More generally, though, do we have any historical evidence of groups whose alcohol consumption was documented with any confidence, to see how they fared?
Actually, we do, at least as a floor: we know the quantity of the Royal Navy’s spirit ration, which until 1823 was based on half a pint of rum (284 millilitres in foreign) per man per day. We also know its minimum strength, since it was tested by trying to ignite gunpowder soaked in it: it had to be over 57% alcohol by volume (“proof strength”) to pass. That’s sixteen units of alcohol – not per week, but per day – or north of a hundred units a week, just for the issued ration before sailors bought any extra from the purser. (No wonder Jack Tar was jolly back in those days!)
But clearly, we would expect a body of men consuming such suicidally destructive quantities of booze to be physical wrecks, raddled by cirrhosis and disease? As Dr James Lind (he of the discovery that citrus fruits were a sovereign remedy for scurvy) put it,
It is an observation, I think, worthy of record that fourteen thousand persons, pent up in ships, should continue, for six or seven months, to enjoy a better state of health upon the watery element, than it can well be imagined so great a number of people would enjoy, on the most healthful spot of ground in the world.
(For context, around this point the Navy won the battle of Quiberon Bay, with twenty ships – who had less than one man sick per ship).
The ration was halved in 1823, and again in 1850, but for a hundred and twenty years until Black Tot Day in 1970, the Navy still issued nearly thirty units of alcohol a week to everyone on the lower deck (junior rates got theirs diluted, seniors got neat rum). Either folk were hardier back then, or Britannia managed to rule the waves and keep her sailors reasonably healthy despite being a pack of hopelessly addicted alcoholics.
Jason Lynch, “How Much Is ‘Too Much’?”, Continental Telegraph, 2018-05-08.
July 29, 2020
QotD: Grog in the Royal Navy
June 21, 2020
QotD: “[T]he fascinating modern science of high-tech grave robbing”
As Fitzgerald’s friend Hemingway ended The Sun Also Rises, “Isn’t it pretty to think so?”
But now the brilliant Harvard geneticist David Reich has published a bombshell scientific book, Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past, whose revelations would have been found congenial by a smarter version of Buchanan (such as Fitzgerald himself).
Despite Reich’s occasional need to stop his otherwise lucid narrative to spew irrational rage against his fellow race-science heretics such as James D. Watson, the genome expert conclusively demolishes the post-Boasian anthropologists’ conventional wisdom.
[…]
Reich learned the fascinating modern science of high-tech grave robbing from Svante Pääbo. This Swedish biologist invented the techniques for extracting from ancient skeletons their DNA. (Interestingly, the 1990 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act makes it hard to get hold of ancient American Indian skeletons, but other races’ ancestors appear to be fair game.)
Reich applied to Pääbo’s breakthrough the traditional American knack for vast industrial scale. Assisted by English code-cracker Nick Patterson’s innovations in extracting meaning from bits and pieces of ancient genomes, Reich’s factory-like lab at the Broad Institute has been churning out a tsunami of papers on fascinating questions of prehistory.
Steve Sailer, “Reich’s Laboratory”, Taki’s Magazine, 2018-03-28.
June 15, 2020
African History Disproves Guns Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond
The Cynical Historian
Published 26 Oct 2019There’s a question in the history profession that if sufficiently answered could not only reshape how we conceive ourselves, but reveal the best course of action for politics around the world. What makes the West strong? While there are many answers, the most popular of these has been Jared Diamond’s Guns Germs and Steel. You’ll see his argument all over the place, including a NatGeo documentary. But of course it has its detractors, to the point that some historians consider it pseudo-history. Now I think that’s going too far, but there are enough problems with his thesis that we can’t take it as the final answer to these questions. So let’s talk about that.
————————————————————
errata
10:32 – not “Blaut’s theory” but “Diamond’s theory” (thx PunkSci)
————————————————————references:
James M. Blaut, Eight Eurocentric Historians: The Colonizer’s Model of the World, Volume Two (New York: The Guilford Press, 2000), 149-172. https://amzn.to/2YFt0iQMichael C. Campbell and Sarah A. Tishkoff, “African Genetic Diversity: Implications for Human Demographic History, Modern Human Origins, and Complex Disease Mapping,” Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics 9 (22 September 2008): 403-433.
Jared Diamond, Guns Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies (New York: WW Norton, 1997). https://amzn.to/2GK6AqI
Martin W. Lewis and Karen E. Wigen, The Myth of Continents: A Critique of Metageography (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997). https://amzn.to/2H0ylv7
Richard York and Philip Mancus, “Diamond in the Rough: Reflections on Guns, Germs, and Steel,” Human Ecology Review 14, no. 2 (2007): 157-162.
https://thetruesize.com
————————————————————
Support the channel through PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/CynicalHistorianLET’S CONNECT:
Subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/CynicalHistory/
Discord: https://discord.gg/Ukthk4U
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Cynical_History
May 10, 2020
“Blitzkrieg”: Stuka & Panzer – DEBUNKED
Military History Visualized
Published 21 Aug 2018Join me in War Thunder for free using this link http://v2.xyz/WarThunderMilitaryHistory and get a premium tank or aircraft and three days of premium time as a bonus.
The popular view is that the Wehrmacht used a combination of Panzers and Stukas to roll over Poland, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, France and later the Soviet Union. Whereas the Panzers were heavily supported by Stukas overwhelming enemy ground forces.
The problem is that the details on how this was actually done are rather scarce. As such, there are various assumptions and misconceptions around, at least I had plenty of them myself before I took a closer look. So, in this video we will take a deeper dive on how Panzers and Stukas actually coordinated their efforts in Poland 1939, France 1940 and the Soviet Union 1941 (Operation Barbarossa).
“Kommandeure der Luftwaffe” (Commanders of the Air Force) – usually called Koluft.
“Flieger Verbindungsoffiziere” (Pilot Liason Officers) – usually called Flivo.
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon – https://www.patreon.com/join/mhv
» paypal donation – https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr…
» Book Wishlist https://www.amazon.de/gp/registry/wis…»» MERCHANDISE – SPOILS OF WAR ««
» shop – https://www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi…»» SOCIAL MEDIA ««
» twitter – https://twitter.com/MilHiVisualized
» twitch – https://www.twitch.tv/militaryhistory…
» minds.com – https://www.minds.com/militaryhistory...» SOURCES «
Corum, James S.: “The Luftwaffe’s Army Support Doctrine, 1918-1941”. In: The Journal of Military History, Vol. 59, No. 1 (Jan., 1995), p. 53-76
Murray, Williamson: “The Luftwaffe Experience, 1939-1941”. In: Cooling, Benjamin Franklin (ed.): Case Studies in the Development of Close Air Support. Office of Air Force History: Washington DC, United States (1990), p. 71-113
Citino, Robert M.: Blitzkrieg to Desert Storm. The Evolution of Operational Warfare. Kansas University Press: US (2004).
Pöhlmann, Markus: Der Panzer und die Mechanisierung des Krieges: Eine deutsche Geschichte 1890 bis 1945 (Zeitalter der Weltkriege), Paderborn 2016.
Creveld, Martin van; Canby, Steven L.; Brower, Kenneth S.: Air Power and Maneuver Warfare, Air University Press: 1994.
Brütting, Georg: Das waren die deutschen Stuka-Asse. 1939-1945. Motorbuch Verlag: Stuttgart, Germany (1984)
Stahel, David: Operation Barbarossa and Germany’s Defeat in the East. Cambridge University Press: UK (2009)
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg, Band 2: Die Errichtung der Hegemonie auf dem europäischen Kontinent
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg, Band 4: Der Angriff auf die Sowjetunion
Munzel, Oskar: Die deutschen gepanzerten Truppen bis 1945
Corum, James S.: The Roots of Blitzkrieg. Hans von Seeckt and German Military Reform
» DATA CHAIN «
Made with Natural Earth. Free vector and raster map data @ naturalearthdata.com.
April 20, 2020
Understanding the Lost Cause Myth
The Cynical Historian
Published 16 Apr 2020The Lost Cause Myth has changed American history. Though it is a hateful ideology today, to ignore it is to give it power. We must understand the myth in order to defeat it.
————————————————————
Connected videos [see YouTube description for linked videos to parts of this discussion]
————————————————————
See pinned comment and its replies for references, notes, responses, and errata
————————————————————
Support the channel through PATREON:
https://www.patreon.com/CynicalHistorianLET’S CONNECT:
Discord: https://discord.gg/Ukthk4U
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Cynical_History
Subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/CynicalHistory/
————————————————————
Wiki: The Lost Cause of the Confederacy, or simply the Lost Cause, is an American pseudo-historical, negationist ideology which holds the view that the cause of the Confederacy during the American Civil War was a just and heroic one. The ideology endorses the supposed virtues of the antebellum South, viewing the war as a struggle which was primarily waged in order to save the Southern way of life, or to defend “states’ rights”, in the face of overwhelming “Northern aggression.” At the same time, the Lost Cause minimizes or completely denies the central role of slavery in the buildup to and outbreak of the war.Particularly intense periods of Lost Cause activity occurred around the time of World War I, as the last Confederate veterans began to die out and a push was made to preserve their memories, and they also occurred during the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s, in reaction to growing public support for racial equality. Through activities such as building prominent Confederate monuments and writing school history textbooks, they sought to ensure that future generations of Southern whites would know about the South’s “true” reasons for fighting the war, and support white supremacist policies, such as Jim Crow laws. In this manner, white supremacy is a characteristic of the Lost Cause narrative.
The Lost Cause narratives typically portray the Confederacy’s cause as a noble one and they also portray its leaders as exemplars of old-fashioned chivalry, who were defeated by the Union armies through numerical and industrial force that overwhelmed the South’s superior military skill and courage. Proponents of the Lost Cause movement also condemned the Reconstruction that followed the Civil War, claiming that it had been a deliberate attempt by Northern politicians and speculators to keep the South down. The Lost Cause theme has also evolved into a major element in defining gender roles in the white South, in terms of preserving family honor and chivalrous traditions. The Lost Cause has inspired numerous Southern memorials and religious attitudes.
————————————————————
Hashtags: #history #LostCause #Mythology
QotD: The Columbus myth
My favorite example is the Columbus myth, the idea that the people who argued against Columbus were ignorant flat-earthers who thought his ships would sail off the edge. That is almost the precise opposite of the truth. By the time Columbus set off, a spherical Earth had been the accepted scientific view for well over a thousand years. Columbus’s contemporaries not only knew that the Earth was round, they knew how big around it was, that having been correctly calculated by Eratosthenes in the third century B.C.
By the fifteenth century they also had a reasonably accurate estimate of the width of Asia. Subtracting the one number from the other they could calculate the distance from where Columbus was starting to where Columbus claimed to be going and correctly conclude that it was much farther than his ships could go before running out of food and water. The scientific ignorance was on the side of Columbus and those who believed him; he was claiming a much smaller circumference for the Earth and a much larger width of Asia, hence a much shorter distance from Spain to the far end of Asia. We will probably never know whether he believed his own numbers or was deliberately misrepresenting the geographical facts in order to get funding for his trip in the hope that he would find land somewhere between Spain and Japan, as in fact he did.
David D. Friedman, “Slandering the Past”, Ideas, 2018-02-14.
April 13, 2020
QotD: Foucault’s “Ship of Fools”
Renaissance men developed a delightful, yet horrible way of dealing with their mad denizens: they were put on a ship and entrusted to mariners because folly, water, and sea, as everyone then knew, had an affinity for each other. Thus, “Ships of Fools” crisscrossed the seas and canals of Europe with their comic and pathetic cargo of souls. Some of them found pleasure and even a cure in the changing surroundings, in the isolation of being cast off, while others withdrew further, became worse, or died alone and away from their families. The cities and villages which had thus rid themselves of their crazed and crazy, could now take pleasure in watching the exciting sideshow when a ship full of foreign lunatics would dock at their harbors.
This was such a great piece of historical trivia that I was shocked I’d never heard it before. Some quick research revealed the reason: it is completely, 100% false. Apparently Foucault looked at an allegorical painting by Hieronymus Bosch, decided it definitely existed in real life, and concocted the rest from his imagination.
Foucault apologists try to rescue this, say that he was just being poetic in some way. He wasn’t. Page 8 in my copy: “Of all these romantic or satiric vessels, the Narrenschiff [Ship Of Fools] is the only one that had a real existence — for they did exist, these boats that conveyed their insane cargo from town to town.” He really, really doubled down on this point. As far as I can tell, this is just as bad a failing of scholarship as it sounds – and surprising, since everything else about the book gives the impression of Foucault as an incredibly knowledgeable and wide-ranging scholar.
Scott Alexander, “Book review: Madness and Civilization”, Slate Star Codex, 2018-01-04.
April 11, 2020
QotD: Zhou Enlai’s famous “too early to say” comment on the French Revolution
So says a retired American diplomat, Charles W. (Chas) Freeman Jr., who was present when Zhou made the comment during President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in February 1972.
Freeman, who was Nixon’s interpreter during the historic, weeklong trip, made the disclosure last week during a panel discussion in Washington about On China, the latest book by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.
The discussion was moderated by Richard McGregor, a journalist and China expert who wrote about Freeman’s comments for the Financial Times of London.
In an interview yesterday, Freeman elaborated on his recollection about Zhou’s comment, the conventional interpretation of which is frequently offered as evidence of China’s sage, patient, and far-sighted ways. Foreign Policy magazine, for example, referred last month to that interpretation, saying the comment was “a cautionary warning of the perils of judgments made in real time.”
The Washington Post‘s recent review of Kissinger’s book likewise referred to the conventional understanding of Zhou’s remark.
Freeman described Zhou’s misconstrued comment as “one of those convenient misunderstandings that never gets corrected.”
He said Zhou’s remark probably was made over lunch or dinner, during a discussion about revolutions that had succeeded and failed. They included, Freeman said, the Prague Spring of 1968 and the Hungarian uprising of 1956, both of which the Soviet Union crushed.
He said it was clear from the context and content of Zhou’s comment that in saying it was “too early to say” the Chinese leader was speaking about the events in France in May 1968, not the years of upheaval that began in 1789.
Freeman acknowledged that the conventional interpretation makes for a better story but added that it was “absolutely clear” from the context of the discussion that Zhou was speaking about 1968.
W. Joseph Campbell, “‘Too early to say’: Zhou was speaking about 1968, not 1789”, Media Myth Alert, 2011-06-14.
April 8, 2020
Debunking the claim that “80% of America’s drugs come from China”
Eric Boehm tries to sort out where the startling claim came from … because it’s not true:
While reading about the COVID-19 outbreak, you’ve probably encountered this particularly shocking statistic at one time or another: 80 percent of America’s pharmaceutical drug supply comes from China.
It’s a statistic that has made the rounds in right-wing publications for a while — offered as proof that China-heavy global supply chains are putting Americans at risk — but it has also popped up in mainstream outlets, including in pieces published in Politico and The Atlantic. Wherever it is deployed, the stat carries an unstated implication: What if China decides to cut us off in the middle of a pandemic? Could America face a dramatic shortage of key pharmaceutical drugs at the moment when we are most in need? And that distorted claim that says America has been too reliant on China has been seized by politicians like Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) as evidence that globalization has undermined America’s pandemic response.
[…]
How much is a lot? “In all, 80 percent of the U.S. supply of antibiotics are made in China,” [Politico contributors Doug Palmer and Finbarr Bermingham] wrote, linking back to a press release from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R–Iowa).
But that’s not what the press release says.
Grassley’s statement was publicizing a letter Grassley sent on August 9 to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the FDA, asking them to conduct more inspections of foreign drug manufacturing facilities to make sure they meet American standards.
“Unbeknownst to many consumers … 80 percent of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients are produced abroad, the majority in China and India,” Grassley wrote.
There’s the first bit of context collapse: the authors of the Politico piece merged Grassley’s “80 percent … are produced abroad” into “80 percent … are made in China.”
All of this also raises another question: Where is Grassley getting that information? His letter sources that claim to a 2016 Government Accountability Office report which itself cited FDA data on pharmaceutical manufacturers around the world. And that report makes it clear that the U.S. has a diverse supply chain for drugs that goes well beyond India and China.
“Nearly 40 percent of finished drugs and approximately 80 percent of active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) are manufactured in registered establishments in more than 150 countries,” is how the GAO summed up America’s pharmaceutical supply chain.
In two jumps, we’ve gone from “80 percent of American drugs are manufactured in more than 150 countries around the world” to “80 percent of drugs come from two countries” to “80 percent of drugs come from China.”
Now, a further complication. The FDA only tracks drug manufacturing facilities — not the supply chains of specific drugs.
That “lack of structural transparency and available supply chain data about drugs,” researchers at the University of Minnesota researchers wrote last month, is one of the reasons why making accurate assessments about potential drug shortages is difficult. Indeed, it was this same bit of missing information that Grassley was encouraging the FDA to address back in August.
Source: FDA; Safeguarding Pharmaceutical Supply Chains in a Global Economy, October 2019.
April 6, 2020
MYTH BUSTED? Laying a hand plane on its side vs. sole
Stumpy Nubs
Published 20 Apr 2019When you use this link to visit our sponsor, you support us►
iGaging Digital Tools: http://www.chipsfly.com/category/L.html
Subscribe (free) to Stumpy Nubs Woodworking Journal e-Magazine► http://www.stumpynubs.com/subscribe.htmlFollow us on social media►
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/stumpynubs/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/StumpyNubs
March 2, 2020
QotD: The legend of Rommel and the Afrika Korps
It’s an attractive image all around, and it is unfortunate that practically all of it is false. The desert was hardly a haven of beauty or romance. It was a pain, and fighting in it was a nightmare for both sides. Far from letting the respective tank fleets roam free, the desert chained them irresistibly to their supply lines, and a single failed supply convoy or a lost column of trucks could stop an entire offensive dead in its tracks. Contrary to the alleged mobility of desert warfare, both sides would spend far more time in static defensive positions, often quite elaborate, then they would launching tank charges.
That leaves us with Rommel. Here, too, we should challenge the mythology. He was hardly apolitical. His entire career had been based on Hitler’s favor, and we might reasonably describe his attitude toward the Führer as worshipful. He was Hitler’s fair-haired boy, a young officer repeatedly promoted over more senior candidates. He was a media creation. Nazi propaganda painted him not only as a garden-variety hero, but as a model National Socialist and Aryan, a man who could overcome stronger enemies through the sheer force of his will. He was not merely a passive bystander to the hype; he was an active accomplice. He loved nothing better than having a camera crew along with him on campaign, and he would regularly order scenes to be reshot if his posture was insufficiently heroic or the lighting had not shown him to best advantage. As is often the case, his relationship to the media was both self-serving and self-destructive. During the years of victory, the German propaganda machine used him as an example to the nation. When things went sour, he became a diversion from the increasingly bad news on other fronts. Finally, when he was no longer useful for any purpose at all, the regime dropped him altogether and eventually killed him.
Robert Citino, “Drive to Nowhere: The Myth of the Afrika Korps, 1941-43″, The National WWII Museum, 2012. (Originally published in MHQ, Summer 2012).
February 28, 2020
The Robin Hood complex – Social banditry theory and myth making
The Cynical Historian
Published 15 Dec 2016There’s one historical theory that people keep deluding themselves with, and it’s about time I pointed it out. Social banditry, or the “Robin Hood theory” is problematic at best and cultural misanthropy at worst.
Social bandit or social crime is a term invented by the Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm in his 1959 book Primitive Rebels, a study of popular forms of resistance that also incorporate behavior characterized by law as illegal. He further expanded the field in the 1969 study Bandits. Social banditry is a widespread phenomenon that has occurred in many societies throughout recorded history, and forms of social banditry still exist, as evidenced by piracy and organized crime syndicates. Later social scientists have also discussed the term’s applicability to more modern forms of crime, like street gangs and the economy associated with the trade in illegal drugs.
————————————————————
References:
Boessenecker, John. “California Bandidos.” Southern California Quarterly 80, i4 (Dec. 1, 1998), 419-434.Hall-Patton, Joseph. Pacifying Paradise: Violence and Vigilantism in San Luis Obispo. San Luis Obispo: California Polytechnic – San Luis Obispo thesis, 2016. http://www.digitalcommons.calpoly.edu…
Hobsbawm, Eric. Primitive Rebels: Studies in Archaic Forms of Social Movement in the 19th and 20th Centuries. New York: WW Norton & Company, 1965. https://amzn.to/2L6TDY0
Hobsbawm, Eric. Bandits. Rev. ed. New York: The New Press, 2000. https://amzn.to/2L4RagK
Rediker, Marcus. Outlaws of the Atlantic: Sailor, Pirates, and Motley Crews in the Age of Sail. Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press, 2014. https://amzn.to/2OasYf4
Linebaugh, Peter and Marcus Rediker. The Many-Headed Hydra: Sailors, Slaves, Commoners, and the Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic. Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press, 2000. https://amzn.to/2JKq8tN
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zorro
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancho_…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joaquin…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_B…
————————————————————
Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/CynicalHistorianLET’S CONNECT:
https://twitter.com/Cynical_History
—————————————–
Hashtags: #History #SocialBanditry #PrimitiveRebellion #RobinHood #BillyTheKid
February 19, 2020
QotD: Myths the Greatest Generation believed
This belief in the military-like efficiency of government inspired the ambitious welfare-state policies of the postwar era, especially Johnson’s War on Poverty. When, in 1972, Richard Nixon declared a War on Drugs, and when, in 1977, Jimmy Carter described the energy crisis as the “moral equivalent of war,” the model they had in mind was, again, World War II. Today, newspapers and scientific journals still proclaim the need for ambitious government action to fix enormously complex problems — for example, calling repeatedly for a “new Manhattan Project” to solve the problem of climate change.
War, as conservatives figured out early on, is a poor metaphor for government doing socially useful things. We can’t fight and win a “war” on poverty, or drugs, or cancer, because these things are nothing like war. The last heroic big-government project run along World War II lines was the Apollo program, which put Americans on the moon. This was a tremendous achievement, but here a military mindset was directly relevant: like the design of war machines a quarter-century earlier, the Saturn rockets were a discrete engineering challenge, one whose basic parameters were well understood.
E. M. Oblomov, “The Greatest Generation and the Greatest Illusion: Success in World War II led Americans to put too much faith in government — and we still do.”, City Journal, 2017-12-28.
February 13, 2020
Here’s a deceptive factoid … time for you to get angry to suit someone’s political agenda
Did you know that “Three Billionaires Have More Wealth Than Half of America”!!!???!!! Are you angry now? You’re supposed to be, because this factoid was concocted specifically to make people irrationally angry. Daniel C. Jensen explains how this sound bite was created:
Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Microsoft’s Bill Gates, and Berkshire Hathaway’s Warren Buffet.
Fox Business.
People between 0 and 24 years of age account for about 32 percent of the United States population of 320 million. Almost all of them are going to be in the bottom half of the wealth distribution for reasons including diaper rash and puberty. That means they account for about 63 percent of the “bottom half of the wealth distribution.” Should it surprise us that some kid fresh out of college does not “hold any stocks or bonds”? Or a kid fresh out of the womb?
Then we must consider people with mental and physical disabilities. They will also tend to be in the bottom half of the wealth distribution because they face greater challenges to building wealth. “About 56.7 million people — 19 percent of the population — had a disability” at last count, according to the United States Census Bureau. But there is overlap between the disabled 19 percent and the young 32 percent of the population. If we assume disabilities are evenly distributed in the population, then young people and non-young disabled people account for 45 percent of the population. So we have now accounted for 90 percent of the “160 million Americans in the bottom half of the wealth distribution.”
Next, we must think about other groups who have had limited wealth-building opportunities. What about the 2.2 million people in jail and prison? What about people in their late twenties who pursued PhDs, law degrees, medical residencies, etc., and are just beginning their careers? Now we are close to accounting for 100 percent of the “bottom half of the wealth distribution.” But this wealth distribution is not what any sensible person would expect it to be.
Maybe the factoid is true. Maybe Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet have more wealth than all of the infants, children, students, handicapped, prisoners, and postgrads combined. But you don’t need a PhD to figure out that’s not useful knowledge. Even if the factoid is true, it’s deceitful. Whoever created it was obviously trying to manipulate people. And we uncovered this deception with nothing but some simple knowledge of the US population.
Next time you encounter an economic factoid, remember that it might be pitting a bunch of newborns against Jeff Bezos, and that hardly seems fair. Thankfully, you can save those babies from certain defeat simply by knowing some basic statistics about your country.
February 12, 2020
Guderian – Myth & Reality
Military History Visualized
Published 24 Apr 2018Heinz Guderian, the father of the German Panzerwaffe, is one of the best known German generals from the Second World War. He is also known for his opposition to the Battle of Kursk (Operation Zitadelle) and the early deployment of the Panzerkampfwagen V Panther, yet some historians noted recently that many of Heinz Guderian’s claims are not backed up by archives. Well, time to take a closer look.
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon – https://www.patreon.com/join/mhv
» paypal donation – https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr…»» MERCHANDISE – SPOILS OF WAR ««
» shop – https://www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi…»» SOCIAL MEDIA ««
» twitter – https://twitter.com/MilHiVisualized
» twitch – https://www.twitch.tv/militaryhistory…
» minds.com – https://www.minds.com/militaryhistory…» SOURCES «
Pöhlmann, Markus: Der Panzer und die Mechanisierung des Krieges: Eine deutsche Geschichte 1890 bis 1945 (Zeitalter der Weltkriege)
Corum, James S.: The Roots of Blitzkrieg. Hans von Seeckt and German Military Reform
Macksey, Kenneth: “Generaloberst Heinz Guderian”; in: Ueberschär (Hrsg.) Gerd R.: Hitlers militärische Elite – 68 Lebensläufe (3. Auflage), S. 351-358
Guderian, Heinz: Panzer Leader (English Version of Erinnerungen eines Soldaten)
Guderian, Heinz: Erinnerungen eines Soldaten
Munzel, Oskar: Die deutschen gepanzerten Truppen bis 1945
Schacter, Daniel L.: The Seven Sins of Memory: How the Mind Forgets and Remembers
Citino, Robert M.: The German Way of War. From the Thirty Years’ War to the Third Reich
Citino, Robert M.: The Wehrmacht Retreats: Fighting a Lost War, 1943
» CREDITS & SPECIAL THX «
Song: Ethan Meixsell – “Demilitarized Zone”#ww2 #panzergeneral #Guderian
