Categories
Uncategorized

The Cockroaches’ Nemesis

 Nothing like turning on lights to see the cockroaches scatter. That’s what Andrew Breitbart did in his relatively short 43 years. His exposure of the shenanigans of public officials and publicly funded organizations embodied the observation of paleo-progressive Louis Brandeis’ observation that sunlight is the best disinfectant. Breitbart took to heart that “the debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.” New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). In recent years he was instrumental in the extinction of ACORN, the resignation of Congressman Anthony Weiner, the shakeup of National Public Radio’s management, and the firing of Agriculture Department Georgia director Shirley Sherrod. He was an outspoken advocate for inclusion of gays and lesbians in libertarian-conservative politics with the organization GOProud. Not a bad resume for such a short life. I would wish that Breitbart rest in peace, but he would doubtless be bored.

Categories
Uncategorized

Texas Independence Day

At a time when men and women were besieged at the Alamo by the self-styled “Napoleon of the West,” the Texas Declaration of Independence was signed at Washington-on-the-Brazos.
The Alamo fell a few days later, but the world was stunned as Sam Houston’s army defeated the dictator Santa Anna less than two months later.
Houston, who coincidentally had been born on the same day of the month the Declaration was signed, later served as president of Texas and as governor when it became a state. On his statue in Huntsville, which can be seen for miles on IH45 these words can be found:
“Govern wisely, and as little as possible.” We still try to do that here, unlike most parts of the world.
Happy Birthday to Texas and to Sam Houston!
Categories
Uncategorized

The First Queen – Sex in History

“Good, good Louis; if I’d managed sons for him instead of all those little girls, I’d still be stuck with being Queen of France and we should not have known each other. Such, my angels, is the role of sex in history.”
    – Queen Eleanor in James Goldman’s drama The Lion in Winter.
It is a matter of speculation whether the real Eleanor of Aquitaine ever uttered these words – if she did, they would have been in French – but they succinctly state a historical truth.
In this year of Queen Elizabeth’s Diamond Jubilee, it seems a fitting exercise to look at the other reigning Queens of England and Great Britain. I say reigning queens, because, as a matter of form the wife of every king is a queen, called “queen consort,” which is a title entirely derivative. So these essays concern those women who were queen in their own right. There have been six, seven, or eight, depending on whether the listing historian chooses to recognize one two of them.

The first and most questionable Queen regnant was Matilda (or Maud, in the old English form) in the 12th Century. Matilda was the granddaughter of William the Conqueror and the only surviving legitimate child of the first King Henry, whose son William died when the White Ship sank in the English Channel in 1120. Matilda had been married at an early age to the Holy Roman Emperor Henry V, thus receiving the appellation of Empress. After the emperor’s death, she married to Geoffrey of Anjou in an effort to form a political alliance between England and the French Angevin county. King Henry intended Matilda to succeed him on the English throne, but when he died in 1135, the barons refused to accept her as queen and caused her cousin Stephen of Blois to be crowned.
In those days, it was not surprising that the English barons, who were mostly Normans rather than Anglo-Saxons, would refuse to accept a woman. Our essayist of the American Revolution Thomas Paine disdained King George III, and all hereditary monarchs, as no more than descendants of the chief ruffian of a restless gang. In the 12th Century, and for some time after that, kings were primarily military leaders, whose most desired attribute in the days of hand-to-hand combat was physical strength. As cunning and able as a woman might be, as Matilda and at least one of her successor queens turned out to be, she could stand little chance in battle with men. Thus, the barons had no confidence in her ability to lead an army and be an effective monarch. Nevertheless, Matilda, supported by her illegitimate half-brother Robert of Gloucester, and others sought for the next 18 years to overthrow Stephen by military force. This period is known to historians as the Anarchy, because it was not often clear who was in charge throughout England. In fact, in 1141, Matilda succeed in capturing Stephen and entered London hoping to be crowned. The Londoners, however, managed to expel her, and, Stephen’s supporters, having captured Robert, agreed to exchange him for the King. Stephen then gained the upper hand and besieged Matilda at Oxford, where, according to some accounts she managed to escape by fleeing across the snow wearing a white cape.
Even though he prevented Matilda from being crowned and achieving any semblance of power in England, Stephen was never able to consolidate his own. His only son Eustace was killed in one of the battles, and he finally was persuaded to make peace with Matilda with the Treaty of Wallingford in 1153. This treaty allowed Stephen to remain king until his death at which time her son Henry Plantagenet would have the crown, making her daughter-in-law, Eleanor of Aquitaine queen consort. That occurred the next year. After Henry II took the throne, Matilda returned to Rouen in Normandy to preside over the duchy there. She died in 1164 and her remains today lie in Rouen Cathedral on the River Seine in Normandy.

The significance for us in America nearly 900 years later might not be readily apparent, but it is there. The English colonies in North American were established nearly a century after those of Spain in Central and South America. The character of those colonies was probably quite different than it would have been if founded earlier. For one thing, they were all colonized by private persons, and generally left alone by the English, and later British, government, unlike the government sponsored and controlled colonies of Spain. Many historians believe that delay was because of the religious turmoil in Britain that Spain did not experience. That sectarian strife was in turn the result of King Henry VIII’s break with Rome over his wish to divorce his consort Catherine of Aragon because he had been unsuccessful in fathering a male heir with her. The succession to the throne had been through the senior male line, but it remained unclear if that line failed. Henry’s anxiety over not having a male heir was due to his knowledge that succession crises always had brought about civil war, the most destructive of which had been the Anarchy of Matilda’s time – well remembered, even after four centuries. One of the curious connections history is so full of.
Moreover, once the war of the American Revolution was won, it was not clear what would replace the British. Few nations in the world were republics, and democracy, in the sense of the general populace choosing their leaders, was almost universally scorned. Hereditary monarchy was the rule, even if some of those in Europe at the time had limitations on regal power. George Washington was seriously proposed to be the new king of the former colonies. The Founders, fortunately, knew their history. They certainly concurred with Thomas Paine, who pointed out that, far from achieving stability, a hereditary monarchy fostered it when the uncertainty of succession arose, which it was bound to. The Anarchy of Matilda’s time is Exhibit A to Paine’s thesis.
For more on Matilda, see:
Chibnall, Marjorie, The Empress Matilda: Queen Consort, Queen Mother, and Lady of the English (1992); ISBN 0631157379; Library of Congress Call No. DA198.6 .C48 1992

Categories
Uncategorized

Are We All Homer Simpson?

Walter Russell Mead writes in The American Interest:

“I can still remember the feeling I had back in the early eighties when I first began to see how low wage manufacturing in the developing world plus the globalization of finance were going to rip up the social fabric I identified with progress and stability. I see many people, some on the left, some in the center, going through that kind of moment today. My first reaction, and that of many people today, was to cling tighter to the blue model as I sensed its fragility and vulnerability. But over time I’ve come to see this breakdown and the transition to something new as the next stage in the story of social and human progress, rather that as some kind of horrible return to savagery.

“One of the realizations that helped me accept the need to move on was the corrosive effect of one of blue model America’s most unattractive features: the emphasis on consumption rather than production as the defining characteristic of the good life. As I reflected on the corrosive consequences of this shift, and also began to see that a post-blue society might reverse this priority, I began to think more positively about what could come next. Frank Fukuyama wrote about the appearance of Nietzsche’s Last Man at the end of history; that Last Man is more or less Homer Simpson come to life, a mostly passive, consumption-focused individual whose life is all episode with no plot.”

See Mead’s rather lengthy essay at this link.

Categories
Uncategorized

A Professor’s Predictions

At a meeting I attended last night, SMU political science professor Cal Jillson presented some interesting projections for this year’s general election. Jillson bases his prediction on historical observations and current trends as evidenced by polling. Historical data are open to interpretation and polling results are always question specific, and I am not privy to the actual polls he relies on. Therefore, I express no opinion on Jillson’s accuracy predictions other than he is an experienced academician in his field. I note that his colleague Dennis Simon was uncannily accurate in his prediction of the 2010 House of Representatives turnover ten months in advance.
Jillson stated his research and analysis suggests:
 The Texas House will lose a few Republicans but the GOP will still control.

 The Texas Senate will remain unchanged in its composition; i.e., GOP will control.
 Republican David Dewhurst will replace Kay Bailey Hutchison in the U. S. Senate.
 The U. S. House will have fewer Republicans, but they will retain control.
 The U.S. Senate will gain a GOP majority, but not a super-majority.
 Barack Obama will be re-elected, defeating Mitt Romney.

Jillson further dates these predictions are based on current trends. A dip in the economy would put Obama’s re-election in serious jeopardy.
As he put it, though, if you want to win a bet from your brother-in-law. Go with the above. At the moment, I have to agree. I would add that a serious international crisis could help or hurt Obama, depending on how he handled it. Gasoline prices that go too high will hurt the President’s chances. Adjusted for inflation, they are about what they were in the mid-1960s, but they are the most visible price for most people.
As for the prospects for the next four years, who knows. One possibility is that Obama will learn to compromise or make sure he has plenty of ink in his veto pen.
Categories
Uncategorized

Klingons Still At Bay?

Well, maybe the Klingons won’t make it here after all.  There appears to be some evidence that cabling in the equipment measuring the speed of neutrinos traveling from the CERN facility in Geneva to Gran Sasso, Italy might not have been properly calibrated.  If that is the case, perhaps Einstein was right. Nothing can go faster than the speed of light. Nothing conclusive, yet.  We may still get to see Prof. Al-Khalili in England eat his boxer shorts.  See WSJ today, and previous post on September 23, 2011.

Categories
Uncategorized

Class Divide

Washington Post Henry Allen opines that the “knowledge class” is contemptuous of the “factory class” in our country.  This notion is in line with Charles Murray’s Belmont vs. Fishtown thesis in his recent book Coming Apart.  Some of Allen’s opinion is misplaced, but there is no denying that we have a plethora of intellectuals who have lots of hypotheses but little practical experience trying to foist all manner of controls on how we lead our lives.  Knowledge is certainly the underlying basis of wealth and prosperity.  The standard of living of those who use their muscles only is the same as that of a medieval blacksmith, the rest flows from the ideas and the rational thought that puts them into practice.  But to allow the nags and busybodies to rule us establishes a new aristocracy.  No more kind than the ones of yesteryear.

Categories
Uncategorized

It’s About Time to be Fair

GOP hopeful Rick Santorum is not my first choice for a Presidential candidate (he or she, as the case may be, is not running this time, unfortunately), and his nomination is by no means assured. Nevertheless, in such anticipation, I have a modest observation and suggestion.
For the first 160 years or so of our Republic, Presidents have been of British (English, Scottish, Scots-Irish) or Dutch (in at least three cases) ancestry. Those of German heritage got their chance with Eisenhower in 1952, the Irish progeny in 1960, and now those of African ancestry (sub-Saharan, anyway) have had their due.
Immigrants from Italy came to the U.S. nearly as early as the Irish, and did so in significant numbers. Italian-Americans certainly did their part in making the Roman Catholic Church the largest single religious denomination in the United States. And who can help but notice that pizza has eclipsed even hot dogs as our national dish! If Santorum were to be the nominee, he should loudly and often proclaim his Italian-American heritage and identity.  Maybe he could name Godfather Herman Cain as his consiglieri, er, chief of staff.  Back in the early 1960s, the political thriller Seven Days in May, whose plot was set in the 1970s, had a Vice-President who was Italian-American. Wouldn’t you say it’s about time?
Santorum could have Marco Rubio as VP nominee, thus giving those of Spanish ancestry a leg up for a future run. Or Eric Cantor could do the same for Jewish-American. Joe Lieberman came close in 2000, but we all know that story.
All in the name of fairly sharing.
Categories
Uncategorized

Our Most Oppressed Minority

I have long believed that the most oppressed and discriminated against minority in the United States is the self-employed entrepreneurs. Now Bard College professor and editor-at-large for The American Interest agrees with me. Some may consider Professor Mead somewhat left of center in his views, and he may be on some issues, but he is squarely libertarian in this regard.
Writing for The American Interest online (link here) Mead opines that “the American legal and regulatory system is set up to bind as many people to employers as possible. The government wants you to be a wage slave and sets up a regulatory framework that keeps as many of us as possible yoked to bosses and management.”
“The IRS doesn’t like the self-employed, fearing they may conceal income. Banks and credit card companies view such people with suspicion, and it is notoriously difficult for start ups and part time enterprises to have access to formal finance . . ..”
He goes on to demonstrate that the self-employed pay both sides of the payroll taxes, cannot deduct medical insurance premiums, and are subject to all kinds of regulations that disproportionately burden them.
“There are other, subtler ways in which the current system favors old style large employers over small firms. The cost of hiring people can be prohibitively high for small businesses: the paperwork involved in hiring so much as a cleaning person or babysitter can be cumbersome. Hiring full time workers involves negotiating the requirements for worker compensation, unemployment insurance and much else. The cost of these barriers cannot be calculated: jobs foregone, businesses stifled in their cradles, ideas untested, innovations untried.”
Mead makes some suggestions as to how government can help self-employed entrepreneurs – mainly by getting out of the way (a suggestion Ayn Rand made 55 years ago).
 “In order to create the kind of job and service explosion that can provide better incomes for more Americans going forward, the government needs to shift policy. It must favor the small firm and entrepreneur: the owner-proprietor group needs to become the apple of the government’s eye. Their taxes should be cut; their paperwork burdens drastically reduced; regulations should be rewritten and simplified to meet their needs.”
Having been self-employed for over 30 years, I can attest to Mead’s observations.
Walter Russell Mead’s comments are also in today’s Wall Street Journal in the Notable and Quotable feature.  See link here
Categories
Uncategorized

Presidents’ Day and the Little World

One of the reasons I remain convinced there must be something beyond this earthly life is the little world that surrounds us. This is the world imperceptible by our unaided senses. It is inhabited by the microbes that give us so much benefit and so much trouble, and is the infinitesimal domain of the electrons, neutrinos, quarks, and who knows what else is out there. Years ago, when musing about the existence of angels in a Christmas column, the late Dallas Morning News columnist Paul Crume came to a “sudden realization of the endless and gigantic dark that exists outside the little candle flame of human knowledge.” That these realms even existed was unknown prior to comparatively recent times, and consigned to the supernatural. Those who speculated that they might part of the natural world were dismissed as alchemists and charlatans. Some, whose inadvertent manipulations of our tiny companions for the good, were given the status of magicians. This latter title is apt. As Arthur C. Clarke has observed, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. What else may exist still beyond the reach and comprehension of our naked and mortal senses?
On Presidents’s Day each year, it is appropriate to take a closer look at one or two of those who have served as our national government’s chief magistrate (as the Founders termed the office). This year, I choose a lesser known President, whose time in office was the shortest save one. His term was on the cusp of discovery of the little world, and the magicians who might have saved, and the alchemists and charlatans who killed him.
James Abram Garfield was the 20th man to hold the Presidential office. He was born on a farm — the last of our Presidents who was born in a log cabin — in Cuyahoga County, Ohio in 1831. His father died before his first birthday leaving his mother to raise the family alone. At sixteen, he had a brief stint as a laborer on the Erie & Ohio Canal, where he nearly drowned in an accident. Afterward, with the encouragement and support of this mother and older brother, Garfield sought an education. He enrolled in the Western Reserve Eclectic Institute (now Hiram College, in Portage County, Ohio), where he defrayed his tuition by serving a school janitor, giving validity to Newt Gingrich’s recent much maligned (by the present American left, that is) suggestion that it might be useful for high school students to do the same in our day. Garfield soon left to attend Williams College in Massachusetts. After graduating with honors, he returned to teach at Western Reserve and became president of the school at age 26. A mostly self-taught mathematician, Garfield published his own proof of the Pythagorean Theorem. In perhaps his spare time, he read law and passed the Ohio bar examination. When the Civil War broke out, Garfield obtained a commission as lieutenant colonel of volunteers in the Union army, and was soon promoted to colonel to command a regiment. His success in securing part of the border state of Kentucky for the Union led to his promotion to general. In 1862, Garfield was elected to his first of nine terms in the House of Representatives, although he did not leave the army to take his seat immediately. After the war, he sought a writ of habeas corpus for five Indiana men who had been tried and sentenced to death by a military tribunal for freeing Confederate prisoners. In this noteworthy case titled Ex parte Milligan, the Supreme Court decided that military tribunals did not apply to citizens in states that had upheld the authority of the Constitution and where civilian courts were still operating, a legal principle that still holds today, as we have recently observed.
By 1880, the Republican party had split into two factions, primarily over the issue of federal patronage. The Stalwarts, led by New Yorker Roscoe Conkling, wished to preserve the “spoils system” where the prevailing party and candidate appointed their supporters to federal government jobs. The “Half-Breeds” so called because of their perceived moderate politics and desire for reform, wished to end that system and install a merit-based civil service. These included James G. Blaine of Maine, and ultimately, Garfield.
When fellow Ohioan Rutherford B. Hayes declined to run for re-election, the GOP nominated Garfield as a compromise candidate. Elected in 1880, Garfield served but 199 days. Like William Henry Harrison, who had been elected 40 years earlier and died after scarcely a month in office, he is generally excluded from lists rating Presidents. Even so, like most of the so-called Gilded Age Presidents, Garfield gets little respect from academic historians. Part of this is probably political bias – longtime Yale history professor C. Vann Woodward once observed that his colleagues are usually liberal Democrats – but the reality is that between Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt, American Presidents were generally passive, quietly presiding over the government while Congress took the lead in formulating national policy.
On July 2, 1881, one Charles Guiteau, ostensibly because of his disappointment over Garfield not appointing him as ambassador to France, shot Garfield in the back at a railway station in Washington. The wound was not fatal and was probably survivable even if left untreated – as were many similar wounds suffered by soldiers during the Civil War which had only ended sixteen years previously. Nevertheless, treating physicians who should have known better by this time, probed the wound over and over in septic conditions in a vain attempt to locate the bullet and caused a massive infection to set in that ultimately killed the President. This malpractice was even more egregious because Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, had also invented a magnetic induction device that probably would have located the bullet, had the physician in charge permitted its use on the side of Garfield’s body where the bullet was discovered after the President’s death. After more than two months of suffering, James A. Garfield died on September 19, 1881.
Bell’s device, like his telephone, made use of the little world we cannot see – the flow of electrons along conductors and electromagnetic waves inducing such currents across space that carry information well beyond the range of our unaided senses. By 1880, the telephone had been acknowledged as a success, and President Hayes, Garfield’s immediate predecessor, had already installed one in the Executive Mansion (it was not formally called the “White House” until 1901). Of course, the telephone worked in a manner that anyone could perceive, even if the means by which it worked were invisible.
That was not the case with antisepsis, the other significant contemporary advance. The little microbes we now know are responsible for disease processes not only are invisible, but they take longer to do their damage and become symptomatic. A cause and effect between germs and disease was not so clear. But Joseph Lister, a British surgeon, had by the 1870s pretty well proven the germ theory of disease, and even presented it to the American medical community in an exhibition at the Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition in 1876 (along with many other inventions, including Bell’s telephone). Nevertheless, Lister’s theory had not been widely accepted among American physicians by 1881, and was even disdained by one in particular, Garfield’s treating physician.
This physician was Dr. Doctor Willard Bliss (yes, ironically enough, his given name was “Doctor”). Bliss and those who assisted him administered alcohol and various heavy metals, such as mercury, which did little but induce vomiting. They probed the wound with dirty fingers, causing infections throughout the President’s body. Defending himself at trial, Charles Guiteau insisted that “General Garfield died from malpractice.” That was certainly true, but on June 30, 1882, just two days shy of the anniversary of his crime, Guiteau was hanged.
Garfield principal legacy as President is, unfortunately, his dubious distinction of being the second of four Presidents felled by assassins. He is also remembered, by historians mostly, for the Pendleton Civil Service Act, later passed and signed by successor Chester A. Arthur in 1883, that ended the spoils system. Garfield had supported that reform, and thus became a martyr to that cause, as Guiteau’s crime was touted as an inevitable consequence of the spoils system.
But James Garfield’s greater legacy as an American is not his final office, but his life before and how he got there. He was a teacher, lawyer, general, and conscientious Congressman. He was as much a martyr to the cause of advancing science and technology as he was to government reform. President Garfield had not been born to any advantage, quite the contrary. He grew up in less than comfortable circumstances, and overcame what obstacles placed before him, save the last. He embodied the American theme of the triumphant individual, and that is how he should be honored on this Presidents’ Day.
For those who wish more detail, I suggest the very readable account by Candice Millard, Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine, and the Murder of a President, published last year, upon which I relied for many of the facts related here.
Exit mobile version