H/T to Eric Kirkland, who noted:
Please note the compulsory requisites for ‘proper’ canal cruising:
1) The flat cap
2) The grey beard
3) The mucky overalls
4) Bloomin’ great boots
Prior to the current ‘Elf and Safety regime there would also be
5) Roll ups permanently attached to the lower lip or a blazing briar full of Ogdens’ Flake
H/T to Jeff Scarbrough for the link.
P.J. O’Rourke remembers his home town:
My hometown, Toledo, Ohio, is one of those junkyards of American capitalism, a deindustrialized old industrial city. The population has declined from 383,818 in 1970 to 316,851 today. The unemployment rate is 10.4 percent. Jeeps are still made there, but most Toledo factories are gone — Auto-Lite, Willys-Overland, Champion Spark Plug, the glass plants of Owens-Illinois and Libbey-Owens-Ford. Toledo Scales aren’t made in Toledo anymore.
Downtown, the department stores are closed, as are most of the shops, theaters, restaurants, and bars. The city’s center looks plucked. Half the buildings have been razed. Toledo is a failure.
Actually, Toledo always was a failure. Incorporated in 1837, with a fancy name for what had been called the Great Black Swamp, Toledo was a land scam. A canal joining the Ohio River to Lake Erie was supposed to have its terminus there. The scam collapsed that very year, in the Panic of 1837, when Andrew Jackson ended easy land-buying credit. The canal did open, but not until 1845, by which time railroads had taken over shipping.
Toledo tried to be a rail hub. In 1860 it had six railroads. They were all short-line operations, each with a different track gauge and none connected to long-haul routes. Toledo’s Erie and Kalamazoo Rail Road never reached Kalamazoo.
Like many of you, I’ve bought lots of books from Amazon over the years. Knowing a fair bit about my book-buying habits, their recommendations for books I might be interested in are usually pretty good. Today’s email rather missed the mark:
I’m not sure how that book relates in any way to the work of Fernand Braudel:
Fernand Braudel (24 August 1902 – 27 November 1985) was a French historian and a leader of the Annales School. His scholarship focused on three main projects, each representing several decades of intense study: The Mediterranean (1923–49, then 1949–66), Civilization and Capitalism (1955–79), and the unfinished Identity of France (1970–85). His reputation stems in part from his writings, but even more from his success in making the Annales School the most important engine of historical research in France and much of the world after 1950. As the dominant leader of the Annales School of historiography in the 1950s and 1960s, he exerted enormous influence on historical writing in France and other countries.
Braudel has been considered one of the greatest of the modern historians who have emphasized the role of large-scale socioeconomic factors in the making and writing of history.[1] He can also be considered as one of the precursors of World Systems Theory.
If you’ve browsed the history section, you’ll have seen them:
The Guardian explains:
Previously unseen footage of the 9/11 attacks, filmed from a police helicopter hovering above the burning World Trade Centre, has emerged almost a decade after the terrorist atrocity.
The New York Police Department air and sea rescue helicopter was dispatched to the scene of the attack to see whether any survivors could be rescued from the rooftops.
[. . .]
The video is part of a cache of information about the attack handed over by city agencies to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the federal agency that investigated the collapse.
It was released by NIST on 3 March under a Freedom of Information Act request, but it remains unclear who published the footage online.
You actually had a short, but interesting chapter in your book explaining why you think our trade balance with China is mostly irrelevant. Could you give people a short, but sweet synopsis of that argument?
Adam Smith was the first to point this out in the Wealth of Nations. The common wisdom at the time, mercantilism was the name it went by, was that the way a nation got rich was by exporting things. In return for the exports they’d get gold. And Smith’s going, I’m paraphrasing broadly here, “You can’t eat gold, you can’t kiss gold, and gold won’t keep you warm at night. Gold is just gold.”
He said the exports, that’s real stuff, and you’re giving it away in favor of gold. He said imports are the good thing. Imports are when you’re getting something you like. You’re getting French wine. You’re getting American tobacco. You’re getting furs from Russia, getting whatever they were getting back in those days. He said exports are the way you pay for those imports. So imports are Christmas morning. Exports are January’s Visa bill.
People getting so upset because everything seems to be made in China — I understand it on the level of the jobs have moved overseas. I think it’s probably an important thing to remember that if the jobs hadn’t moved overseas, they probably would have just gone away. So, it’s not like the Japanese have all of our car making jobs.
John Hawkins, “The P.J. O’Rourke Interview”, Grendel Report, 2010-10-11
Coming up on the 100th observance of International Women’s Day, Robert Fulford takes a step back to view the feminist movement:
Some organized attempts to improve the lot of humanity claim limited victories; others do more harm than good. Only feminism can claim to have broadened, permanently, the lives of half the humans in the West. Its success, based on earnest arguments and improvised political strategies, is without parallel in the last century. Nothing since the Industrial Revolution has done so much to expand opportunity.
Feminism has altered a whole culture’s ideal version of sexual roles. It has changed the professions, most strikingly medicine and law. It has affected how children are raised, how the law deals with domestic life, how corporations and public institutions are staffed.
Like all revolutions, feminism is at war with itself. Many one-time feminists have quietly abandoned that term after watching former comrades flock behind every dubious new faction in the grievance culture. Radical feminists consider feminism a failure because it has not wiped out poverty, which should have been its goal. Events have so addled the radicals that they believe anyone who calls feminism a success is a covert enemy. Radicals believe we are living through a long dark night of conservatism and therefore have a right to be miserable, indefinitely. Celebrating anything, even the success of a movement they helped start, would rob them of their bitterness.
The world still needs the feminist spirit. It should shine a consistent light on the many millions of women who are caged by misogynistic religions and male-made dictatorships. Freeing them should become the central feminist project.
Actually, compared to a lot of newspaper articles on the SCA, this one isn’t too bad:
The Society is a global organization with some 30,000 registered members reliving the world before the 17th century. Most stick to European history, but there are plenty of katana-wielding Japan enthusiasts among the ranks. Members get together and do any and everything medieval and renaissance, from armored combat and blacksmithing to the craftier trades such as glass-etching and embroidery.
The Toronto group is know as the Canton of Eoforwic
of, one chapter of the Kingdom of Ealdormere, which encompasses most of Ontario and is one of 19 worldwide kingdoms. Each kingdom has its own King, Queen and handful of other royals and nobility.Unlike a Renaissance Faire, these gatherings are not for anyone’s entertainment but their own.
“We’re not playing to an audience, we’re just doing things for fun,” Ms. Carroll-Clark says.
No mention of rapier combat (my bit of the SCA), but that’s not surprising — even in the SCA it’s a minority interest.
I doubt very many of you ever used Windows 1.0 (I certainly didn’t: 3.0 was the first time I used Windows). Charles Arthur writes about an interesting experiment conducted by Andrew Tait to test how well your system would work if you somehow needed to upgrade through all the major Windows versions:
The question is: how robust is it? Can you really do all that updating? You have to start with MS-DOS 5.0, of course, because early versions of Windows needed that.
It’s a bit hairy and config.sys-y in the early versions up to 3.1.
But what’s really impressive is that Doom 2 and Monkey Island — installed right at the beginning — work all the way through, right up to Windows 7. Well, apart from in Windows 2000, where it hung at the start (lack of DOS support).
Well done Andrew Tait, alias Rasteri, the YouTube/Reddit user who had the enormous patience to do all this. Especially for sounding like Sean Connery all the way through. “It is indeed possible to upgrade through every version of Windows… and have some settings remain. This is nearly 20 years of application compatibility and Microsoft should be applauded.”
Of course, the real stumbling block to doing this would be the hardware: nothing that was available in the Windows 1.0 era would be able to run the far more demanding software of the Windows NT family of operating systems. To get around that, Tait used VMWare’s virtualization software:
I had been labouring under the impression that Australia had been freed from the colonial yoke in 1931, but I was mistaken:
TWENTY-FIVE years ago today, Australia became independent.
You might think this statement absurd. Surely Australia has been independent for a lot longer than that? Let me provide a lawyer’s answer: yes and no. Yes, Australia as a nation became independent at some unknown date after 1931. By 1931 it had the power to exercise independence but chose not to do so for some time. Arguably, having the capacity to exercise independence is enough to be classified as independent, although the parents of 20-something children who show no inclination to leave home may beg to differ.
The Australian states, however, did not gain their independence from Britain at that time. Bizarrely, they remained colonial dependencies of the British crown, despite being constituent parts of an independent nation. This meant state governors were appointed by the Queen on the advice of British ministers and that it was the Queen of the United Kingdom (not the Queen of Australia) who gave royal assent to state bills. When an Australian governor-general once complained to the British government about this anomaly, the response of British diplomats was that it was better to “let sleeping anomalies lie”.
H/T to Roger Henry for the link.
Daniel Ikenson takes ABC to task for their misleading propaganda against international trade:
Back in the “golden age” of 1960, when imports were oddities to marvel over in a disdainful way, the per-capita U.S. income was $2,914. In 2009, with imports ubiquitous, per-capita income was $46,411. (Economic Report of the President, 2010, Tables B-1 and B-34). In real, inflation-adjusted terms, even with a U.S. population increase from 181 million to 307 million, per-capita incomes in 2009 were almost triple what they were in 1960 ($42,277 vs. $15,669 in 2005 dollars — ERP, 2010, Tables B-2 and B-34). Oh, if only we could replicate the relative poverty, the limited consumer choices, the inefficient production processes, the massive trade barriers that compelled Americans to buy American, and the uneconomic work rules and wages commanded by once-powerful private sector labor unions. In 1960, before real economic liberalization spawned cultural and social liberalization, Diane Sawyer would never have dreamed of being a network news anchor, if she even dared to entertain the concept of working outside of the home. How can she pine for such an era?
It’s frustrating that so much research refuting the myth of manufacturing decline and supporting the conclusion that U.S. manufacturing is thriving — and is in fact leading the world in terms of value of output — is simply neglected by a media that is more committed to scaring than informing. Today Americans are less likely to find in their homes products manufactured in the United States because U.S. manufacturers have moved on to producing higher value products. American manufacturing isn’t focused on products that consumers find in retail stores, like furniture, hand tools, sporting goods, flatware, draperies, carpeting and clothes. American factories produce more value than any other country’s factories by focusing on producing the highest value products: pharmaceuticals, chemicals, airplanes, sophisticated componentry, technical textiles, and other items often sold directly to other businesses.
I and others have been making these points for several years, as U.S. manufacturing continues to thrive in every metric . . . except employment. Manufacturing employment peaked in 1979 and has been on a downward trajectory ever since. But that is the point that eludes ABC and everyone else who thinks U.S. manufacturing’s best days are in the past. Making more with less is the goal! That’s how an economy grows! The political imperative of “putting people back to work” regardless of the economic value of that work — remember the so-called stimulus? — spits in the face of economics. The fact that Americans are unemployed speaks to a mismatch of skills demanded and skills available, as well as to a business and regulatory environment that dissuades investment and hiring.
A German I know will on occasion tell you his father died in the concentration camps. He waits for the concerned and properly sympathetic faces and then adds that he got drunk and fell out of a watchtower. Europeans find that boorish, faintly crass and rather tasteless; the English love it. It’s a proper joke, and a German doing it is double bubble. The surprise is that neither the Europeans or the English realize that it’s not a joke at all, his father really did fall out of a watch tower and it’s poignant and sad because his son never knew him, never met his dad.
A.A. Gill, The Angry Island: Hunting the English, p. 112.
No, not my books: I’ve written lots, but they’re all technical manuals for software products the vast majority of you will never have heard of, and wouldn’t want to read about even if you had. I mean books I’ve read recently that I consider to be very good. I’ll categorize for convenience (both yours and mine):
Powered by WordPress