I have never thought of history in a way that did not involve the connections that exists between all of the various fields of study. I have always felt that everything that falls into the scope of human interaction, as well as everything that has had some form of interaction on humanity, i.e. weather, plant and animal life, and landform changes, needs to be studied and understood in a historical manner. Manning does an excellent job in describing these interactions and the need to connect history to other disciplines. When it comes to being able to study history, I think we can all agree that a historical record of facts and figures, names and places, and who died when is not easy to study. A historical record that connects population movement and growth to the ecological record of an area , while it includes the who, what, when and where is much more beneficial because it helps answer the all important why.
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Israel's Impact on the Post-WWII World
There was no greater period of change in the face of the world in such a short period of time as was found in the years immediately following the end of the Second World War. New nations were formed, borders redrawn, and new governments established around the world. The most impactful of all of these changes was the creation of a Jewish nation in the Middle East. When the European powers decided to create the country of Israel they set in motion a series of events that still affect the world in every way possible. All aspects of global society, from economics and politics to culture and religion, are affected by Israel. Events in this tiny nation create massive ripples felt in every corner of the world. There is seldom a day when there is not at least one news story in every major world newspaper related to the Israeli people in one way or another. Jewish conflict with the neighboring Muslim countries has set the tone for international diplomacy for almost 100 years. Which side of the dispute a nation sides with at any given time extends beyond the Middle East to the world at large.
There are countries around the world such as Venezuela with its population around 29 million. That even though nations may not like the leader’s foreign policy or stand on nuclear weapons draw very little notice. Yet the same cannot be said for Israel with its almost 8 million people. In our modern world it can be said that if the leader of Israel gets a cold, the world as a whole sneezes. In a May 12th search of the AP website (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/fronts/WORLD?SITE=AP) for stories relating to Israel, 71 news stories were listed for the month of May alone, 89 stories in the 15 days kept on record. During that same time period only 32 stories were reported for our example country of Venezuela. What other country, founded in the last 75 years, has had such impact the world over?
There are countries around the world such as Venezuela with its population around 29 million. That even though nations may not like the leader’s foreign policy or stand on nuclear weapons draw very little notice. Yet the same cannot be said for Israel with its almost 8 million people. In our modern world it can be said that if the leader of Israel gets a cold, the world as a whole sneezes. In a May 12th search of the AP website (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/fronts/WORLD?SITE=AP) for stories relating to Israel, 71 news stories were listed for the month of May alone, 89 stories in the 15 days kept on record. During that same time period only 32 stories were reported for our example country of Venezuela. What other country, founded in the last 75 years, has had such impact the world over?
Monday, April 29, 2013
I feel that without the Protestant Reformation there could have never been the Enlightenment and Scientific Revolution. Until people were freed from the control of the church and allowed to explore new areas and ideas there could never be any major advance in society. The proof of this lies in the history of Europe leading up to the time of intellectual growth in comparison to the history of the Near and Far East during the same time period. In this way the Reformation freed the Western world and allowed science and thought to advance in ways that had hither to been stifled.
Now to my true answer: the Scientific Revolution made the world both small and much larger at the same time on many different scales. Many people will, and have, discussed the advances in sailing and the beginning of the Age of Exploration or Exploitation depending on which side of the landing party you stood. But the Scientific Revolution also made the world a much bigger place on a small scale. I know that sounds like a contradictory term but hear me out. With advances in agriculture and industry there came a growth of awareness among the lower and middle classes in the Western world. Always before the great lords were the only ones who had dealings with “foreign” peoples. Very few members of the lower classes ever thought of those who lived more than a day’s ride from their home as being of any import.
Now suddenly the small free-holder farmer has new technology available helping him produce more and better foods, resulting in a surplus. He now faces the question of what to do with this surplus. He hears of a weaver in the next village over who makes excellent cloth and is willing to trade cloth for food. Our poor farmer would like to wear better clothing than those he currently has so he makes a voyage out into the unknown world beyond his small village and is soon trading surplus food for finer cloth. He returns home and is considered a wealthy man because he was able to get such good materials. The next year his neighbors use the new technologies and they too have a surplus, but only our farmer knows the weaver, so he takes a small commission from everyone and sets out to trade food for cloth, getting richer along the way when he realizes he can trade for things beyond cloth. In a few years he is no longer a farmer; he is now a grocer.
In a very similar manner the weaver gets richer as well because he can trade a surplus of food for better wool or whatever else his need may be. Both of these men, and those they traded with, suddenly became part of a larger world. The Scientific Revolution expanded their small world in ways they could have never imagined.
Now to my true answer: the Scientific Revolution made the world both small and much larger at the same time on many different scales. Many people will, and have, discussed the advances in sailing and the beginning of the Age of Exploration or Exploitation depending on which side of the landing party you stood. But the Scientific Revolution also made the world a much bigger place on a small scale. I know that sounds like a contradictory term but hear me out. With advances in agriculture and industry there came a growth of awareness among the lower and middle classes in the Western world. Always before the great lords were the only ones who had dealings with “foreign” peoples. Very few members of the lower classes ever thought of those who lived more than a day’s ride from their home as being of any import.
Now suddenly the small free-holder farmer has new technology available helping him produce more and better foods, resulting in a surplus. He now faces the question of what to do with this surplus. He hears of a weaver in the next village over who makes excellent cloth and is willing to trade cloth for food. Our poor farmer would like to wear better clothing than those he currently has so he makes a voyage out into the unknown world beyond his small village and is soon trading surplus food for finer cloth. He returns home and is considered a wealthy man because he was able to get such good materials. The next year his neighbors use the new technologies and they too have a surplus, but only our farmer knows the weaver, so he takes a small commission from everyone and sets out to trade food for cloth, getting richer along the way when he realizes he can trade for things beyond cloth. In a few years he is no longer a farmer; he is now a grocer.
In a very similar manner the weaver gets richer as well because he can trade a surplus of food for better wool or whatever else his need may be. Both of these men, and those they traded with, suddenly became part of a larger world. The Scientific Revolution expanded their small world in ways they could have never imagined.
Sunday, April 21, 2013
God, Glory, and Gold:
Not Necessarily in that Order
History is a vast collection of cause and effect events that shape the world as they happen. Our study of history is nothing more than a study of these events in an attempt to understand what lead to the causes and how the effects shaped these events. We think if we are able to understand what causes the events happening around us we can predict future events. When we look hard enough for the true causes in history we will find, in most cases, that it is either God, Glory, or Gold that drives men to act. More often than not, it was Gold more than any of the other two that drove mankind.
Examples of these motives can be found in all the great empires of the world. The empires of Mesopotamia show this in their growth. The leaders who founded these great civilizations were driven by a need to establish themselves as the head of the dominant society. This was the driving force behind all of the great civilizations throughout history. All leaders from the smallest tribal leader to the mightiest emperor all worked to make their society the dominant one in their time. They strove to control as much territory as possible and as many people as they could, for as long as possible. They did all of this to ensure that their name would go down in history as the greatest leader possible.
It wasn’t just empire building that was done for Glory. Often great feats of engineering were undertaken in an effort to make sure later generations did not forget. The great pyramids of Egypt are the best example. The pharaohs who had them built were working to ensure that they were not forgotten by history. When we look back on Egyptian history we often think of the great names such as Ramses, Tut, or Amenhotep. The reason we remember these leaders is not so much for what they did as leaders, but what they left behind: their tombs. It is true that from study we know that Amenhotep IV did make history on his own by attempting a religious revolution, but there again you find God, or in this case gods, as the motivating factor in his actions.
As time passed and more religions were being developed and strengthened beyond simple pagan tribalism. Out of the wide and varied litany of world religions Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and even Confucianism had risen to the top by the middle of the 4th century. They had begun to play a larger and larger role in the world around them. In Europe, Islam and Christianity battled for supremacy for centuries before Christianity finally won out. Church and government leaders for each side worked to make sure their religion was the dominant one for their time. While there were cases of tolerance, these cases were often, in the scope of history, rather brief.
The same pattern played out all over the world: one religion striving to overcome another until ultimately there would only be one left. We often see these conflicts as political or territorial, but the true motive behind them was often religion. The Crusades in Europe are a great example of the opposite of this being true. Religion was the cover for wars fought for political gain. In a time when the powers of Europe were struggling to establish themselves as independent and in some cases dominant of each other, the favor of the church played a major role. In efforts to gain this favor, the leaders of different European countries undertook military actions designed to gain the favor of the church and strengthen their own positions both at home and abroad. The later Crusades were driven more by the last of our great causes: gold and riches.
The desire for gold has motivated much of what man has done throughout history. Often this motivation is covered up with some other reason, which at the time looks very presentable as was the case in the later Crusades. No leader in history has ever taken power, defeating those around them, simply because they could. They did it for the gold. Those who strive to rise to power, even in our modern time, may say they are concerned for the common good of all, but in truth greed and a need for wealth is the underlying motivator. If this were not the case elected officials would not be given lavish salaries and extravagant benefits for doing what they declare their public duty for the good of all those they lead.
So while we often see Glory, God, or Gold as the cause of what has happened in history, when we look deeper into the events we are studying we find the truth is nothing more than greed. Gold, more than any other factor, has been a driving force behind what has taken place. This sad truth is not something we like to hear, but is something of which we should all be aware of when looking at the world around us. There are many good examples of missionary organizations that are working to better the world around them; however, when someone comes along saying they want to do something to help the people, look at their true motives. In many cases it is their own prosperity they have in mind.
Not Necessarily in that Order
History is a vast collection of cause and effect events that shape the world as they happen. Our study of history is nothing more than a study of these events in an attempt to understand what lead to the causes and how the effects shaped these events. We think if we are able to understand what causes the events happening around us we can predict future events. When we look hard enough for the true causes in history we will find, in most cases, that it is either God, Glory, or Gold that drives men to act. More often than not, it was Gold more than any of the other two that drove mankind.
Examples of these motives can be found in all the great empires of the world. The empires of Mesopotamia show this in their growth. The leaders who founded these great civilizations were driven by a need to establish themselves as the head of the dominant society. This was the driving force behind all of the great civilizations throughout history. All leaders from the smallest tribal leader to the mightiest emperor all worked to make their society the dominant one in their time. They strove to control as much territory as possible and as many people as they could, for as long as possible. They did all of this to ensure that their name would go down in history as the greatest leader possible.
It wasn’t just empire building that was done for Glory. Often great feats of engineering were undertaken in an effort to make sure later generations did not forget. The great pyramids of Egypt are the best example. The pharaohs who had them built were working to ensure that they were not forgotten by history. When we look back on Egyptian history we often think of the great names such as Ramses, Tut, or Amenhotep. The reason we remember these leaders is not so much for what they did as leaders, but what they left behind: their tombs. It is true that from study we know that Amenhotep IV did make history on his own by attempting a religious revolution, but there again you find God, or in this case gods, as the motivating factor in his actions.
As time passed and more religions were being developed and strengthened beyond simple pagan tribalism. Out of the wide and varied litany of world religions Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and even Confucianism had risen to the top by the middle of the 4th century. They had begun to play a larger and larger role in the world around them. In Europe, Islam and Christianity battled for supremacy for centuries before Christianity finally won out. Church and government leaders for each side worked to make sure their religion was the dominant one for their time. While there were cases of tolerance, these cases were often, in the scope of history, rather brief.
The same pattern played out all over the world: one religion striving to overcome another until ultimately there would only be one left. We often see these conflicts as political or territorial, but the true motive behind them was often religion. The Crusades in Europe are a great example of the opposite of this being true. Religion was the cover for wars fought for political gain. In a time when the powers of Europe were struggling to establish themselves as independent and in some cases dominant of each other, the favor of the church played a major role. In efforts to gain this favor, the leaders of different European countries undertook military actions designed to gain the favor of the church and strengthen their own positions both at home and abroad. The later Crusades were driven more by the last of our great causes: gold and riches.
The desire for gold has motivated much of what man has done throughout history. Often this motivation is covered up with some other reason, which at the time looks very presentable as was the case in the later Crusades. No leader in history has ever taken power, defeating those around them, simply because they could. They did it for the gold. Those who strive to rise to power, even in our modern time, may say they are concerned for the common good of all, but in truth greed and a need for wealth is the underlying motivator. If this were not the case elected officials would not be given lavish salaries and extravagant benefits for doing what they declare their public duty for the good of all those they lead.
So while we often see Glory, God, or Gold as the cause of what has happened in history, when we look deeper into the events we are studying we find the truth is nothing more than greed. Gold, more than any other factor, has been a driving force behind what has taken place. This sad truth is not something we like to hear, but is something of which we should all be aware of when looking at the world around us. There are many good examples of missionary organizations that are working to better the world around them; however, when someone comes along saying they want to do something to help the people, look at their true motives. In many cases it is their own prosperity they have in mind.
Monday, April 15, 2013
I think we are doing a serious wrong when we say that societies turn to civilizations when they settle in one place and lose the sense of commonality with those around them, banding together with their own beliefs, customs, and in some cases languages. We feel this change occurs when people agree to live together in accordance with an understood and often written set of guidelines to govern their behavior and develop a surplus in staple goods so they can work to develop new technologies and new ideologies as well as establishing a means of defense to protect their luxuries the surplus allows.
With these as the guidelines most commonly accepted for what a society needs to be considered a civilization, we tend to ignore any groups that we, in essence, do not like because they fail to fit our cookie cutter world. Would any of us declare that the Hebrew people were not civilized? They lived in accordance with a written set of guidelines that governed behavior, working to develop surpluses in staple goods to allow for the development of specialists in many different areas of society. They stood apart from those around them in beliefs, dress, and governance and their leaders established plans for defense to protect their society. Yet for all of this we do not study the great Hebrew civilization of the Middle East simply because they did not, at any time in the history of this region, rule over vast territories and the people within them. Instead they lived in the same basic area from ancient times predating the great Mesopotamian Civilizations through our modern world.
We also discount the Hunter-Gatherer societies of ancient times. While they did not live in one fixed location, instead often travelling over a vast range that may or may not have overlaped with other groups, they did have distinct customs and beliefs often setting them apart from other groups. They worked for a common good making sure everyone and everything within their society was protected from outsiders. They also worked to build a surplus allowing for a small amount of specialization and a sense of security against future times. Again we do not call them civilizations mainly because they did not live in one fixed location.
With these as the guidelines most commonly accepted for what a society needs to be considered a civilization, we tend to ignore any groups that we, in essence, do not like because they fail to fit our cookie cutter world. Would any of us declare that the Hebrew people were not civilized? They lived in accordance with a written set of guidelines that governed behavior, working to develop surpluses in staple goods to allow for the development of specialists in many different areas of society. They stood apart from those around them in beliefs, dress, and governance and their leaders established plans for defense to protect their society. Yet for all of this we do not study the great Hebrew civilization of the Middle East simply because they did not, at any time in the history of this region, rule over vast territories and the people within them. Instead they lived in the same basic area from ancient times predating the great Mesopotamian Civilizations through our modern world.
We also discount the Hunter-Gatherer societies of ancient times. While they did not live in one fixed location, instead often travelling over a vast range that may or may not have overlaped with other groups, they did have distinct customs and beliefs often setting them apart from other groups. They worked for a common good making sure everyone and everything within their society was protected from outsiders. They also worked to build a surplus allowing for a small amount of specialization and a sense of security against future times. Again we do not call them civilizations mainly because they did not live in one fixed location.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
The argument that all history needs to be evaluated for authorial bias is quite valid. This bias leads us to ensure that certain facts are included in our account of events and that others are omitted. All writing, not just historical, is affected by the beliefs and opinions of the author. While we may critically evaluate the sources we use, we will still select sources that support and defend our pre-conceived ideas surrounding the events we study. By not taking the time to look at and understand these prejudices in our own thinking, we will not be able to evaluate the prejudices of the authors we study.
I think that the “Marwick 20% Rule” is a misrepresentation of the truth. The idea that 20 % of all written history is influenced by personal bias and outside pressure from society, politics, etc. is an understatement of the truth. I feel that 100% of recorded history is influenced by social and personal prejudice. No matter how much we strive for an unbiased accounting of events, everything we do, not just our writing, is influenced by personal opinion. Even works such as dictionaries of history, simple accountings of names, dates, etc. are guided by personal opinions of the authors. They chose what events get in and which ones are not worth mentioning. All dictionaries of the history of England will tell you that William the Conqueror landed in 1066. Very few will tell you that he set sail numerous times before making the successful crossing of the channel and that he did not land where he had hoped. Through critical examination of our sources to evaluate the competence of the authors we can learn what is influencing the authors and shaping what we read allowing us to fill in the gaps in the written accounts of the past.
Much of what is written about historical events focuses on who, what, when, and where of the past. By moving beyond this format into the how and why we can get a broader picture of events and an understanding of how they fit into the bigger picture. In truth it is the narrative histories that we enjoy and read most often. While historians fall back on diplomatic and social sources for hard facts, the story-telling narratives give us the how and why to support the recorded facts. To get the understanding we need requires two things; first, a study of motives among those whose works we study, and second, a look into our own motives for studying history. Until we fill in the blanks we can only ________________ history.
I think that the “Marwick 20% Rule” is a misrepresentation of the truth. The idea that 20 % of all written history is influenced by personal bias and outside pressure from society, politics, etc. is an understatement of the truth. I feel that 100% of recorded history is influenced by social and personal prejudice. No matter how much we strive for an unbiased accounting of events, everything we do, not just our writing, is influenced by personal opinion. Even works such as dictionaries of history, simple accountings of names, dates, etc. are guided by personal opinions of the authors. They chose what events get in and which ones are not worth mentioning. All dictionaries of the history of England will tell you that William the Conqueror landed in 1066. Very few will tell you that he set sail numerous times before making the successful crossing of the channel and that he did not land where he had hoped. Through critical examination of our sources to evaluate the competence of the authors we can learn what is influencing the authors and shaping what we read allowing us to fill in the gaps in the written accounts of the past.
Much of what is written about historical events focuses on who, what, when, and where of the past. By moving beyond this format into the how and why we can get a broader picture of events and an understanding of how they fit into the bigger picture. In truth it is the narrative histories that we enjoy and read most often. While historians fall back on diplomatic and social sources for hard facts, the story-telling narratives give us the how and why to support the recorded facts. To get the understanding we need requires two things; first, a study of motives among those whose works we study, and second, a look into our own motives for studying history. Until we fill in the blanks we can only ________________ history.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Tripartite Sources
Understanding the tripartite nature of written sources, the classifications of narrative, diplomatic, and social, and what these classifications entail is key in evaluating sources for their relevance in a given field of research. To understand that narrative sources are aimed at presenting the specific ideas, opinions, and facts chosen by the author to further their own goals helps researchers realize that narratives cannot be used to establish facts. Narratives are useful in understanding the society and culture in which they are written.
Knowing that diplomatic sources give evidence of, or create new legal situations helps researchers understand how governments worked. By knowing the particular styles and formats used by different governing bodies, historians can follow changes in these governments. Diplomatic sources are often very formal by nature with a great deal of attention given to the different parts of the document. For many years diplomatic sources were seen as the only pure source for historical research. While diplomatic sources offer greatly detailed accounts of how governments work, they lack the social aspects needed to fully understand why things happened.
The final leg of the tripartite, social sources, is based on records keeping. While at times social sources are less formal than narratives or diplomatic documents, they can still be very useful in learning about societies and cultures of the past; however, if studied as the only source in learning about the past, social documents can be very limited in their information.
To fully research a topic you need to find the blend of all three: narrative, diplomatic, and social sources. You have to have an accounting of how the government worked, who lived where and where they worked, and what they thought about the world around them. This knowledge can only be gained by blending all three types of sources, something that can only be done if the researcher understands the nature of these sources and how they relate.
Knowing that diplomatic sources give evidence of, or create new legal situations helps researchers understand how governments worked. By knowing the particular styles and formats used by different governing bodies, historians can follow changes in these governments. Diplomatic sources are often very formal by nature with a great deal of attention given to the different parts of the document. For many years diplomatic sources were seen as the only pure source for historical research. While diplomatic sources offer greatly detailed accounts of how governments work, they lack the social aspects needed to fully understand why things happened.
The final leg of the tripartite, social sources, is based on records keeping. While at times social sources are less formal than narratives or diplomatic documents, they can still be very useful in learning about societies and cultures of the past; however, if studied as the only source in learning about the past, social documents can be very limited in their information.
To fully research a topic you need to find the blend of all three: narrative, diplomatic, and social sources. You have to have an accounting of how the government worked, who lived where and where they worked, and what they thought about the world around them. This knowledge can only be gained by blending all three types of sources, something that can only be done if the researcher understands the nature of these sources and how they relate.
Review of the Historical Primer Website
1. Most Difficult Concept to Embrace
The most difficult concept for me in doing historical research is one of the very first steps, asking a good question. I have the problem of being interested in everything, so I want to know it all. To narrow a topic down to something that can be easily studied is very difficult for me. An example is my interest in the Glorious Revolution of 1688 in England. I am fascinated by this event not only because it in itself was amazing, but also because of its widespread impact on the world of the 17th century and its continued impact of the world today. However, when it comes to studying the events of 1688, I often find myself reading about Queen Anne or Charles I instead of James II and William and Mary. I am so captivated by the great people and amazing events that lead up and follow the actual revolution that I often find myself sidetracked. As a result, I need to work to focus my research through asking better questions, something with which the website offers a great deal of information and help with. I found the fill-in-the-blank sentence, “I am studying___________ because I want to know ____________ in order to help my readers understand______________.” Very helpful in developing a tighter focus and better question about the topics I enjoy.
I am studying the Glorious Revolution of 1688 because I want to know what actions of James II and the monarchy lead to his overthrow in order to help my readers understand the misuse of power by the Stuarts.
2. Easiest Concept to Embrace
The easiest concept presented on the website for me to understand was a combination of the use of maps, photographs/pictures, and landscape to study and understand history. I enjoy analyzing maps and photographs for their historical value. When you are studying an ancient civilization you can learn a great deal by looking at the maps of how cities and countries were laid out as well as pictures of different forms of art left behind. The same skills can be used to study more modern societies. One can look at a picture and see beyond a family on vacation to see examples of the world around them allowing one to better understand the society they were visiting. The same thing can be done with landscapes in situations where there are no maps or photographs. We can look at the land and see how it has been changed and how it could have affected the peoples who lived there in the past.
3. Influence on My Research
The website, in my opinion, was very helpful. Much of the material presented was aimed at the beginning researcher so while I already knew much of it, it did serve as a beneficial refresher. The designers of the website made it very user friendly and laid it out in accordance with how you would go about writing a historical research paper, so the flow of the information on the website matched what you would need as you did your own research. I think I will be using the website in the future for its sections on formulating a good question and effective searching for sources.
The most difficult concept for me in doing historical research is one of the very first steps, asking a good question. I have the problem of being interested in everything, so I want to know it all. To narrow a topic down to something that can be easily studied is very difficult for me. An example is my interest in the Glorious Revolution of 1688 in England. I am fascinated by this event not only because it in itself was amazing, but also because of its widespread impact on the world of the 17th century and its continued impact of the world today. However, when it comes to studying the events of 1688, I often find myself reading about Queen Anne or Charles I instead of James II and William and Mary. I am so captivated by the great people and amazing events that lead up and follow the actual revolution that I often find myself sidetracked. As a result, I need to work to focus my research through asking better questions, something with which the website offers a great deal of information and help with. I found the fill-in-the-blank sentence, “I am studying___________ because I want to know ____________ in order to help my readers understand______________.” Very helpful in developing a tighter focus and better question about the topics I enjoy.
I am studying the Glorious Revolution of 1688 because I want to know what actions of James II and the monarchy lead to his overthrow in order to help my readers understand the misuse of power by the Stuarts.
2. Easiest Concept to Embrace
The easiest concept presented on the website for me to understand was a combination of the use of maps, photographs/pictures, and landscape to study and understand history. I enjoy analyzing maps and photographs for their historical value. When you are studying an ancient civilization you can learn a great deal by looking at the maps of how cities and countries were laid out as well as pictures of different forms of art left behind. The same skills can be used to study more modern societies. One can look at a picture and see beyond a family on vacation to see examples of the world around them allowing one to better understand the society they were visiting. The same thing can be done with landscapes in situations where there are no maps or photographs. We can look at the land and see how it has been changed and how it could have affected the peoples who lived there in the past.
3. Influence on My Research
The website, in my opinion, was very helpful. Much of the material presented was aimed at the beginning researcher so while I already knew much of it, it did serve as a beneficial refresher. The designers of the website made it very user friendly and laid it out in accordance with how you would go about writing a historical research paper, so the flow of the information on the website matched what you would need as you did your own research. I think I will be using the website in the future for its sections on formulating a good question and effective searching for sources.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Why Study History
In the essay "Why Study History" Peter Stearns states, "History should be studied because it is essential to individuals and to society, and because it harbors beauty." Stearns then proceeds to offer a number of reasons why we should study history, for example: [it] helps us understand people and societies, [it] contributes to moral understanding, [it] is useful in the world of work, etc.
In George Orwell’s 1984, Winston Smith sums up why we study history when he writes, “I understand the How: I do not understand the Why.” 1
As someone with a great interest in both history and revolution, many of Stearns’ reasons for studying history resonated with me. Stearns first reason, history “helps us understand people and societies,” holds one of the key reasons I study history. When he states, “How can we evaluate war if the nation is at peace…” he strikes at the heart of why I study history. To understand the nations around us in peace, we need to understand the wars and conflicts that created the peace we see today. Later in his article he discusses history’s role in providing identity. Historical data gives us the knowledge we need to understand how countries and societies were formed and how they evolved into the modern world we know.
When you study a revolution, you need to understand the nation as it was before the war. To understand that you need to know how it was formed and in what ways it has changed since that forming. You need to be able to view evidence and events often presented in opposing manners. Stearns also discussed this towards the end of his article while listing the skills history students need. The ability to critically read conflicting interpretations of the same events is the most important skill for studying revolutions.
Overall I feel Stearns presented a great accounting of reasons people study history and what skills are needed to truly study and understand the past. He stresses the idea that history needs to be studied in a more engaging manner, that there needs to be a move beyond the lecture and note taking to a more scientific approach. I agree with his statement that if history is a science it should be taught as a lab to be more engaging and move beyond the simple memorization format that it has become in the American school system.
1.Orwell, George, 1984 (New York: New American Library of World Literature, Inc., 1962), 68.
In George Orwell’s 1984, Winston Smith sums up why we study history when he writes, “I understand the How: I do not understand the Why.” 1
As someone with a great interest in both history and revolution, many of Stearns’ reasons for studying history resonated with me. Stearns first reason, history “helps us understand people and societies,” holds one of the key reasons I study history. When he states, “How can we evaluate war if the nation is at peace…” he strikes at the heart of why I study history. To understand the nations around us in peace, we need to understand the wars and conflicts that created the peace we see today. Later in his article he discusses history’s role in providing identity. Historical data gives us the knowledge we need to understand how countries and societies were formed and how they evolved into the modern world we know.
When you study a revolution, you need to understand the nation as it was before the war. To understand that you need to know how it was formed and in what ways it has changed since that forming. You need to be able to view evidence and events often presented in opposing manners. Stearns also discussed this towards the end of his article while listing the skills history students need. The ability to critically read conflicting interpretations of the same events is the most important skill for studying revolutions.
Overall I feel Stearns presented a great accounting of reasons people study history and what skills are needed to truly study and understand the past. He stresses the idea that history needs to be studied in a more engaging manner, that there needs to be a move beyond the lecture and note taking to a more scientific approach. I agree with his statement that if history is a science it should be taught as a lab to be more engaging and move beyond the simple memorization format that it has become in the American school system.
1.Orwell, George, 1984 (New York: New American Library of World Literature, Inc., 1962), 68.
American Historical Association essay by William McNeill “Why Study History”.
"Memory is not something fixed and forever. As time passes, remembered personal experiences take on new meanings. A bitter disappointment may come to seem a blessing in disguise; a triumph may later turn sour, while something trivial may subsequently loom large-all because of what happens later on. Collective memory is quite the same. Historians are always at work reinterpreting the past, asking new questions, searching new sources and finding new meanings in old documents in order to bring the perspective of new knowledge and experience to bear on the task of understanding the past. This means, of course, that what we know and believe about history is always changing. In other words, our collective, codified memory alters with time just as personal memories do, and for the same reasons.”
I remember reading McNeil's Essay during my undergrad historical methods class and being struck by the same quote. I recall thinking about how often we are told, "These are the best days of your life" as children and teens and how we felt those who were telling us this were wrong. Now looking back through the rose colored glasses of nostalgia, those were the best days of our lives. We struggle with bills and family, work and home life, and wish for those easier times all the while the older generation is telling us, "These are the best days of our lives."
Dr Dan Dourghty, head of the LSSU History Dept where I received my BS, often said the greatest enemy of the historian is memory; so much of history relies on what we choose to remember. He would talk about the great and happy memories he had as a child growing up in Ireland during WWII and how his memories were a stark contrast to the poverty and terror the war really brought to his homeland. So while he lived through and experienced firsthand WWII in Ireland, he could not give a full picture of what life was like because of what he chose to remember.
"Memory is not something fixed and forever. As time passes, remembered personal experiences take on new meanings. A bitter disappointment may come to seem a blessing in disguise; a triumph may later turn sour, while something trivial may subsequently loom large-all because of what happens later on. Collective memory is quite the same. Historians are always at work reinterpreting the past, asking new questions, searching new sources and finding new meanings in old documents in order to bring the perspective of new knowledge and experience to bear on the task of understanding the past. This means, of course, that what we know and believe about history is always changing. In other words, our collective, codified memory alters with time just as personal memories do, and for the same reasons.”
I remember reading McNeil's Essay during my undergrad historical methods class and being struck by the same quote. I recall thinking about how often we are told, "These are the best days of your life" as children and teens and how we felt those who were telling us this were wrong. Now looking back through the rose colored glasses of nostalgia, those were the best days of our lives. We struggle with bills and family, work and home life, and wish for those easier times all the while the older generation is telling us, "These are the best days of our lives."
Dr Dan Dourghty, head of the LSSU History Dept where I received my BS, often said the greatest enemy of the historian is memory; so much of history relies on what we choose to remember. He would talk about the great and happy memories he had as a child growing up in Ireland during WWII and how his memories were a stark contrast to the poverty and terror the war really brought to his homeland. So while he lived through and experienced firsthand WWII in Ireland, he could not give a full picture of what life was like because of what he chose to remember.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Topics of Interest
For the first week of class we were required to type up a small statement on a topic of research that interested us and then list five sources from AMPU's online library that could be used in researching that topic. Anyone who has known me for any length of time will tell you that there is nothing like a good revolution to get me going. It is often a toss up as to whether I am a historian or a revlutionary, but I like to see myself as a revolutionary historian.
When I say I am interested in revolutionary history, I truly mean revolutionary with a small r, it is not a typo. I enjoy the study of all revolutions, not so much the actual fighting and war often associated, but the causes of the revolution in the first place as well as the effects they have on society following the upheaval. To look at a revolution from an economic or religious point of view and try to determine what exactly was the trigger, to study the changes in society leading up to the revolution helps give more insight than simply reading about who fought who where and who won in the end. Then this insight can be used to gage the health and well-being of the world around us in an effort to predict and, to a certain degree, control revolutions in today’s society.
There was also a bit of a disscussion going on about the nature of historical texts, how they could be boring and difficult to read. First, as a former history teacher, I agree, history texts, as in text books, are boring beyond all belief, but I disagree in the statement made that students are not interested in history. Over the years I have had several high school students, often co-workers, tell me that history is one of their favorite subjects, if only it were presented better in school. Second and this is where it gets tricky, I disagree, old history texts are great to read and I love them. I find too much of modern history is defined by politics, and while I know that politics influenced historians of the past, they still wrote clear and concise accounts of events that often happened within a couple generations of their lifetime. In regards to the language they wrote in, how easy would it be for Gibbons to read Max Hastings’ account of the Falklands War.
I will gladly admit however, that like all historians, I am biased. As an Ancient and Classical History Major, I enjoy nothing more than spending half my day having to look up Latin or Greek phrases that the historians of the day used at random, or trying to wrap my head around an account of a Viking raid written in Old English.
When I say I am interested in revolutionary history, I truly mean revolutionary with a small r, it is not a typo. I enjoy the study of all revolutions, not so much the actual fighting and war often associated, but the causes of the revolution in the first place as well as the effects they have on society following the upheaval. To look at a revolution from an economic or religious point of view and try to determine what exactly was the trigger, to study the changes in society leading up to the revolution helps give more insight than simply reading about who fought who where and who won in the end. Then this insight can be used to gage the health and well-being of the world around us in an effort to predict and, to a certain degree, control revolutions in today’s society.
There was also a bit of a disscussion going on about the nature of historical texts, how they could be boring and difficult to read. First, as a former history teacher, I agree, history texts, as in text books, are boring beyond all belief, but I disagree in the statement made that students are not interested in history. Over the years I have had several high school students, often co-workers, tell me that history is one of their favorite subjects, if only it were presented better in school. Second and this is where it gets tricky, I disagree, old history texts are great to read and I love them. I find too much of modern history is defined by politics, and while I know that politics influenced historians of the past, they still wrote clear and concise accounts of events that often happened within a couple generations of their lifetime. In regards to the language they wrote in, how easy would it be for Gibbons to read Max Hastings’ account of the Falklands War.
I will gladly admit however, that like all historians, I am biased. As an Ancient and Classical History Major, I enjoy nothing more than spending half my day having to look up Latin or Greek phrases that the historians of the day used at random, or trying to wrap my head around an account of a Viking raid written in Old English.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
March Madness
While I realize that this is just a rant, and nothing will ever come of it, I have to put it out there, March Madness is all wrong. Don't get me wrong here, I like and follow college basketball, nit the NBA. I think the NBA is a bunch of over-paid whiners and drama queens who never outgrew middle school.
I think the NCAA brackets for the tourney are a bit "fixed" and need fixed. There are 32 Div I conferences. I think to truly fix the problems with March Madness every Conf Champ should get a spot, there is about half of your teams. Next anyone who won a regular season championship that isn't already there gets a spot. After that any spots left are filled lottery style, everyone else gets their names put in a hat and somebody, possibly the President of the United States, picks names to fill in the rest of the bracket.
Everyone should then be seated based on their overall season record, best records get the higher ranks. So in truth, you could be one of the lottery teams and if your record is good enough you could be a #1 ranked team.
No more who you played and how much money you bring to the table, it is all based on how well you play.
I think the NCAA brackets for the tourney are a bit "fixed" and need fixed. There are 32 Div I conferences. I think to truly fix the problems with March Madness every Conf Champ should get a spot, there is about half of your teams. Next anyone who won a regular season championship that isn't already there gets a spot. After that any spots left are filled lottery style, everyone else gets their names put in a hat and somebody, possibly the President of the United States, picks names to fill in the rest of the bracket.
Everyone should then be seated based on their overall season record, best records get the higher ranks. So in truth, you could be one of the lottery teams and if your record is good enough you could be a #1 ranked team.
No more who you played and how much money you bring to the table, it is all based on how well you play.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Moving On
It has been over a year since my last post here, not something I am very proud of, but I am back and will attempt to be a more frequent visitor to my own blog. As the title says, I am moving on, in more ways than one.
I have set a few goals for this year, the first of which it to post more frequently. I also want to improve my physical health by dropping 25 lbs and taking 5 minutes off of my 5K time. I am going to base the running time on this years Chamber Chase in contrast to last years race.
I am also, after a 10 yr delay, returning to school. I will be starting my MA in Ancient and Classical History at American Public University in April. So if nothing else you will be reading a bunch of my school posts and papers.
I will admit I am a bit nervous about returning to school, but I am also better able to deal with the anxiety. In 1997 I officially returned to school after 5 yrs off while I was in the Army. I thought the difference in age and the time I had spent away from school would make it difficult for me to keep up with a younger generation. I was wrong, where they had youth and a better understanding of the school setting, I had age and guile. I did just fine. Here I am 10 yrs later looking at much the same situation. At 38 yr old I have to learn to navigate an online classroom and electronic library. But I am ready. I haven't had my brain turned off for the last decade, I have continued to read and study, just at my pace and on topics I picked. Now it is time to take the knowledge and experience I have and show it off a bit to a younger generation.
Hopefully they can keep up.
I have set a few goals for this year, the first of which it to post more frequently. I also want to improve my physical health by dropping 25 lbs and taking 5 minutes off of my 5K time. I am going to base the running time on this years Chamber Chase in contrast to last years race.
I am also, after a 10 yr delay, returning to school. I will be starting my MA in Ancient and Classical History at American Public University in April. So if nothing else you will be reading a bunch of my school posts and papers.
I will admit I am a bit nervous about returning to school, but I am also better able to deal with the anxiety. In 1997 I officially returned to school after 5 yrs off while I was in the Army. I thought the difference in age and the time I had spent away from school would make it difficult for me to keep up with a younger generation. I was wrong, where they had youth and a better understanding of the school setting, I had age and guile. I did just fine. Here I am 10 yrs later looking at much the same situation. At 38 yr old I have to learn to navigate an online classroom and electronic library. But I am ready. I haven't had my brain turned off for the last decade, I have continued to read and study, just at my pace and on topics I picked. Now it is time to take the knowledge and experience I have and show it off a bit to a younger generation.
Hopefully they can keep up.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
"Someone needs to man up..."
Ain't that the truth brother. For those who haven't heard, there is a very interesting story on Yahoo! News today about Andre Hall, a Pittsburgh resident who came home from vacation to find that the city had demolished his house. Now for a bit of back story on this, Hall had bought the house as a condemned property in November and had 6 month to make it livable. He had installed new windows and had a bunch of drywall stacked for installation after the holidays. The plan was for him, his girlfriend and her five kids to move into the house within three weeks. Now they will all continue to live in his one-bedroom apartment. His thoughts on the matter, "Someone needs to man up and take responsibility for this."
I couldn't agree more, and while many may feel the contractor who did the demolition should be to blame, I feel the city of Pittsburgh is at fault. They should have made sure the demolition orders were clear, and they should have had someone on site before the first swipe was taken at the building. Instead they, through their negligence, allowed this man's home be destroyed, postponing and possibly ending his shot at the "American Dream" of owning a home. But to call the actions of the City of Pittsburgh negligent is to light, I feel this is a case of Criminal Negligence as it directly resulted in the loss of Andre Hall's house and the hours and money he had put into making it livable. Instead of having a live and vibrant neighborhood, the City of Pittsburgh has an empty lot.
There should be some form of restitution paid for this, and I can think of nothing better that the City of Pittsburgh replacing the house they destroyed. By that I do not mean they should give Hall back the money he paid on the house plus what he had invested into rebuilding. I mean they should build, to Hall's specifications, a new 1600 sq foot house. Not just because they destroyed his, but because in destroying this house they have not only taken away Hall's dream of home ownership, they have also taken the dream of a better life from Hall, his girlfriend and her five children, who must continue to live in his ONE BEDROOM apartment.
The worst part of this is that in reading the story, Yahoo! reports that this is not the first time something like this has happened in recent history. Apparently it is quite common. Every time I read or hear a news story like this it saddens me for two reasons. First is that as a homeowner and someone who has worked very hard for all I have, I know what it is like to have that sense of pride and dignity that comes from belonging, and I can;t imagine what it would be like to have that taken away.
The second reason I am saddened is every time I read or hear a story like this I am concerned for the safety and welfare of the rest of the population. If the people we chose to lead, govern, and protect us are this careless, are we safe. The City of Pittsburgh Solicitor's Office is investigating the incident, what's to investigate. Last week the house was there, this week it isn't. End of investigation, "man up" and build the poor guy a new house already.
I couldn't agree more, and while many may feel the contractor who did the demolition should be to blame, I feel the city of Pittsburgh is at fault. They should have made sure the demolition orders were clear, and they should have had someone on site before the first swipe was taken at the building. Instead they, through their negligence, allowed this man's home be destroyed, postponing and possibly ending his shot at the "American Dream" of owning a home. But to call the actions of the City of Pittsburgh negligent is to light, I feel this is a case of Criminal Negligence as it directly resulted in the loss of Andre Hall's house and the hours and money he had put into making it livable. Instead of having a live and vibrant neighborhood, the City of Pittsburgh has an empty lot.
There should be some form of restitution paid for this, and I can think of nothing better that the City of Pittsburgh replacing the house they destroyed. By that I do not mean they should give Hall back the money he paid on the house plus what he had invested into rebuilding. I mean they should build, to Hall's specifications, a new 1600 sq foot house. Not just because they destroyed his, but because in destroying this house they have not only taken away Hall's dream of home ownership, they have also taken the dream of a better life from Hall, his girlfriend and her five children, who must continue to live in his ONE BEDROOM apartment.
The worst part of this is that in reading the story, Yahoo! reports that this is not the first time something like this has happened in recent history. Apparently it is quite common. Every time I read or hear a news story like this it saddens me for two reasons. First is that as a homeowner and someone who has worked very hard for all I have, I know what it is like to have that sense of pride and dignity that comes from belonging, and I can;t imagine what it would be like to have that taken away.
The second reason I am saddened is every time I read or hear a story like this I am concerned for the safety and welfare of the rest of the population. If the people we chose to lead, govern, and protect us are this careless, are we safe. The City of Pittsburgh Solicitor's Office is investigating the incident, what's to investigate. Last week the house was there, this week it isn't. End of investigation, "man up" and build the poor guy a new house already.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
To Quiet Too Long
I almost made it, but in the end I wasn't able to sit by any longer. Some quack in Florida wants to burn a Quran, and We the People, here in the Land of the Free, were suppose to be outraged.
Why?
Was it because this man was using the destruction of a religious book to make a political statement, or was it because his statement was of an anti-Muslim nature?
Either way, we may not like what he planned on doing, but we must stand up and support his actions, least we all take part in a greater tyranny, the infringement of this man's right to the freedom of symbolic speech. We have stood up for the right of people around the world to burn the American Flag in protest to American actions and ideals. We allow the wearing of the American flag on clothing, regardless where and how it is worn, but when a person steps forward and announces his plan to burn the Quran in protest of plans to build a Mosque in New York City.
I personally think, as I stated earlier, that this guy is a Quack, with a capital Q. Yet I can not in good conscience stand by while he is denied his right to free speech. The US Legal System has countless times ruled on the validity of symbolic speech (ie Tinker v Des Moines, US v O'Brien, Texas v Johnson).
If we can burn a flag to protest our governments actions, and we can burn any book we want, no matter how much it makes is look like a Nazi, then this man has every right to burn the symbol of the Muslim people, and anyone who thinks otherwise is sadly wrong.
Remember, it may not be the right thing, but is the free thing.
Why?
Was it because this man was using the destruction of a religious book to make a political statement, or was it because his statement was of an anti-Muslim nature?
Either way, we may not like what he planned on doing, but we must stand up and support his actions, least we all take part in a greater tyranny, the infringement of this man's right to the freedom of symbolic speech. We have stood up for the right of people around the world to burn the American Flag in protest to American actions and ideals. We allow the wearing of the American flag on clothing, regardless where and how it is worn, but when a person steps forward and announces his plan to burn the Quran in protest of plans to build a Mosque in New York City.
I personally think, as I stated earlier, that this guy is a Quack, with a capital Q. Yet I can not in good conscience stand by while he is denied his right to free speech. The US Legal System has countless times ruled on the validity of symbolic speech (ie Tinker v Des Moines, US v O'Brien, Texas v Johnson).
If we can burn a flag to protest our governments actions, and we can burn any book we want, no matter how much it makes is look like a Nazi, then this man has every right to burn the symbol of the Muslim people, and anyone who thinks otherwise is sadly wrong.
Remember, it may not be the right thing, but is the free thing.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
WW I Memorial
For those who haven't read the recent news, the last surviving US WW I Veteran, Mr Frank Buckles, is part of a group lobbying Washington DC to have a WWI Memorial erected on the National Mall. While there is a monument tot hose who served and died in WW I, the Liberty Memorial, it is located in Kansas City Missouri. Just last year the US Senate declared the Museum at the Liberty Memorial the official national museum to honor WW I.
Now here is my personal thoughts on this matter. While there are memorials to WW II, Korea, and Vietnam on the National Mall, there is not one for WW I. Why not have one for WW I? And then there is the other issue at play here; the last surviving US WW I Veteran has ask for a Memorial to his comrades-in-arms and we need to have Senate Hearing to decide the issue.
Just build the thing already. After what this man gave to his country in not just one, but two world wars (he was taken as a prisoner of war by the Japanese in WW II and held for three years), there should only be two questions, what do you want and where do you want it?
As a veteran myself, and someone who has great respect for those who came before me, I feel a deep sense of sadness and, at the same time outrage that this is what we must go through to honor the heroes of our country. What a sad commentary on the state of our nation, when someone as distinguished as Mr Buckles must be paraded before the nation in such a fashion to simply pay respect to those who died to preserve not only our freedom, but the freedom of those around the world.
Now here is my personal thoughts on this matter. While there are memorials to WW II, Korea, and Vietnam on the National Mall, there is not one for WW I. Why not have one for WW I? And then there is the other issue at play here; the last surviving US WW I Veteran has ask for a Memorial to his comrades-in-arms and we need to have Senate Hearing to decide the issue.
Just build the thing already. After what this man gave to his country in not just one, but two world wars (he was taken as a prisoner of war by the Japanese in WW II and held for three years), there should only be two questions, what do you want and where do you want it?
As a veteran myself, and someone who has great respect for those who came before me, I feel a deep sense of sadness and, at the same time outrage that this is what we must go through to honor the heroes of our country. What a sad commentary on the state of our nation, when someone as distinguished as Mr Buckles must be paraded before the nation in such a fashion to simply pay respect to those who died to preserve not only our freedom, but the freedom of those around the world.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Dali Who?
While I understand the important role that China plays in the US Economic picture, especially in light of our current economic recession, I feel we place entirely too much importance on the issue. We worry entirely too much on what the Chinese people and more directly their government thinks of us. As a world superpower, dare I say the last true world superpower, we need to stand strong and boldly hold to our long established policies. So by now I am sure you are wondering where I am going with this, so let me explain.
Our President, and I call him that because whether we like him or not Barak Obama is our President. Our President chose to postpone his meeting with the Dali Lama, one of the worlds most respected religious leaders and advocate for peace, until after the President has met with the Chinese President in Beijing in November. While this meeting is a great step in the right direction for the US to take is strengthening our relationship with China, it should not affect the meeting with the Dali Lama. By postponing the meeting, President Obama has told China the he holds them in a higher regard then he does the people of Tibet, a message that is in direct contrast to the long-standing view the world has had of the US-Tibetan friendship.
We as a nation have long held to the ideal of independence to all who seek it, a policy that goes back to the very founding of our nation. Every war the US has been involved in has been to help secure the independence of a people from oppressors seeking to stifle their independence. The only exception to this is the war on terrorism in the Middle East. And even there we fought to free the people from oppressive leaders. Yet we now have a President and Administration that feels it should value the Chinese dollar more than Tibetan independence.
How can we claim to be the democratic leaders of the world, while we turn our backs on those who seek the very freedoms we hold so dear yet take for granted so often.
Our President, and I call him that because whether we like him or not Barak Obama is our President. Our President chose to postpone his meeting with the Dali Lama, one of the worlds most respected religious leaders and advocate for peace, until after the President has met with the Chinese President in Beijing in November. While this meeting is a great step in the right direction for the US to take is strengthening our relationship with China, it should not affect the meeting with the Dali Lama. By postponing the meeting, President Obama has told China the he holds them in a higher regard then he does the people of Tibet, a message that is in direct contrast to the long-standing view the world has had of the US-Tibetan friendship.
We as a nation have long held to the ideal of independence to all who seek it, a policy that goes back to the very founding of our nation. Every war the US has been involved in has been to help secure the independence of a people from oppressors seeking to stifle their independence. The only exception to this is the war on terrorism in the Middle East. And even there we fought to free the people from oppressive leaders. Yet we now have a President and Administration that feels it should value the Chinese dollar more than Tibetan independence.
How can we claim to be the democratic leaders of the world, while we turn our backs on those who seek the very freedoms we hold so dear yet take for granted so often.
Friday, September 4, 2009
Scottish Law
I would like to begin by pointing out that when people travel to foreign countries they are expected to follow the laws of that country. Here in the US we hold our foreign visitors to our laws just as we are held to the laws of their country when we travel there. With this established, I would like to next point out that in the US legal system people imprisoned for most crimes are eligible to receive parole and early release for things such as good behavior. For that matter there is a special group of people who deal with these cases.
Now to the issue at hand. Under Scottish law if you are terminally ill you can receive a compassionate release from prison. This law, very much like our own parole system, has recently taken center stage on the world scene. The Scots recently gave a compassionate release to Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the infamous Lockerbie Bomber.
While there are rumors that the release of al-Megrahi was connected to threats by the Libyan government to freeze British assets in it's oil rich country, the facts remain. Under Scottish Law al-Megrahi, recently diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer, is eligible for compassionate release from prison. His release did not come until doctors declared that he has less then three months to live, a diagnosis that was confirmed by several physicians.
Much of the anger being expressed here in the US and around the world is at the fact that a know terrorist, sentenced to life in prison, has been releases and that he now poses a threat to the rest of the world. If al-Megrahi is to be any real threat to the world it is as an example. How long before other countries are pressured to strike deals with terrorist nations to protect financial interests.
For their sake I am hoping that the rumors of this release having anything to do with a $900 million development deal between BP and the Libyan government. BP and the rest of the world needs to stop and realise something, they need to realise that there are several other nations around the world with the same resources that would gladly have their business. Libya is not the only country in the world with oil and natural gas resources. I'm sure any one of the under developed countries of the world such as Venezuela or even Britain's powerful neighbor to the East Russia would gladly accept offers to help their countries failing economies and industries.
But the core problem as I see it is that we here in the US have for to long held to the idea that we know what is best for the world. This pompous attitude would be bad enough alone, but you often here people us rhetoric such as, "We are the last superpower so the world should do what we want."
We can not use our position as a superpower to dictate laws to sovereign nations, we must use our position to make sure that financial and political blackmail is not a tool used by other nations to get what they want. If the Scottish government was coerced into this release, the terrorist win they greatest victory, they managed to get another country to do their will, and divided the rest of the world at the same time.
Remember, united we stand, divided we fall.
Charlie
Now to the issue at hand. Under Scottish law if you are terminally ill you can receive a compassionate release from prison. This law, very much like our own parole system, has recently taken center stage on the world scene. The Scots recently gave a compassionate release to Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the infamous Lockerbie Bomber.
While there are rumors that the release of al-Megrahi was connected to threats by the Libyan government to freeze British assets in it's oil rich country, the facts remain. Under Scottish Law al-Megrahi, recently diagnosed with terminal prostate cancer, is eligible for compassionate release from prison. His release did not come until doctors declared that he has less then three months to live, a diagnosis that was confirmed by several physicians.
Much of the anger being expressed here in the US and around the world is at the fact that a know terrorist, sentenced to life in prison, has been releases and that he now poses a threat to the rest of the world. If al-Megrahi is to be any real threat to the world it is as an example. How long before other countries are pressured to strike deals with terrorist nations to protect financial interests.
For their sake I am hoping that the rumors of this release having anything to do with a $900 million development deal between BP and the Libyan government. BP and the rest of the world needs to stop and realise something, they need to realise that there are several other nations around the world with the same resources that would gladly have their business. Libya is not the only country in the world with oil and natural gas resources. I'm sure any one of the under developed countries of the world such as Venezuela or even Britain's powerful neighbor to the East Russia would gladly accept offers to help their countries failing economies and industries.
But the core problem as I see it is that we here in the US have for to long held to the idea that we know what is best for the world. This pompous attitude would be bad enough alone, but you often here people us rhetoric such as, "We are the last superpower so the world should do what we want."
We can not use our position as a superpower to dictate laws to sovereign nations, we must use our position to make sure that financial and political blackmail is not a tool used by other nations to get what they want. If the Scottish government was coerced into this release, the terrorist win they greatest victory, they managed to get another country to do their will, and divided the rest of the world at the same time.
Remember, united we stand, divided we fall.
Charlie
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Welcome
Welcome to Veritas Vox Populi, for those of you who are a little rusty with your Latin that means get a dictionary and figure it out for yourself. Not everything in life is handed to you on a platter, some of it you have to work for yourself. If you haven't guessed by now, I intend to call 'em like I see 'em, and if you don't like that I would suggest you move on to somewhere a little more politcally correct.
For those still reading, I am a 35 yr old graduate of Lake Superior State University with a BS in History and Minors in English and Secondary Education. No this does not make me a know-it-all teacher, it makes me someone who has some idea of where society and civilization has came from and I realise where it is headed. I tried my hand at teaching and decided that, while I liked what I did and the kids I worked with, I couldn't stand parents or the rampent nepotism that infects our American educational systems. If you feel the "good 'ole boy" system of hiring and promoting is limited to the business world all you need to do is step through the doors of your local school and look around to see how many of those working there are related to another employee.
I am also a published author. I have written articles on the right to revolt and the true definition of evil. I feel that if you are unhappy with those who are in power over you, you have the right to stand up and say, "No more!"
This does not mean I am calling for and armed march on a capital anywhere in the US. It means that when we have our organized revolt, ie elections, don't vote for the same moran time after time. And if you decide to vote for the same idiots, sit down and shut up, you are more a part of the problem than you are the solution.
Much of what you read here will be me commenting on the news from around the world, as well as on occassion comments on events and activites here in my own home town. Nobody is safe, and no topic is taboo. I invite comment and look forward to hearing your ideas on what I have to say. Just be warned, if you comment like a moran, you could very well be the next topic I discuss.
Charlie
For those still reading, I am a 35 yr old graduate of Lake Superior State University with a BS in History and Minors in English and Secondary Education. No this does not make me a know-it-all teacher, it makes me someone who has some idea of where society and civilization has came from and I realise where it is headed. I tried my hand at teaching and decided that, while I liked what I did and the kids I worked with, I couldn't stand parents or the rampent nepotism that infects our American educational systems. If you feel the "good 'ole boy" system of hiring and promoting is limited to the business world all you need to do is step through the doors of your local school and look around to see how many of those working there are related to another employee.
I am also a published author. I have written articles on the right to revolt and the true definition of evil. I feel that if you are unhappy with those who are in power over you, you have the right to stand up and say, "No more!"
This does not mean I am calling for and armed march on a capital anywhere in the US. It means that when we have our organized revolt, ie elections, don't vote for the same moran time after time. And if you decide to vote for the same idiots, sit down and shut up, you are more a part of the problem than you are the solution.
Much of what you read here will be me commenting on the news from around the world, as well as on occassion comments on events and activites here in my own home town. Nobody is safe, and no topic is taboo. I invite comment and look forward to hearing your ideas on what I have to say. Just be warned, if you comment like a moran, you could very well be the next topic I discuss.
Charlie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
