« Sounds like a plan ... | Main | "King Charles III" – The Deep State Strikes Back - A Review by Newmarket »

12 March 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Edward Amame

Col Lang

Bishop Hughes did help, though. He meet with leaders of the rebellion to ask them so stand down.

He's the same Bishop who threatened the mayor of NYC that the city would be burned to the ground if city cops allowed nativists to attack NYC's Catholic community and their churches. Here's the quote: "should one Catholic come to harm, or should one Catholic business be molested, we shall turn this city into a second Moscow." Balls!


Edward Amame

IMO DoBoise is wrong and I would point to the relative rarity of slave revolts. The just about complete absence of that during the WBS when White men were largely absent would indicate that there was not a lot of hostility in spite of the enslavement. Some people left the farm to follow the Union Army but violence against slave owners was rare. l



A fine piece of revisionist history. The 1480s are just few centuries after the 700s. You talk a great deal about Isabella, leaving out what Muslim armies did to the conquered and how they treated all those that did not convert.



Yes. He did do that, but it was late in the game after most of the damage had been done. The prods called him "Dagger" because an RC bishop draws a little cross in front of his signature. He is buried behind the main altar in the cathedral. He went down to DC to plead for Mary Surratt's life with President Johnson and was reused an audience. John Hughes never pretended to be neutral about anything. IMO she was guilty as charged. IMO several Catholic clergymen perjured themselves at the military commission trying to save Dr. Mudd and she. Black Dave Hunter, the aforementioned miscreant was president of the Commission. pl


Colonel -

Although raided in the north, my father was a Virginian. I have considered myself a Northerner. One of the happiest times of my life was when I was in North Carolina. I was also in Northern Virginia for awhile, but even in the seventies that was more like living well above the Mason Dixon line than below it. I imagine it is much worse now.

And why would you rebuke me for using the term Southern Belle? I never thought of them as useless and never considered them as the stereotypical image that you seem to think I think. I realize you get a lot of grief from some quarters and that has given you a thin skin. But IMHO you quite often see disrespect or insult where none exists.



That's just another year old WAPO op-ed which points to zero colleges or universities being shut down. Somebody put a list of speakers they don't like together? Santa has a naughty list too.



I am about tired of having you tell me how thin skinned I am. Either take it quietly or leave. IMO "Southern Belle" is a disparaging term. Its use demonstrates how Northern you really are. The women so described are more aptly called Iron Butterflies. pl

Babak Makkinejad

My surmise was that they have been charming urbane & cultivated women who were raised to be good mothers and wives; the epitome of hospitality - knowing how to be pleasing to men (as opposed to be confrontational and cold) as well as gracious hostesses and competent managers of a family's affairs.

The world could surely use more of them, especially North of the Mason-Dixon Line.

Edward Amame

Col Lang

Looking up the Nat Turner revolt showed that he had about 40 men and about 3,000 white men put down the rebellion. That put-down killed over 200 blacks. I'm certain that sent a potent message. It also seems that slaves had very limited access to weapons and (supposedly) slave states require white men to take part in mounted, armed patrols of the slave population. Your point about a complete lack of slave insurrection during the war is interesting.

(Hopefully this isn't a double post - I'm still having browser issues, sorry).



Yes, the Nat Turner revolt in the 1830s was a traumatizing event and ad a result it was made much more difficult to manumit slaves and it was forbidden by law to teach them to read. The event was so traumatic because it was so rare. The law about teaching slaves to read was often ignored and fines paid as necessary. Stonewall Jackson taught slaves who attended the First Presbyterian church in Lexington to read because he wanted then to be able to read scripture and hymnals. He wasn't interested in their general literacy but he wanted their souls saved. The Commonwealth's Attorney Told him to stop and Jackson said that the CA had his duty to do and so did he. he continued teaching literacy. pl



How about shortening your life expectancy by adding to your heart attack risk due to stress by changes to things in the employers control such as: employee evaluation criteria, supervisory assignments and changes to reporting locations? Or changing insurance provider options which would result in increases to insurance co-pays, changes prescription coverage and costs; increase in deductibles and out-of-pocket expenses; changes to 401K plan options, matching funds, vestment payout dates and cancelling pension programs? Or just plain outsourcing the jobs but first bringing in your replacements on H1B visas for you to train first?


in his search for answers about the incident at Middlebury College, Frank Bruni shifted considerable blame to the religious impulse -- an increasingly popular recycling of a tactic favored by Marx and Lenin, as you can see in Andrew Sullivan's framing of the Middlebury incident for New York Magazine. ("Is Intersectionality a Religion?")


(H/T SST commenter Keith Harbaugh.) Follow the links in Bruni's NYT editorial for more illustrations of the modern version of the old commie tactic.

The Middlebury incident has nothing to do with organized religion or the religious impulse, nor do countless incidents that have happened on American campuses since the 1960s. Two friends and I were accosted by a little gang of students -- children of privilege all -- while we were walking across the Harvard campus in the early 1970s, and simply because we were adults wearing business suits who looked as if we might be on our way to an auditorium where Ayn Rand was to give a lecture.

What happened at Middlebury is the outgrowth of an educational environment that's reversed the natural order of things for humans in two key ways.

1. Small children form their respect for a teacher's authority based on what they see of massed numbers of humans -- a very basic way of assigning importance. If they see more Big Humans than Little Humans like themselves massed around them in the classroom, they respect the authority of the Big Humans and the teacher speaking for the Big Humans. If the opposite holds, they place their peers in the supreme position of authority.

Yet a small child's acceptance of his peers as the authority can easily lead to the kind of incident that happened at Middlebury College.

There are exceptions to the rule that small children should always be outnumbered by adults in a formal learning situation. However, I think the exceptions only apply when a clan/tribal society or stand-in for such (e.g., life on a military base) has a strong influence on a child.

Otherwise it's folly to place only one adult teacher in command of a roomful of small children.

2. The natural order is also reversed by an education system that presses small children to make intelligent remarks and give 'correct' answers.

There is wisdom in the adage "Children are to be seen and not heard." It so happens that small children learn best under such a condition because they're free to concentrate on what is being said by the teachers and their peers, rather than having to listen with an ear to how they're going to reply. In the latter situation a big part of their attention is consumed with coming up with questions or remarks that make them sound smart, or at least not stupid, in front of the class.

Yet such split attention is a big reason many graduates of the modern education system have the attention span of a gnat and concentrative power of a jumping bean.

The act of constantly splitting attention also leads to all kinds of behavioral and learning disabilities.

It is cruel, verging on inhumane, when an education system presses small children to think they must sound intelligent. The cruelty also creates children who dislike and even fear debate and other challenges to their assertions as they grow older.

There are other important factors that make the modern education system unfriendly to the development of a child who is well prepared to enter adulthood. But the above two factors are the biggest ones, and they both have relatively simple solutions.

Now I return to Frank Bruni's editorial. He writes, "The protesters didn’t use [Charles] Murray’s presence as an occasion to hone the most eloquent, irrefutable retort to him. They swarmed and swore."

How does Mr Bruni plan to extract eloquent, irrefutable retorts from children who've been trained not to listen and live in fear of the authority of their peers?

More importantly, why does he expect children to come up with eloquent -- and irrefutable, no less -- retorts to the ideas of adults?

Or does he see the "work to end racism, sexism, homophobia and other bigotry" as a children's crusade? If so he might want to read William Golding's "Lord of the Flies." That is, if he can muster sufficient concentration for the act of reading.

Edward Amame

Col Lang

Thanks, I've been finding this discussion with you really fascinating, and have been navigating around the web reading all day...

There are some historians who are saying that if you define "revolt" in a particular way, that the number of revolts may have been over 200. Nevertheless, a guy who seems to make a lot of sense to me is historian Eugene Genovese, who puts forward the theory that is was simply pragmatism that kept slaves from revolting. That uprisings would have been basically considered suicide, especially post-Turner. I'm also wondering how many slaves escaped to fight for the north during the WBS.

During my web travels, one book in particular caught my interest: The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism by Edward E. Baptist. He agrees with you that "the system of forced labor was quite efficient." In fact, Baptist says that it drove the evolution and modernization of the US. Do you know it, would you recommend it?


Edward Amame

Don't worry Fred. Trumpcare will fix everything.



It is useless to argue with you . You have a closed mind. I started out with the standard Northern oriented belief that the south was not only regressive and primitive but a concentration camp for Blacks in the Antebellum period and not much better in 1958 when I came to school. I learned that I had been wrong. you will not. pl


correct, Babak, IQ alone is not enough.. what made Western civilization dominant was & is science & technology that it pioneered, advanced & discovered electricity, physics, chemistry, medicine, etc with it's network of scientific research universities first established by the gov of Germany, France, England, Canada & later copied in the US .. more details from the book 'Guns, Germs, & Steel' --large excerpts here
or full book here:

.. even
though China invented gunpowder (but had only fuse-lite guns), crossbow, compass, rudder, printing press, mortar/concrete, & mass production
giant naval ships centuries to decades before Europe & became the leading technology until about the 16th century, it remained insular & did not develop a network of scientific universities like Europe did

Moreso, most people didn't realize that the Soviet Union & pre-1990s China used to be on a gold/silver standard & had no commercial banking industry -
.. thus, their economies were starved of money & did NOT have enough funds/capital to fund/finance much gov/business investment, production, research & development nor consumer demand

In contrast, commercial banking in Europe/US since the 1800s relies on the 'fractional reserve lending' principle where banks create money about 10x (or whatever ratio determined by law) as much money as they have in deposits

--ie, banks create money whenever they create loans/credit at 10x the ratio of deposits, which further increased the money supply, capital & fund various projects, business investment, research & development, demand & spending & production
because of private banks need for profit & private sector's inability to sustain long-term debt, it created boom & bust cycles ..

This important because stats show that 80%+ of all economic activity of the US in real estate development, construction, auto sales, business investment, etc is dependent on money creation (aka as bank loans/credit) --hence the boom & bust cycle .. hence why fed gov's role during recessions is step in & provide funding/deficit spending during recessions

US & Europe which during & after WW2 after going off the gold-standard, the massive 'deficit spending' aka as money creation by the federal gov, which invented the
internet, antibiotics,
nuclear power, MRI's,
hired 16 million military (giant jobs program!) & spent enough on defense contracts to hire everyone & their sister to build jeeps, tanks, planes, reducing the unemployment rate down to 2% aka as 'full employment'
the GI Bill passed in 1944 put capital in the hands of most Americans
guaranteeing every 16 million military (about 33% of USA's 48 million households)
gov-guaranteed, subsidized low interest mortgage (thus for the 1st time creating a huge middle-class when before only the wealthy could afford to own a home in the suburbs & creating & stimulating huge demand for homes)
a gov-guaranteed, subsidized low-interest BUSINESS LOANS to start or expand their own businesses
(thus, increasing supply & stimulating increased PRODUCTION of homes since many of them used their business loans to start or expand into real estate development/construction & contracting companies)
e in addition to gov-guaranteed, gov paid 'free' University education (of which 50% of military accepted)
trained MILLIONs into becoming engineers, scientists, doctors, etc , including the founders of Intel,, Hewlett-Packard, etc

The gov also created money via the Marshall Plan loans (aka as money creation) to Europe & Japan to rebuild using similar polices

Singapore also did & does similar policies as well as modern China using MMT-Lite policies via it's gov banks
gov creating TRILLIONs of dollars to fund & finance it's trillion dollar building cities, infrastructure, factories, bullet-trains etc as a giant jobs program as well as migrate it's millions of rural into modern cities
--in the process, it's working since China now has 400+ million middle-class to wealthy, 2nd only to the US in number of billionaires & millionaires
now produces & buys 28+ million new cars a year & 400+ million smartphones & HDTVs

ie, this is standard Post-Keynesian economic policies that helped create & advance any country's economy until the 1970s

What's causing the backlash in US & Europe & rise of populism that popularizes Trump & Sanders is that the "austerity, balance budget, cut deficit spending, 'free trade' mantra" of the Chicago School & Milton Friedman economic policies adopted by both Republican & Democrats --
the ~70% of the US population who don't have university educations are left behind as manufacturing is offshored to Mexico where the mininum wage is 50 cents per hour & 18 new car factories are paying autoworkers as low $1 to $2 per hour to $5 per hour

Since the 1970s politicians in the US adopted Milton Friedman's Chicago School Economic policies (aka as 'neoliberalism' of 'free trade', austerity, & 'cutting deficit spending', balanced budgets)
abandoned Keynesian policies due to the high inflation caused by the OPEC oil embargoes of the 1970s, when OPEC jacked up oil prices 400% & also did oil embargoes, causing much stagflation which was falsely blamed on gov deficit spending

The 'father' of capitalism Adam Smith wrote that what a nation can't produce, it should welcome trade for it but what products a nation needs (such as food or steel), it should produce itself for independence
else be it will subject to & hostage to the whims of foriegn nations for your food & necessities



Thanks. I'm grabbing a copy now. It even has musical scores for drum and bugle. Lots of detail in the daily regs. But five roll calls a day is a bit too extreme even for 1836. Were they that worried about AWOLs?


Great selection Keith,
Sullivan sent me on a long journey around what he called the latest academic craze. On to Intersectionality, the lady, a video, some texts, then on to her foundation. ...

Lee A. Arnold

Genetics is no longer set in stone. Gene-editing techniques such as CRISPR will make new-borns into Einsteins, Mozarts, super-soldiers. Not only new borns: change inside people who are already born will be common within our lifetimes. In fact it will extend our lifetimes. The science is exploding in all directions.

Before this, predetermination by genes was never what people thought it was. Intelligence increases (as measured by IQ scores) over the generations happens too fast, for example the "Flynn effect" (not related to Mike Flynn). Even today, success in life is less due to "The Bell Curve" and more due to loving & challenging environments for the education of kids (which is related to the fuzzy concept of "social capital"). Anyway, science has made the concept of "lifetime genetic determination: you are stuck with it" to be obsolete, finished.



When I was at the War College I took advantage of the presence on post of the Army Institute for Military History to look at Cooper's record. He was an AAG in the 1830s and was sent to Europe on a study mission. The US military establishment had become sufficiently self aware by then to know that it lacked a lot of institutional knowledge and infrastructure. He spent a lot of time with the British and returned to recommend the adoption of British staff structure. His book resulted from that trip. BTW, Mike included in a comment that I have not posted that he "would consider it an honor to be banned." And so, I have honored him as he wished. pl

Babak Makkinejad

No, no, no.

You do not understand this, many traits are due to strings of condones with varied lengths. And then there is the issue of how the organism develops, it may or may not develop in such a way as to the desired state. Not everyone who has genes for this or that cancer develops that cancer, for example.

Furthermore, like any system, if you change one set of parameters in order to improve a certain feature or features, you would be compromising some other aspect of the organism; a very intelligent man who cannot work in group - let us say.

What CRIS-PR makes possible, in my opinion, is the creation of subhumans - with souls - that could be exploited for pleasure and profit. Just imagine a production line of sub-human females of the right proportions; there would be an insatiable demand for them.

And so on and so forth...


Croesus, I have witnessed others being taken in by Germar Rudolf and his diverse colleagues, US comrades in spirit following their hero-victims to Germany to report live from the scene. People from all over the world sending me their condolences about the state of affairs I was forced to live under. After all, if he was such a poor victims mustn't I be regretted somewhat too?

They live well off people like you.

Beyond that I am pretty tired of the debate and the issue. Thus, please, please don't expect any further comment on it.

Lee A. Arnold

Scientists can already edit genes in fully grown adults.

This is being actively researched for many applications, including cures of various diseases. Investigation of a gene-editing cure for lung cancer was just announced about 2 weeks ago. Doctors can sequence any individual's genome easily, making applications completely individualized.

CRISPR is already automated by computers, making it possible to edit gene sequences of any length.

We hardly know whether "some other aspect of the organism would be compromised" if you change a set of parameters -- much less whether it can be corrected, if it happens. This is a false inference about stability, from the study of complex systems.

It could be that humans can have varying numbers of genes, and the number that we have is an accident.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad