Good Old Days of Democratic Dominance

 James Fallows had a tribute to Jimmy Carter today, mentioning in passing that the Democratic margin in the House was 150!! I checked, it actually was 149 in 1977 and 122 in 1979.

As Fallows noted, the big fights were intra-party.

A Ponzi Scheme? No, a Howe Scheme

 While I'm sure she didn't invent the idea, Sarah Howe did precede Mr. Ponzi in bilking people out of their money by promising unrealistically high returns and paying them off with the deposits from later suckers.  That's from this Jstor piece on women's banking.

(I didn't realize the Homestead Act gave women the right to homestead as well as men.)

Maybe I Should See "Hamilton"?

 I know the musical is good but today I wrote a letter to the editor of the Post, in the course of which I looked up the lyrics of one of the songs--The Room Where It Happens.   Makes me think I should see it.  Is it available on Netflix? 

Chevalier--I Remember It Well

 The snowstorm of February 11, 1983, that is.  My fiance and I had a meeting with a priest to arrange for our wedding later in the year.  When we came out of St. Mathews it was impossible for us to get out to Reston, so I got a hotel room.  The next morning we got a cab out to Reston. It had to drop us off about a few hundred yards from the house, so we trudged through the snow, me in my loafers IIRC. 

The Politico story says that the snowstorm shut down DC, enabling Nancy Reagan to set up a family dinner with the Shultzes, over which the relatively new Secretary of State bonded with the president, and which led eventually to Reagan's opening to the Soviets.

That's what happens when the unexpected hits; the people who are confined together form bonds.  Notoriously, Clinton and Monica started their bonding during the government shutdown. 

Covered With Night

 The book, Covered With Night,  is quite good.  The author uses the murder of an Indian by one or two white settlers in colonial Pennsylvania (1720s) as a way to describe and contrast the different societies and views of justice of the parties involved (various tribes, Quakers, British governor, etc.) It won the Pulitizer in 2022, deservedly.

Given the subject and approach, not to mention the prize, you'd expect it to be modern historical writing, and it is, meaning there are no heroes or villains, complexity is embraced, attention paid to women and bit players.

I recommend it. I do think it's a little one-sided, no doub because of the available source material.  The author shows the colonists as sometimes trying and usually failing to understand the ways of the Indians. Fair enough. It wasn't a total failure, but...  She does not try the reverse, to show how the Indians tried and failed to understand the colonists.   As I say, there's likely no source material for that.

Road Rage, Then and Now

My cousin remembers the experience in the 1930s of riding with her father driving.  He was a reckless driver; she says he had "road rage" before the name.

For those who don't remember the days before the interstate, and who no longer regularly drive in rural areas, two-lane roads were standard.  In hilly areas, such as upstate New York, that meant a lot of blind curves, and no-passing zones.  On long drives, like that from Maryland to Minneapolis, or even North Fenton to Ithaca, those zones were frustrating to those of us who are impatient.  Find yourself behind a car whose driver was old, or cautious, or law-abiding (those were more common in those days than now), on a road with lots of traffic coming towards you, with a number of curves or hills, you'd get more and more frustrated, each time you swerved over the middle line and saw a car coming, or ran out of the dashed passing line and into the double white line.

Eventually either the slowboat in front of you would turn off, or you'd take the chance of passing when you really shouldn't.

The Visual Revolution

 Discussing our childhoods with a cousin, we both had the experience of Life magazine. For me it was a new perspective on the world.  Before another cousin passed on a few old copies of Life in the late 40's, I hadn't seen many pictures.  Newspapers at that time didn't print many photographs, certainly nothing in color. What pictures I did see were mostly advertising illustrations. 

There were, of course, the newsreels at the movies, but we didn't go to them very often, usually just to Disney movies maybe four or five times a year.

The same cousin who provided the issues of Life also passed on a few National Geographics.  Both magazines were a revelation, in their different ways.  For one, my definition of decolletage is linked to Sophia Loren. 

Since the 1950's we've become a much more visual culture, between the internet, cellphones, and streaming video. I don't know what the change means for other aspects of society, though likely today's childen will never have the same feelings as I did in viewing Ms. Loren (whose wikipedia entry images doesn't include any low necklines.)

Passing of an Era--1980?

 Currently reading Sen. Leahy's memoir. He entered the Senate in 1974 and was barely re-elected in 1980. It's an easy read, anecdotal and more about persons than policy or procedure.

One point--Reagan's victory in 1980 swept out a bunch of Democratic senators; only Leahy and Gary Hart of the 1974 Watergate class survived in the Senate.  Was this the turning point to partisanship?  He mentions Carter's farewell address, which included a warning against single-interest organizations. I think the reality is that organizations trying to influence Congress have become more and more specialized over the years.  For example, we used to have the "farm lobby", composed of three big national organizations--Farm Bureau, Grange, National Farmers Union. But over time single commodity groups have become more important and more wide-spread.

I've got a couple books in my library queue about the growth of partisan politices; both of which I think go back to the 1990's, but not before.

The Clarity of Hindsight

 The consensus of historians is the cause of the Civil War was slavery.  Evidence includes the assertions of many Southern leaders, as documented in the secession resolutions.

A few people have worried about a new civil war. I don't share that worry, but out of my contrarian spirit I wonder this: if we were to have a new civil war, what would be the cause? 

[Added: my point is that everything is clearer in hindsight.]

Make the Ivory Castle Into a Museum

 Politico has a piece on the fight for space on the Mall for the various museums. Everyone wants recognition.  In the old days we had the Freer, then we added an Asian art museum and an African Art museum underground. But these days, following in the paths of the National Museum of the American Indian and the National Museum of African American Art and Culture Congress is now trying to add museums for Latinos/Hispanics and Women on the Mall, despite laws which would prohibit the proposed sites.  In my lifetime we've added memorials for the Vietnam war, the Korean war, and World War II as well. We've added monuments for Ike, FDR, and MLK on or near the Mall, as well as the Holocaust museum.

What's next?  The obvious one is a "National Museum of Asian and Pacific Islander X".  But how about honoring the brave veterans of our longest wars, if not the bloodiest?  I think the potential demand is infinite, and it's an easy way for Congress to please an interest group.

Given the unending demand, I suggest we start repurposing buildings on the Mall, starting with the Administration building for USDA. When I joined ASCS in 1968 Chet Adell used to call it the "ivory tower", an indication of his disdain for the decisions made there (he was a key figure in implementing them). It's the only bureaucratic HQ on the Mall--so tear it down and use the site for a couple of the new museums.  Once we've set that precedent, we can go onto repurposing other of the structures.  

9600 Baud--Those Were the Days

 Kevin Drum delves into the past to get his telescope working. In this case the past is likely >30years. And the lesson is, even with IT, don't judge everything by its looks.

I remember the actual original mo-dem (modulator-demodulator).  Never bought one, but used one, very briefly. 

Forgotten History

Either the Post or the Times today had a piece on the effects of using primaries to select candidates, with the main argument being that primaries widened the gaps between parties and increased partisanship.  I don't have the patience to find the url.

The overall thesis may be right; I won't dispute it. But one sentence I did dispute--describing the time frame during which primaries became important.  It wasn't the 1980s, but earlier. 

For example, in the 1960 campaign, JFK and Hubert Humphrey were the main competitors in several state primaries. I acknowledge not every state held presidential primaries, but effectively JFK won the nomination by winning the primaries.  In 1960, and before, the selection process was a composite: "party bosses", the man in a given state or often a major citywho could sway the selection of delegates to the convention, and "favorite sons" usually the governor or highest elected official in the state who also could sway delegates.  (The "bosses" were behind the scenes; the "sons" might or might not have dreams of becoming the nominee themselves.)

Today states use primaries, in 1960 the bosses and sons relied on the primaries to assess the strength of candidates, rather like polls today. 

The Importance of History

Just getting back to the blog after a trip to NY Sheep and Wool. 

Noted something this morning on the holes in the sanctions on Russia--Greek oil tankers are getting a break.  The article referenced the large role Greeks play in oil shipments.

Led me to think of Aristotle Onassis, of Jackie fame.  Also of an early scandal after WWII when Greeks picked up cheap ships from war surplus.  

And finally to the Iliad and Greek ships.  I wonder, has Greece always been prominent in shipping since Troy?  Is that culture, or is it geography? 

Events Which Change Elections

NYTimes newsletter from Nate Cohn discussing election polls, also whether the Clinton indictment was a possible parallel to the impact of Dobbs on the campaign.

In comments there I suggested that Sputnik was in some ways comparable--a surprise event, raising the importance of a new issue, close enough to impact the 1958 elections in which Dems did very well --48 House and 15 Senate.

It helped that there was a recession in 58 and Ike was in his second term. It set the stage for JFK's pledge to get the nation moving and for the (false) concerns about "missile gap."

The Hero in History

 As part of a seminar on historiography I had to read Sidney Hook's book with this title.  Still have the paperback somewhere in the house, and I can remember the crimson cover, but not anything of its contents.

The issue is and was whether the individual can influence the course of history. The answer I give now, whether or not it represents Hook's conclusions: it depends, sometimes "yes", sometimes "no". 

It partly depends on the level of analysis. A story today in the Post on the death and burial of a WWII paratrooper, who fought heroically and was part of the force liberating a slave labor/concentration camp, where he formed a connection with a 17-year old inmate. He began working for peace.  Did he change the world?  No, 

Gorbachev died the other day--he changed history. You can safely say the Cold War would not have ended in the way it did if any other communist leader had been in office. 

Arms Dealings

 Got the book "Thundersticks" from the library. It's a history of the arms trade with Native Americans from the initial contact through the nineteenth century.

I've only read the first couple chapters--it seems a bit too scholarly for my current ability to focus.  But a couple things struck me:

• the pattern of arms dealing in the seventeenth century is similar to the pattern in modern times: countries/companies with advanced technology sell weapons to those who don't have the capability to produce their own.  (Natives weren't able to produce their own weapons or gunpowder, while they could make their own bullets if they could obtain the lead.) And the sales are used to influence international/intertribal politics, just as the Soviet Union/Russia sold weapons to India and the US sells to Israel and Saudi Arabia.
• what was surprising was how the natives financed their purchases.  Furs--beaver skins and deer skins, I knew.  But capturing slaves from other tribes for resale to colonists, possibly for export to the Caribbean--that was new. 

Changing Times--Reversals of Roles

 Live long enough and you might find white becomes black and black white.  That's an oversimplification, but it applies this week.

When I was young (1950's) those who took the Fifth Amendment were frowned upon--then they were often Hollywood radicals, what were called "fellow-travelers" of the Communist Party, possibly spies, and certainly people who deserved to be dismissed from their jobs, blackballed from the entertainment industry, and investigated, tried, and convicted, not necessarily in that order.

Meanwhile, the FBI was led by J.Edgar Hoover, renowned defender of the American Way against subversives, spies, criminals (except organized crime, since there was none), and deviants of all stripes.  

Today of course the former guy has taken the Fifth and some in the Republican party want to defund or blow up the FBI.

Because the right has reversed their field, it tends to force liberals to reverse theirs: to condemn those who take the Fifth, defend the powers of government in investigations, and protect the FBI.

Shirts in the Revolution Were Costly

 Reading Alan Taylor's "American Revolutions".  As usual he's quite readable, though there's not much new for me so far.  One trivia bit jumped out to me though:

In 1780 women in several of the states organized in support of the troops, soliciting donations*, and raised some $340,000, which they sent to Martha Washington to give to her husband to be distributed to the troops.  As Washington George figured, probably likely, the cash would be wasted on drink and frivolity he asked for shirts instead.  So they bought fabric with the money and made shirts, 2,200 of them.

So each shirt cost $154, and that's just for the fabric.

Note the date--1780.  By then Continental paper money wasn't worth a continental.

Clearance Rates on Homicides

 This piece describes six reasons that the clearance rate for homicides has declined. 

None of them mention my guess at a possible reason: a higher proportion of gang/drug-related murders. There were gangs in the 60's; the Mafia was active. But it seems to me there's more conflict among gangs now, fights over territory for selling drugs, etc.  Gangs have and enforce the code of silence, and they have more power to intimidate possible witnesses.  

Douglass on USA Mission

Frederick Douglass had a speech on the US, partially focused on Chinese immigration during a time when that was a big thing.  

Our geographical position, our relation to the outside world, our fundamental principles of government, world-embracing in their scope and character, our vast resources, requiring all manner of labor to develop them, and our already existing composite population, all conspire to one grand end, and that is, to make us the perfect national illustration of the unity and dignity of the human family that the world has ever seen.

That's a vision of America I can endorse.  It's backed by this Bloomberg interview about immigration.