and concubine for nearly a decade, she was one of a few captives ransomed by the Danish king. She returned to Iceland, marrying the young pastor Hallgrímur Pétursson. The story of "Gudda The Turk". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gu%C3%B0r%
Estimated exchange rates at the beginning of the 11th century in Iceland were:
  • 8 ounces of silver = 1 ounce of gold;
  • 8 ounces of silver = 4 milk cows;
  • 8 ounces of silver = 24 sheep;
  • 12 ounces of silver = 1 adult male slave.
The Barbary Corsairs raided northern Europe for slaves on many occasions.
Painting Giulio Rosati, Inspection of New Arrivals, 1858-1917, Circassian beauties. In French, “la traite des Blanches”. The English translation, "white slave trade", the term is often used as a synonym for international prostitution in the present time.
Photo: Group of white slaves in Germany. 1942. Slavery may never vanish. Nazi Germany re-instituted white slavery from the Bay of Biscayne to the Bering Sea in 1941.
DEMOCRACY and EUROPEAN UNION
Surprisingly, but along with barbarian traditions of slavery and human sacrifice, medieval Europe had practiced democracy, elections and no-border society from London to Moscow, something that we can only dream about. Also European Union was established. As you can see that Dark Ages was not so dark and for some countries it was Golden Ages.
  1. Open border society. All europeans were mobile and they all the time moved from the place to another without visas. 1000 years ago in Europe borders did not exist between countries. Visas, border officers passports did not exist in Europe and the concept of ethnics or nationalities did not exist. Europeans were divided only by religion, by language and loyalty to king, not by ethnics. People moved freely in Europe from Dublin to Moscow. In the medieval period Europeans had much more freedom of movement than modern Europeans. Varangians (proto-russians) are a good example of the mobility and travels of peoples from one end of the continent to another, meaning that Celts, Germanics, Goths, English, Latinates, Huns and God knows who else wandered all over the Europe and freely without visa moved all over the territory , rendering the idea of any specific area of Europe belonging to any specific ethnic meaningless.
  2. Democracy. Russia had a democracy during the medieval time. Veche was a Russian democratic parliamentary form of state administration (legislative power) in the Novgorod Republic since 862 till 1478. Rus have had democratic forms of government, including those inherited from the predating Kievan Rus period. The Novgorod parliament had legislative power, the parliament could fire unwanted Prince and hire new one, parliament managed finances, declared war and made peace, claimed treaties with foreigners, led the court on political and official crimes etc. In 862 Novgorod veche made a contract with Rurik.
  3. Elections. France had democratic election in the 11th century. The election by a voting body facilitated the peaceful transference of power, even if such decisions also considered the privileges of birth and rank, as well as the requirements of the church. Under canon law, medieval people were guaranteed certain human rights, including welfare rights, the right of certain classes to vote, and religious liberty
Hanseatic League
European Union was existed in the medieval period for 400 years in the form of Hanseatic league, and was controlled by German city of Hansa. The Hanseatic League was a farefather of modern European Union. The idea of EU is very old and always was managed by Germany. Hanseatic league was a commercial and defensive confederation of merchant guilds and market towns in Northern Europe. It was a powerful economic and defensive alliance that left a great cultural and architectural heritage. The towns participants of alliance raised their own armies, with each guild required to provide levies when needed. The Hanseatic cities came to the aid of one another, and commercial ships often had to be used to carry soldiers and their arms. Growing from a few North German towns in the late 1100s, the league included 170 cities and came to dominate Baltic maritime trade for three centuries along the coasts of Northern Europe from London to Moscow. Notably Novgorod, was a major Russian trade partner of the Hansa in the Middle Ages.
Exploratory trading adventures, raids, tourism and piracy had occurred early throughout the Baltic region; the sailors of Gotland sailed up rivers to Novgorod. Lübeck became a base for merchants from Saxony and Westphalia trading eastward and northward. This area was a source of timber, wax, amber, resins, and furs, along with rye and wheat brought down on barges from the hinterland to port markets.
Main trading routes of the Hanseatic League
Visby- Novgorod alliance
Long before Hansean league was established, Scandinavian city of Visby functioned as the leading trade centre in the Baltic since 10th century. In 1080 AD, Visby merchants established a Scandinavian trading post Gutagard-Gotenhof in Russian city of Novgorod. International trade in the Baltic area before the Hanseatic League was led by Scandinavians, who established major trading hubs at Birka, Haithabu, and Schleswig by the 9th century.
Later merchants from Holy Roman empire also stayed in Novgorod. In 1220s Germans established their own trading station “Kontor” Peterhof not far from Novgorod. In 1229 German merchants were granted certain privileges that made their positions more secure in Russia.
Painting: Georg Giese from Danzig, 34-year-old German Hanseatic merchant at the Steelyard, painted in London by Hans Holbein
THE FATE OF BARBARY STATES AND PIRACY
Barbary States, term used for the North African states of Tripolitania, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco. From the 16th century Tripolitania, Tunisia, and Algeria were autonomous provinces of the Turkish Empire. Morocco pursued its own independent development. The corsair Barbarossa and his brothers led the Turkish conquest to prevent the region from falling to Spain. A last attempt by Holy Roman Emperor Charles V to drive out the Turks failed in 1541. The piracy carried on thereafter by the Muslims of North Africa began as part of the wars against Spain. In the 17th and 18th cent., when the Turkish hold on the area grew weaker, the raids became less military and more commercial in character. The booty, ransom, and slaves that resulted from attacks on Mediterranean towns and shipping and from occasional forays into the Atlantic became the main source of revenue for local Muslim rulers.
All the major European naval powers made attempts to destroy the corsairs, and British and French fleets repeatedly bombarded the pirate strongholds. Yet, on the whole, countries trading in the Mediterranean found it more convenient to pay tribute than to undertake the expensive task of eliminating piracy. Toward the end of the 18th cent. the power of the piratical states diminished. The United States and the European powers took advantage of this decline to launch more attacks. American opposition resulted in the Tripolitan War. After the Napoleonic wars, European opinion clearly favored destroying the pirates. In 1816 Lord Exmouth with an Anglo-Dutch flotilla all but ended the naval power of the dey of Algiers. An ultimatum from the European Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle (1819) compelled the bey of Tunis to give up piracy.
The fate of european slaves in Africa
Many slaves converted to Islam. That means they only were 'freed from the Oar, but not from their Patron's Service.' Christian girls who had been taken into the pasha's harem often 'turned Turk' to stay with their children, who were raised as Muslims.
Christian men, after converting to Islam, sought easier labours, usually as overseers for other slaves, and some gained real power and occasionally their freedom. Between 1580 and 1680, there were typically around 15,000 of these 'renegades' in Barbary, including around half of the corsair captains, or re'is, and even some of the pashas. Most had probably never been slaves, however, but had come to Africa looking for opportunity, and had cast off their Christianity along with their earlier lives.
The legacy of enslavement
Slaves in Barbary states could be black, brown or white, Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Jewish or Muslim. In the 1600s, no one's racial background or religion automatically destined him or her for enslavement. Preachers in churches from Sicily to Boston spoke of the similar fates of black slaves on American plantations and white slaves in corsair galleys; early abolitionists used Barbary slavery as a way to attack the universal degradation of slavery in all its forms.
This may require that we rethink our belief that race was fundamental to pre-modern ideas about slavery. It also requires a new awareness of the impact of slave raids on Spain and Italy - and Britain - about which we currently know rather less than we do about slaving activities at the same time in Africa. The widespread depopulation of coastal areas from Malaga to Venice, the impoverishment caused by the kidnapping of many breadwinners, the millions paid by the already poor inhabitants of villages and towns to get their own people back - all this is only just beginning to be understood by modern-day historians.
Sources:
Barbary States | Encyclopedia.com

Food Necessity!! Weapon!!!

Food is a weapon. Nations weaponize food against nations, governments use it against dissenters, invaders use it against holdouts. Here are examples from the recent past.
Sherman's 1864 March to the Sea in Georgia was a scorched earth campaign. Horses, mules, cattle and millions of pounds of fodder were confiscated. Farms were stripped and put to the torch. The novel and movie Gone With The Wind was set in this time.
The British naval blockade of Germany from 1914 to 1919 led to widespread starvation. The most reliable account puts the death toll at 424,000. The unpayable war reparations levied on Germany after the war led to more hunger during the Weimar era.
Stalin's confiscation of food and blockade of Ukraine in 1932-1933, for resisting collectivization of farms, resulted in death by starvation of about five million people.
Nazi Germany's "Hunger Plan" of 1941 to divert food to Germany from Soviet countries was to allow only a small remnant of the population to survive, as slave labor. As it was, huge numbers of conquered peoples perished from hunger, including one rarely cited, the Netherlands.
For the first three years of the war World War II, German U-boats successfully attacked shipping bound for Britain. While they didn't manage to close the shipping lanes as completely as did the Royal Navy in the previous war, the losses forced drastic cuts to already severe food rationing
Operation Starvation, begun by the US in the waning days of World War II, used advanced sea mines to all but destroy what remained of Japan's merchant fleet. Some experts claim it could have won the war had it begun earlier.
None of these famines were from natural causes—drought, insect infestation or plant disease and the like. But have a care, weaponized hunger isn't "instead" of natural causes, it's in addition to natural causes. Notice the accelerating ramp up of the price for pork in China due to the epidemic of "pig ebola". They're drawing down reserves at present, when those are gone there is no obvious alternative source for the quantity needed. And the knock-on effects for substitutes is under way, just as their import tariffs take full effect.
The food supply is a target for any number of disasters. Most times it evades a hit altogether, sometimes it's merely wounded, occasionally it takes a ruinous blow. There are no guarantees. Disruptions often can't be foreseen well enough to do much good. Example: poor growing weather in the UK and the desperate demands of a hungry Europe caused food rationing from 1945 to 1948 even more severe than it was in the war years. The successful survivalist will have a secure source of food with sufficient reserves for unforeseen adversities.

David Gelernter Takes On Darwinism — Manhattan Contrarian

David Gelernter Takes On Darwinism — Manhattan Contrarian

Sunday, August 25, 2019

He'll be your Lily in the Valley

I FOUND A LILY IN MY VALLEY 

All alone and broken hearted, trying to calm the raging battle in my mind 
In search of many answers, my troubled soul just couldn't seem to find 
I saw a flower blooming where there was no rain or sunshine 
And I knew not that this flower would change the rest of my life 

Chorus 
I found a lily in my valley; I found strength when I was worn 
I found the place to leave my burdens; I found refuge from the storm 
At the place I prayed through dark skies; came beaming rays of sunshine 
I found a lily in my valley and He blooms all the time 

So if you're down and broken hearted and you just can't seem to find peace of mind 
You're searching for your answers but your problems are getting worse all the time 
Just reach your hands to Jesus; He'll take you in and break the ties that bind 
He'll be your lily in your valley and He'll (you can watch Him) bloom all the time. 

He'll be your lily in your valley; He'll be strength when you are worn 
He'll be the place you leave your burdens; He'll be your refuge from the storm 
At the place you've prayed through dark skies can come beaming rays of sunshine 
He'll be your lily in your valley and He'll bloom all the time 

Chorus 
Tag 
He'll be your lily in your valley and He'll bloom all the time

Muse (Alprostadil Urethral Suppository): Side Effects, Interactions, Warning, Dosage & Uses

Muse (Alprostadil Urethral Suppository): Side Effects, Interactions, Warning, Dosage & Uses



ED

Wednesday, August 14, 2019

Tuesday, August 13, 2019

Growing Old

(1) Pam Williamson - Happy BIRTHday Michele Ritter welcome to the...

A WINTER FRIEND
This article is so befitting for all of us... take time to ponder... the last statement cannot be refuted:-

I FIRST STARTED READING THIS EMAIL AND WAS READING FAST UNTIL I REACHED THE THIRD SENTENCE. I STOPPED THEN AND STARTED OVER, READING SLOWER, AND THINKING ABOUT EVERY WORD... IT MAKES YOU STOP AND THINK. 
So, please READ SLOWLY!
AND THEN IT IS WINTER 
You know time has a way of moving quickly and catching you unaware of the passing years. It seems like yesterday that I was young, just married, and embarking on my new life with my mate. Yet in a way, it seems like eons ago, and I wonder where all those years went.
I know that I lived them all. I have glimpses of how it was back then and of all my hopes and dreams. But, here it is... the winter of my life, and it catches me by surprise... How did I get here so fast? Where did the years go and where did my youth go? I remember well seeing older people through the years and thinking that those "older people" were years away from me and that winter was so far off that I could not fathom it or imagine fully what it would be like.
But, here it is...my friends are retired and getting grey... they move slower and I see an older person in myself now. Some are in better and some worse shape than me... but, I see the great change... Not like the ones that I remember who were young and vibrant...but, like me, their age is beginning to show and we are now those older folks that we used to see and never thought we'd be.
Each day now, I find that just getting a shower is a real target for the day! And taking a nap is not a treat anymore... it's mandatory! Cause if I don't on my own free will... I just fall asleep where I sit!
And so... now I enter this new season of my life unprepared for all the aches and pains and the loss of strength and ability to go and do things that I wish I had done but never did!! But, at least I know, that though the winter has come, and I'm not sure how long it will last... this I know, that when it's over on this earth... it's over. A new adventure will begin!
Yes, I have regrets. There are things I wish I hadn't done... things I should have done, but indeed, there are also many things I'm happy to have done. It's all in a lifetime.
So, if you're not in your winter yet... let me remind you, that it will be here faster than you think. So, whatever you would like to accomplish in your life, please do it quickly! Don't put things off too long!! Life goes by quickly. So, do what you can TODAY, as you can never be sure whether this is your winter or not!
You have no promise that you will see all the seasons of your life... so, LIVE FOR TODAY and say all the things that you want your loved ones to remember.. and hope that they appreciate and love you for all the things that you have done for them in all the years past!!
"Life" is a GIFT to you. The way you live your life is your gift to those who come after. Make it a fantastic one.
Remember: "It is Health that is real Wealth and not pieces of gold and silver."
~Your kids are becoming you......but your grandchildren are perfect! 
~Going out is good.. coming home is even better! 
~You forget names... but it's OK, because other people forgot they even knew you!!! 
~You realize you're never going to be really good at anything.... especially golf. 
~The things you used to care to do, you no longer care to do, but you really do care that you don't care to do them anymore.
~You sleep better on a lounge chair with the TV blaring than in bed. It's called "pre-sleep." 
~You miss the days when everything worked with just an "ON" and "OFF" switch.. 
~You tend to use more 4 letter words ... "what?"..."when?"...??? 
~Now that you can afford expensive jewelry, it's not safe to wear it anywhere. 
~You notice everything they sell in stores is "sleeveless?!" 
~What used to be freckles are now liver spots. 
~Everybody whispers. 
~You have 3 sizes of clothes in your closet.... 2 of which you will never wear.
~But "Old" is good in some things: 
Old Songs, Old movies ... 

A New Clue to the Origins of Life - The Atlantic

A New Clue to the Origins of Life - The Atlantic

Woodpile Report

Woodpile Report: Daily Mail - NRA planned to buy a $6 million mansion in Dallas for chief Wayne LaPierre last year, leaked records from the New York Attorney General's office show ... 10,000 sqft French mansion with four bedrooms and nine baths

Working people have no friends in DC. The NRA spends money like water because, to them, it is water. How many Emergency Fund Appeals was it going to take to buy this mansion?

Global Warming not

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/08/09/delingpole-every-story-you-read-about-the-environment-is-fakenews/

Michael Ryan East Texas Re Kapeg

New Texas Supreme Court Case Expands a Right-Holder’s Ability to Unwind a Conveyance for which It Did Not Receive Notice


https://www.kslaw.com/blog-posts/oil-gas-uscanada-rights-of-first-refusal-new-texas-supreme-court-case-expands-a-right-holders-ability-to-unwind-a-conveyance-for-which-it-did-not-receive-notice

Saturday, August 10, 2019

The Global Empire of Niall Ferguson

https://harvardmagazine.com/2007/05/the-global-empire-of-nia.html

ERE IS AN IMAGE calculated to ruffle the feathers of all red-blooded Americans:
Consuming on credit, reluctant to go to the front line, inclined to lose interest in protracted undertakings: if all this conjures up an image of America as a sedentary Colossus—to put it bluntly, a kind of strategic couch potato—then the image may be worth pondering.
This charge of unfitness for duty has been laid at our doorstep by the lively young Scottish historian Niall Ferguson, Harvard’s (relatively) new Tisch professor of history and Ziegler professor of business administration. And he is far from done with us: “Consider…the question of peacekeeping. It has become abundantly clear that the United States is not capable of effective peacekeeping—that is to say, constabulary duties.” He clarifies his position:
Unlike most European critics of the United States…I believe the world needs an effective liberal empire and that the United States is the best candidate for the job.…The United States has good reasons to play the role of liberal empire, both from the point of view of its own security and out of straightforward altruism. In many ways too it is uniquely well equipped to play it. Yet for all its colossal economic, military and cultural power, the United States still looks unlikely to be an effective liberal empire without some profound changes in its economic structure, its social makeup and its political culture.
“All I mean,” continues Ferguson in his controversial book Colossus: The Price of America’s Empire(2004), “is that whatever they choose to call their position in the world—hegemony, primacy, predominance or leadership—Americans should recognize the functional resemblance between Anglophone power present and past and should try to do a better rather than worse job of policing an unruly world than their British predecessors.”
Though he argues in another of his contentious books, Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power (2002), that the British empire was, on the whole, a successful enterprise, well worth imitating, we Yanks, he says, just do not have the stomach for it. We suffer, says he, from three fundamental deficits, which hinder us from flexing our muscles and making the world a better place: an economic deficit, a manpower deficit, and “most serious of the three,” a huge attention deficit. The economic deficit is remediable, though not entirely without risk down the road: “[Americans] can carry on borrowing from abroad since there seems to be an insatiable appetite on the part of foreign investors for dollar-denominated securities, no matter how low the return on them.”
The manpower deficit is problematic because, as he notes, Americans do not want to spend long years abroad serving in the armed forces or supervising a colony somewhere. He offers a mischievous proposal: “If one adds together the illegal immigrants, the jobless, and the convicts, there is surely ample raw material for a larger American army.” More seriously: “One of the keys to the expansion of the Roman Empire was, after all, the opportunity offered to non-Romans to earn citizenship through military service.”
But our attention deficit may well be our undoing: we are a people sunk in unseemly denial. Ferguson quotes a dispirited American general: “We preach about values, democracy, human rights, but we haven’t convinced the American people to pony up….”
With which Ferguson essentially agrees: like it or not, we Americans not only can afford to “play a more assertive global role, but [can]not afford not to.”
If Ferguson has had a signature theme, it is this: the importance of an energetic liberal empire and how best to carry it off, as did, for the most part, the British and Romans. Though his next few years will be dedicated to his other principal interests, namely money, German-Jewish history, and power, it is his multiple works on empire that have brought him notoriety.
At the age of 43, the prodigious Ferguson has produced eight meaty, weighty books, and has another two in progress; hundreds of scholarly articles, tumbles of introductions and book chapters, and an assembly line of regular columns and op-eds for American, British, and German newspapers, all while editing the Journal of Contemporary History. (He once told an interviewer, “My puzzle is with people who spend 10 years not producing a book. What do they do?”) And all while commuting among Harvard, the Hoover Institution at Stanford (where he is a senior fellow), and the United Kingdom, where his wife Susan, a media executive, and their three children live.
Moreover, in the United Kingdom, he is also quite the media celebrity. In 2002-3, for Britain’s Channel 4, he wrote and starred in a six-part history of the British empire. In 2004, he followed with American Colossus—both programs based on his books. And in 2006, Britons watched his six-part The War of the World, dramatizing his latest, a huge volume subtitled Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West.
Visiting Ferguson in his office at the Center for European Studies, I asked him about the strain of separation from home and family, what he has called his transatlantic “trilemma.” “I can testify that it is extraordinarily hard,” he said. “It’s unfair to the family, and I’d so much rather they were here. But with every passing year, as children get older, they become harder to move. So I feel that I’ve lost this particular argument.” After a pause, though, he added, “Another way to look at it is that historically it’s not that abnormal for husbands and fathers to spend significant time away from their families—seamen, army officers, colonial administrators. Actually, funnily enough, these long separations perhaps do allow me bouts of extreme work, which suits my temperament.”

IN THE ORATION Ferguson delivered at Harvard’s Phi Beta Kappa literary exercises in June 2004, he noted: “Throughout much of my life, the United States has seemed to be tapping on my shoulder, urging me to quit the Old World for the New.”
Niall (pronounced “NEEL”) Campbell Douglas Ferguson—born in Glasgow in 1964, his father a doctor, his mother a physics teacher—grew up in the west of Scotland, except for two years in Nairobi, Kenya, where his father had taken a job teaching. (His younger sister is now a professor of physics at the University of Pennsylvania.) He prepared at The Glasgow Academy, which he describes as “a school produced by the Scottish bourgeoisie in the nineteenth century to educate their sons for commerce. I was lucky because, though it was clear that I wasn’t going into business or law, the school was encouraging of those who were obviously effete intellectuals, and encouraged us to apply to Oxford or Cambridge. My parents never opposed this path. My father wasn’t the kind of man who wants to clone himself—he was delighted that I was academically motivated. The ethos of my family was work and education.”
So it was off to Oxford, where he promptly went straight to the devil. “In the true tradition of Calvinist lads who lapse,” he says, “I spent two years doing everything but work. I played the double bass in the jazz quintet, debated rather badly at the Oxford Union, edited a student magazine, and even appeared as the caterpillar in Alice in Wonderland, hookah and all.” At that moment, says he, he fortuitously discovered he was not cut out for the stage and, according to his account, sprinted to the Bodleian Library in the nick of time. “Oxford, unlike Harvard, doesn’t do continuous assessment. If you can get it together for your final examinations, which in those days meant 10 three-hour papers over seven days, it won’t matter how bad you’ve been before.”
Dare we say the rest is history? Graduating with first-class honors in 1985, he was a demy (a foundation scholar) at Magdalen College until 1989. He then spent two years as a Hanseatic Scholar in Hamburg and Berlin, where he learned German, worked on his dissertation (subsequently his first book, Paper and Iron: Hamburg Business and German Politics in the Era of Inflation, 1897-1927), and worked as a journalist for British and German newspapers—using a variety of pseudonyms, to avoid academic reproach. At this point, he took up a research fellowship at Christ’s College, Cambridge, soon afterwards moving to a lectureship at Peterhouse. He returned to Oxford in 1992 to become fellow and tutor in modern history at Jesus College, and in 2000, he was appointed professor of political and financial history. Two years later he jumped the Atlantic to take the Herzog chair in financial history at the Stern Business School of New York University (where he was voted “Professor of the Year” in 2003). In 2004, the year he arrived at Harvard, Time magazine included him in its list of the 100 most influential people in the world. 

FERGUSON IS A BONNIE and beamish lad—genial, open, and charming. His admirers have suggested that in a movie he might be played by Colin Firth or Hugh Grant. In Alan Bennett’s recent play and film, The History Boys, he is the model for the contrarian teacher Irwin, played by Stephen Campbell Moore. But there is no reason he could not play himself. He certainly has the media savvy and experience. In his films he uses to great effect his mellifluous actor’s voice, Oxonian wrapped in unmistakable burr. As he does his good looks: In the film of Empire, he treks all over the former British colonies, looking very cool, from the Caribbean to Africa to India, speaking from dungeons and castles, from churches, gardens, and deserts, from parades, bazaars, and ritual ceremonies, from dugout canoes and rickshaws, and even while clambering up peaks, all the while overflowing with names, dates, customs, exotic anecdotes, and even the occasional familiar chestnut, such as “Dr. Livingstone, I presume!”
To those inclined to turn up their noses a bit at the concept of a media historian, Simon Schama, University Professor of art history and history at Columbia, and himself a media celebrity in much the same mold as Ferguson, snaps, “Well, let them try it themselves before they sniff. Trying to be a historian and a public intellectual is the most demanding, challenging task one can undertake. My professor, Jack [Sir J.H.] Plumb, and a mentor of Niall’s, taught that reaching a wide public is the most exacting challenge you can have as a scholar, without compromising the truth and the complexities of what you want to say. Niall does that extremely well, both on the printed page and on television. I am his number- one fan!”
On the other hand, it will come as no surprise that some of the concepts expounded by Ferguson rub many people the wrong way. Indeed, the very word “empire,” it seems, touches off severe reactions. To take but a couple of examples, the British journalist Johann Hari, under the headline “There can be no excuse for Empire,” writes in the Independent: “For over a decade now, Ferguson has built a role as a court historian for the imperial American hard right, arguing that the British Empire from the Victorian period on was a good thing with some unfortunate ‘blemishes’ that have been over-rated and over-stated.” In a review in the Guardian,entitled “The story peddled by imperial apologists is a poisonous fairytale,” Priyamvada Gopal, who teaches postcolonial studies at Cambridge, says that Ferguson, whom she refers to as a “neocon ideologue,” is rewriting history, “driven by the messianic fantasies of the American right….Colonialism—a tale of slavery, plunder, war, corruption, land-grabbing, famines, exploitation, indentured labour, impoverishment, massacres, genocide and forced resettlement—is rewritten into a benign developmental mission….” Ferguson is used to these imprecations. Although he did write a published letter chiding “Horrible Hari” (the epithet alludes to the Horrible Histories series by British author Terry Deary), Ferguson says this kind of criticism comes with the (imperial) territory.
We cannot deal here with all these charges. Anticolonialism, after all, is Gopal’s career. But take, for example, Gopal’s charge of slavery—an integral element, she says, of empire. In Ferguson’s film, one of the most significant points made is that Britain abolished slavery in its empire. Returning to Empire, the book, one reads in the section on the Clapham Sect about this evangelical group’s success in bringing about abolition:
It is not easy to explain so profound a change in the ethics of a people. It used to be argued that slavery was abolished simply because it had ceased to be profitable, but all the evidence points the other way: in fact, it was abolished despite the fact that it was still profitable. What we need to understand, then, is a collective change of heart.
He goes on to discuss the broad and diverse leadership of the campaign for abolition, and its unstoppable resolve, so that the slave trade was abolished in 1807 (and slavery itself in 1833). “From now on,” he continues, “convicted slavers faced, by a nice irony, transportation to Britain’s penal colony in Australia.” (In short, “indentured labour.”)
Furthermore, despite the anti-Western imperial scenarios constructed by his critics, Ferguson (without denying the undeniable) is emphatic about the benefits that accompanied British rule, including active efforts to eliminate female infanticide and sati (the self-immolation of a Hindu widow on her husband’s funeral pyre). 
“Without the spread of British rule around the world,” he continues, “it is hard to believe that the structures of liberal capitalism would have been so successfully established in so many different economies around the world.”
Those empires that adopted alternative models—the Russian and the Chinese—imposed incalculable misery on their subject peoples. Without the influence of British imperial rule, it is hard to believe that the institutions of parliamentary democracy would have been adopted by the majority of states in the world, as they are today. India, the world’s largest democracy, owes more than it is fashionable to acknowledge to British rule. Its elite schools, its universities, its civil service, its army, its press and its parliamentary system all still have discernibly British models.
Ferguson is resolute in his defense of the relative stability and calm created by the British empire. In fact, one of the three principal causes of the “extreme violence of the twentieth century,” he writes in The War of the World, was the fracturing of empires—the British, yes, but also the others, the Axis powers, “the worst empires in all history.” (The two other determinants he cites—to simplify the vast tapestry of this book—were the violent coming apart of multiethnic societies and the boom and bust of economic volatility.) If the British empire was far from unblemished—and Ferguson describes the blemishes in great detail—it was also impressively noble in its “finest hour” against the Axis powers; and
what made it so fine, so authentically noble, was that the Empire’s victory could only ever have been Pyrrhic. In the end, the British sacrificed her Empire to stop the Germans, Japanese, and Italians from keeping theirs. Did not that sacrifice alone expunge all the Empire’s other sins?
 The War of the World takes the reader on a long and gruesome march through the century-long racial tensions and economic uncertainties that led to the Second World War and the “descent” of the West: that is, the descent into unimaginable horror, and the concomitant political rise of the East. His conclusion essentially is that the war would have been less costly in every way if the West, instead of fretting and temporizing, had taken pre-emptive action in, say, 1938. Hitler’s goal, he writes,
was to enlarge the German Reich so that it embraced as far as possible the entire German Volk and in the process to annihilate what he saw as the principal threats to its existence, namely the Jews and Soviet Communism (which to Hitler were one and the same). Like Japan’s proponents of territorial expansion, he sought living space in the belief that Germany required more territory because of her over-endowment with people and her under-endowment with strategic raw materials.
However, “Hitler wanted not merely a Greater Germany; he wanted the Greatest Possible Germany. Given the very wide geographical distribution of Germans in East Central Europe, that implied a German empire stretching from the Rhine to the Volga. Nor was that the limit of Hitler’s ambitions, for the creation of this maximal Germany was intended to be the basis for a German world empire that would be, at the very least, a match for the British Empire.”
But the British and their allies continued to dither. “Thus,” in Ferguson’s view, “the only one of the options that was never seriously contemplated was pre-emption—in other words, an early move to nip in the bud the threat posed by Hitler’s Germany…. [T]he tragedy of the Second World War is that, had this been tried, it would almost certainly have succeeded.”

BUT WAR IS NOT ALWAYS INEVITABLE, as Ferguson stresses in his magisterial earlier book, The Pity of War. The book’s title is taken from Wilfred Owen’s “Strange Meeting”:
For by my glee might many men have laughed,
And of my weeping something had been left,
Which must die now, I mean the truth untold,
The pity of war, the pity war distilled.
Ferguson plays on the subtle double meaning of the word: pity as the infinite sadness of war, and perhaps even more heartbreaking—pity as the avoidability of war.
In the very beginning of the book, he tells us about his grandfather, John Gilmour Ferguson, who joined up at age 17 and was sent to the trenches as a private in the Seaforth Highlanders, the “devils in skirts.” He was wounded and gassed, reminding us of the more famous Owen poem, “Dulce et decorum est,” with its vivid “Gas! GAS! Quick, boys!....” But the lucky John Ferguson returned to Scotland to become in time a grandfather, unlike a huge number of his comrades.
The book is full of unexpected conclusions, not least that the outbreak of war itself took almost everyone by surprise. In spite of decades of predictions, treaties, broken treaties, and precautions; in spite of the fact that virtually every member of royalty throughout Europe was related and constantly in touch; in spite of all the spies and double agents and best-selling books; in spite even of the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand and his wife in Sarajevo, “thanks to the most famous wrong-turning in history”—the fact is that on August 4, 1914, it seems that the whole world was shocked that war had begun.
But was it avoidable? In Ferguson’s words:
Had Britain stood aside—even for a matter of weeks—continental Europe could therefore have been transformed into something not wholly unlike the European Union we know today—but without the massive contraction in British overseas power entailed by the fighting of two world wars. Perhaps too the complete collapse of Russia into the horrors of civil war and Bolshevism might have been averted.…And there plainly would not have been that great incursion of American financial and military power into European affairs which effectively marked the end of British financial predominance in the world. Granted, there might still have been Fascism in Europe in the 1920s; but it would have been in France rather than Germany that radical nationalists would have sounded most persuasive….
In addition, perhaps “the inflations and deflations of the [succeeding decades] would not have been so severe.” But of course, Germany would have been the victor. Not such a terrifying prospect in 1918. In fact:
With the Kaiser triumphant, Adolf Hitler could have eked out his life as a mediocre postcard painter and a fulfilled old soldier in a German-dominated Central Europe about which he could have found little to complain. And Lenin could have carried on his splenetic scribbling in Zurich, forever waiting for capitalism to collapse—and forever disappointed.
“It was Germany which forced the continental war of 1914 upon an unwilling France (and a not so unwilling Russia), but it was the British government which ultimately decided to turn the continental war into a world war, a conflict which lasted twice as long and cost many more lives than Germany’s first ‘bid for European Union’ would have….It was,” he concludes, “nothing less than the greatest error of modern history.”
Schama, who says this book is probably his favorite—“I just love the narrative, the passion, the way it is written”—is nevertheless not sure he agrees with Ferguson’s conclusion. “Though I’m not a complete determinist,” says he, “I have a little bit more of the predestination person in me.”
Also disputing Ferguson’s position is Saltonstall professor of history Charles S. Maier, who co-teaches a conference course, History 1965 (“International History: States, Markets, and the Global Economy”), with Ferguson. “He makes his arguments with great verve and panache and learning,” says Maier, “but I don’t agree that Britain might have been better advised to stay out of the war. I don’t agree with him in that I think the Germany that would have won would not be the Germany of today—no one could have foreseen the Third Reich.” As Maier writes in a review of the book, “Ferguson’s thought-experiments are warranted for reflecting on the irony of unintended consequences, but not to persuade us that the statesmen of 1914 should have acquiesced in German demands….” No, he continues, “World War I was fought with a pervasive consciousness of iron inevitability.” For himself, Maier writes, “the abiding lesson of this stimulating book is that rational choices can produce absolutely catastrophic outcomes. For that sobering demonstration, I am grateful to Ferguson as well as to his grandfather.”
The “thought-experiments” mentioned by Maier are the “counterfactuals” through which Ferguson arrives at his painful conclusion in The Pity of War. It is history in the subjunctive past perfect, a jeu d’esprit that he deploys with the utmost seriousness throughout his work and teaching. Anyone needing more background on Ferguson’s opinion that Britain’s entry into the war was indeed “the greatest error of modern history,” is herewith referred to his detailed essay, “The Kaiser’s European Union: What if Britain had ‘stood aside’ in August 1914?” This is one of nine chapters in Virtual History, edited by Ferguson, who, along with eight other historians, plays the game of “What if?”—toying with concepts such as “What if Germany had invaded England in May 1940?” “What if Charles I had avoided the Civil War?” “What if John F. Kennedy had lived?”
Ferguson admits that the book comprises a “series of separate voyages into ‘imaginary time.’ It may smack of science fiction to offer the reader glimpses through a series of worm holes into eight parallel universes.” But far from apologizing, he argues, “The world is not divinely ordered, nor governed by Reason, the class struggle or any other deterministic ‘law.’”
Though counterfactual history has been dismissed by some historians as a parlor-game, a red herring, even “the complete rejection of history,” Ferguson will have none of it. “Virtual History,” he says in his office, “was a very important moment in my intellectual development. It came about because my Ph.D. had ended up posing a counterfactual question: What if the Germans had stabilized their currency in 1920 and not embarked on their deranged hyperinflationary policy? Without actually knowing what I was doing, I tried to think that through, and argued that there really was an alternative, that it wasn’t inevitable, that there was a moment when, as a result of a series of very bad decisions, Germany ended up plunging into hyperinflation.
“I sent off an article making that point, and it came back with a referee’s report from one of the grand old men of German economic history, denouncing the very notion that an historian could ask a what-if question.
“I thought about this damning report, and I decided that he was wrong, and in a sense Virtual History was born at that moment. My feeling was, and I’m still very committed to the notion, that we need to ask this stuff. We can’t duck these questions. There’s a reluctance among mainstream historians to engage what seems to me a philosophically irrefutable point: that if we’re going to propose anything of a causal nature, we’ve got to make explicit the counterfactual that statement implies. I think it’s almost fraudulent not to make your counterfactual explicit. You’re cheating your readers and your students. If you really do think that, let’s say, the Fed was responsible for the Great Depression, then you have to show how a different monetary policy would have avoided it.
“The other thing I deeply believe,” he continues, “is that it helps you recapture the uncertainty of the past. We are about recapturing past thoughts, recapturing and reconstructing them, like the moment in August 1914, when absolutely nobody knew what was coming. Historians have been writing for years and years that the origins of the First World War date back to the 1890s. Well, that’s not how it felt at the time.”

THEN THERE WAS Colossus, the book, he says “that managed to annoy just about everybody.” “Back in the dying days of the Clinton administration,” he says, “I concluded—somewhat heatedly—that ‘the greatest disappointment facing the world in the twenty-first century [is] that the leaders of the one state with the economic resources to make the world a better place lack the guts to do it.’ Little did I imagine that within a matter of nine months, a new president, confronted by the calamity of September 11, would embark on a policy so similar to the one I had advocated. Since the declaration of the war against terrorism, the question has ceased to be about guts. It is now about grit, the tenacity to finish what has been started.”
It is not hard to see why this book “managed to annoy just about everybody.” And it becomes easier to understand why his liberal critics call him a neocon stooge of the American hard right. (Especially when it gets around that he was, in his words, a “confirmed Thatcherite.” He had fallen in with the Thatcherites at Oxford—“clearly the most interesting people there,” but was too “junior and insignificant” to do more than write “a lot in support of her, and Reagan, too.” As he once told an interviewer, “Britain was on the road to becoming Argentina” when, fortunately, Lady Thatcher came along to the rescue.)
But he claims he has never had the slightest contact with the Bush administration, and says the “neocon” charge is “absolutely malicious.” He notes, “I was always consistent in saying that the United States was not likely to make a success of the invasion of Iraq because, unlike Britain, it had the three deficits I wrote about: in manpower, capital, and above all, staying power. I also opposed British involvement in the war. I wrote in the Financial Times that this may have been in the interest of the United States, but it was not in Britain’s interest. But I was heeded neither in London nor in Washington.
“My lament and refrain in those distant days was, ‘Why does America ignore British history? Why does nobody here talk about 1920, and Britain’s experiences in Baghdad?’ Remember what Churchill said: ‘At present we are paying eight millions a year for the privilege of sitting on an ungrateful volcano out of which we will in no circumstances get anything worth having.’ It was a revelation to me that Americans were so parochial. I must say I came here no doubt with all kinds of illusions, but I was still surprised. I think that what happened is that people said, ‘Well, this guy is in favor of empire (which empire they don’t say), so therefore he must be in favor of the war.’ What I did say was that the United States should use its power more aggressively to get rid of rogue regimes and failed states, but the notion that that had any role to play in 2003 is absurd.
“I also said that the time for a ‘surge’ was 2004—I mean, if you’re going to do it, do it right. And the piece I wrote then for the New York Times, which got me into a lot of trouble, said the time for ruthlessness was at that moment. You had to stop the insurgency then and there; you had to whack Fallujah, you had to whack al-Sadr. But the army backed off, and that was a disastrous mistake. The credibility and legitimacy of U.S. forces on the ground have only gotten shakier.
“We need another idea at this point. I’ve suggested putting in UN troops.” (This column was roundly derided, too—particularly in that part of the media where the UN is synonymous with fecklessness and corruption, opinions he actually shares.) But, he persists, “I’m thinking of, say, Indians with blue helmets. Where in the world can the United States expect to find an ally prepared to put up sincere interest and support? Perhaps in India; India is a country with a large conventional force, and with a commitment to fight the war on terror.”
One way out of the appearance, so distasteful to his critics, of creating an empire in Iraq, is, to put it succinctly: hypocrisy. He wrote in the New Republic:
As in Bosnia, the United States should hand over some of the dirty work….But that will only be possible if the Europeans get what they want: the semblance of an imminent U.S. handover of power in Iraq. Note the word semblance. As the British showed in Egypt, you can keep up this kind of hypocrisy for quite a long time before you actually have to restore self-government for real.
“I don’t think running away is an option,” he explains. “I think regardless of who is president, we are still going to have a military presence in Iraq by 2012. It’s not like Vietnam; you can’t just walk away, leaving it to go to hell, with everybody killing one another. As bad as that was, it had no geopolitical cost at all for Americans; the costs of failure were zero. Whereas the geopolitical cost of running away here is almost unimaginable. Not only would a full-scale regional civil war create all sorts of opportunities for Iran. It creates all sorts of opportunities for the Iranian-backed Shi‘ah and the wildest Sunni radicals who are behind al Qaeda. It makes your most important ally in the region, Israel, desperately vulnerable.”

THESE DARK AND FREIGHTED SUBJECTS—Vietnam, Israel, indeed most of the life-and-death questions of the last half-century—will be examined in Ferguson’s forthcoming undertaking: a biography of Henry Kissinger. It will be a “global” biography in the sense, he says, that “there isn’t a government that doesn’t have a view of this man. You’re dealing with an individual who had a significant role in almost every international crisis of the 1970s.”
Kissinger himself invited Ferguson to write the biography, and gave him access to his papers, upon which work has begun. But first, Ferguson must finish his book on Siegmund Warburg, who, though hardly known in the United States, was highly influential in European financial circles between the 1950s and 1980s. The Warburg book began back in Ferguson’s days in Hamburg, when he met a Warburg relative who invited the young Scot, a historian now morphing into an economic historian, to look at the family papers.
“So there I was,” Ferguson recalls, “sitting in the M.M. Warburg bank offices in Hamburg, and it was there that I really had my first encounter with serious historical research. Reading through the Warburg papers, I realized that here was an economic story I needed to understand. Why did the Germans lose control of their currency? What exactly had gone wrong?
“But there was another story which was not new to me. I’d always understood its importance. This was the story of the German Jews and their predicament. I was gripped by the most important and certainly the most perplexing tragedy of modern history, which was the tragedy of the Jews. The Jews—tremendously successful, not only in economic life, but also in cultural life, the standard-bearers of modernity in the arts and in political innovations of the modern period, and of course the ultimate victims of the backlash against it in the 1930s and ’40s.
“That really started my interest in German-Jewish history,” he continues. “And it wasn’t long after finishing my book, Paper and Iron, in which the Warburgs were central figures, that I was asked to look at the Rothschild archives, with a view to writing a substantial work on the history of the Rothschilds. It was an opportunity I seized with both hands, and I spent five years practically living in the Rothschild archives in London, with visits to important stuff in Russia and Frankfurt. By the time I was done, I think I was about as deeply immersed in German-Jewish history as it’s possible for a non-Jew to be; after all, it was ironic that somebody with my background was asked to write this book.”
The House of Rothschild has been called the finest book ever written about this dynasty, a work that “reaffirms one’s faith in the possibility of great historical writing,” according to historian Fritz Stern. Dense with family details, it unfolds a formidable skein of transactions, contracts, codes, and regulations that took the family from the ghetto of Frankfurt to the status of wealthiest family in the world—perhaps in history—in a deft shadow play illuminated against the grievous background of the ugliest kind of anti-Semitism.
But why is Ferguson destined to find himself so “deeply immersed in German-Jewish history”? Has he not enough to do defending and perhaps perpetuating his arguments on empire? There is no answer—yet—to the “irony” that a disputatious Scot should be chosen to write the story of not one, but three, German-Jewish world players who dominated history. Perhaps a hint can be found in Ferguson’s own suggestion that the Scots are in many significant ways similar to the Jews: “Scottish Calvinism gave rise to impulses comparable to those we associate with Jews in the modern period. A high regard for literacy. An emphasis on education as a route to social mobility. An aptitude for finance and for science.” Whatever the reason, he says with a laugh, “through it all, I have become a thorough philo-Semite.”
For more on this irony, we must await the coming cascade of books. Meanwhile, we might contemplate a possible counterfactual: What if we prove Ferguson wrong, don the purple, and show up as the next empire?      

President Trump is right. Now is the time to deal with China. America deserves better terms.

President Trump is right. Now is the time to deal with China. America deserves better terms.



Sunday, August 04, 2019

Saturday, August 03, 2019

Why I Want to Start a Free Speech Trade Union - Quillette

Why I Want to Start a Free Speech Trade Union - Quillette: Ten years ago almost to the day I wrote an article for the Observer saying I wanted to start a new type of school that was as close as possible to the grammar school I went to—traditional curriculum, competitive atmosphere, zero tolerance of disruptive behavior—but with a non-selective, comprehensive intake. The response was so overwhelmingly that I arranged a public meeting at my house in London and, out of that group, a steering committee emerged. Two years later we opened one of England’s first free schools and today there are 442 of them with another 250 in the pipeline.

devotional????

Remember, along with orbiting around the Sun at 66,600 miles per hour., the Earth is also rotating on its axis at about 1,070 mph. On top of that, don’t forget our whole solar system is rocketing through space around the center of the Milky Way at around 560,000 mph. On top of that, our galaxy is hurtling through space at around 670,000 mph with respect to our local group of galaxies.
So, bottom line, even if you went back in time just a few seconds, you’re going to be in a VERY different place than when you first achieved 88 mph with your DeLorean. Go back several hundred years, and you are going to need an extremely fast space ship and some good star chart data to find your way back to Earth.
But let’s say you’ve figured all that out. After a quick stop to murder baby Hitler and a few of his top cronies (or at the least bring a wizened Mister Rogers back to give their parents some life lessons to instill in their children), how far back could you go and still be able to communicate effectively in the English speaking world?

Thursday, July 25, 2019

back exercise

https://brightside.me/inspiration-health/10-easy-exercises-to-kill-back-pain-and-tone-your-abs-at-the-same-time-760910/

American Digest - WHEN in the course of human Events, it becomes necessary....

American Digest - WHEN in the course of human Events, it becomes necessary....



I bequeathe myself to the dirt, to grow from the grass I love;
If you want me again, look for me under your boot-soles.
You will hardly know who I am, or what I mean;
But I shall be good health to you nevertheless,
And filter and fibre your blood.
Failing to fetch me at first, keep encouraged;
Missing me one place, search another;
I stop somewhere, waiting for you.  — Whitman

Friday, July 05, 2019

Fabre’s Book of Insects (1921) – The Public Domain Review

Fabre’s Book of Insects (1921) – The Public Domain Review

quote

Sometimes in the course of human events we detect what looks like the fingerprints of Providence.

Carney: The Anti-Slavery Inspiration of the Declaration of Independence | Breitbart

Carney: The Anti-Slavery Inspiration of the Declaration of Independence | Breitbart



he first publication of the Declaration of Independence did not occur until the following day, in the print shop of John Dunlap. His work was overseen by the “Committee of Five”—Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman and Robert R. Livingston—which was charged with making sure only the approved text made it out to the 13 colonies.
John Adams initially thought that the day of the vote would echo through the ages as the day the American colonies declared a new epoch had dawned on the earth. But a year later, Philadelphia held a party to commemorate America’s independence on July 4th and we never really looked back.
One of the overlooked sources for Jefferson’s early draft was a now largely forgotten pamphlet written by Judge Samuel Sewall in 1700 titled , “The Selling of Joseph: A Memorial.” It is a remarkable document, one of the earliest antislavery declarations published in the American colonies.