Friday, May 02, 2014

something about "The French Revolution and Napoleon"


The French Revolution and Napoleon distills with flourish the fiery, priority years of French, Western, and arguably world history from about 1789 to 1815. The bulk of those years encompass the reign of Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte; but in his book, Charles Downer Hazen gives equal time to the relatively brief epochal years of the French Revolution.

When this history begins, monarchies exercised feudal rulership over Europe, mostly. Francenine-tenths of which was peasantswas suffering the mismanagement of Louis XVI and massive class inequalities of wealth, privileges, rights, and justice. By 1789, the treasury runs dry and a series of national assemblies, constitutional conventions, and emergency committees gather in Paris. Political factions spring up, feuds begin, and revolutionaries quarrel with each other and with the keepers of the status quo. At one point, a draft of the constitution incorporates the Catholic Church with the State, sparking another feud, this time between the elected clergy and the old faithful. This is how the French Revolution begins.

King Louis XVI, of course, is an immediate underdog. But before the revolution reaches his doorstep, France finds itself at war with a Europe full of worried kings and French expatriate clergy and nobles agitating abroad for counter-revolution. Despite a bad start, France somehow manages to fend off and actually beat the primary aggressors, Austria and Prussia.

Fighting this war keeps France from total dissolution and buys King Louis XVI some time. But the war also spurs some of the first ultra-violence, as panicking nationalists find and kill any suspected domestic traitors and terrorists. From here, the feuds between political factions bring France to a boil. As the balance of power tips, the majority at once begins imprisoning and executing its enemies. This so-called Reign of Terror (also known as simply The Terror) ultimately discredits the radical majority, allowing some sense to emerge from the bloody chaos enough so that a functional, albeit ultimately temporary government and constitution are established.

Meanwhile, having fended off domestic mobs from the convention halls at home and then leading French soldiers to victory abroad, Napoleon steps up center stage. He makes use of any time he gets in Paris, networking and then organizing a coup d'etat. Of course, his version of the constitution makes Napoleon Emperor of France. Now head of the state, Napoleon establishes a new norm and order. This order honors the revolutionary principle of equality, more or less, but not liberty, and for the people this is enough for awhile.

But the temporary peace that allowed Napoleon to take the throne dissipates, and France is once again at war with everyone in Europe and Russia. Under Napoleon's direction, France somehow keeps winning against them all except for England, whose Navy has the definite edge. Napoleon feuds with the Pope in Rome, but forms an alliance with Czar Alexander I in Russia, with whom some of France's spoils are shared. Trying a different tactic, Napoleon aims to bleed England of its wealth by declaring a boycott of English goods across the expanded French Empire. But ultimately this causes as much or more hardship for France's subordinate kingdoms, whose peasant class needs the English trade.

So the relative peace in the expanded French Empire withers under this hardship, and again the French expatriate clergy and nobles agitate abroadincluding those in Russiaagainst Emperor Napoleon. Czar Alexander I violates the boycott and Napoleon invades Russia. The Russian military retreats but the Russian climate fights the battle with France and Napoleon, his forces decimated, is forced to withdraw and then struggle to maintain control of rebelling occupied German states. Russia and England join Austria and Prussia in the fight, and Napoleon loses Germany. His determination to keep the remainder of his empire proves hopeless, however, and Napoleon abdicates rule of France and is banished to the island of Elba.

All that, Napoleon's rule from 1804 to 1814, would be a great enough story. But Napoleon authors a powerful final chapter when he raises an army on Elba and embarks on a sequel. Evading the English Navy, the ousted Emperor sails to France and marches to Paris where he is welcomed a hero. The order established in his absence, headed by the installed King Louis XVII, dissatisfies the people. The European alliance that defeated him last time, feuding amongst themselves over how to split up the defeated French Empire, resolve to put a stop to Napoleon once and for all. Napoleon rushes an army to Belgium to beat the allies to the punch, but there he is met by the Duke of Wellington, who defeats Napoleon at Waterloo. Napoleon is banished this time to the island of St. Helena in the South Atlantic where he dies six years later.

The French Revolution and Napoleon was published in 1917 when European rivals were still burying millions in World War I. Author Charles Downer Hazen uses his preface to recognize this, urging that "there is much instruction to be gained from the study of a similar crisis." Of course, in its way, WWI begot WWII so, if there were any lessons to learn at all, nobody learned them.


Notes:
At one point, King Louis XVI's attempt to flee the palace in Versailles turns into a freakish parade, the heads of his guards hoisted high on pikes by mocking crowds.



Sunday, April 20, 2014

About life down this hill



























Life in itself
Is nothing,
An empty cup, a flight of uncarpeted stairs.
It is not enough that yearly, down this hill,
April
Comes like an idiot, babbling and strewing flowers.



From "Spring," by Edna St. Vincent Millay


Friday, April 11, 2014

something about Christopher Hitchens' "No One Left To Lie To: The Triangulations of William Jefferson Clinton"


In The Trial of Henry Kissinger, Christopher Hitchens assailed the supposedly murderous ambition of one American politician. In No One Left To Lie To: The Triangulations of William Jefferson Clinton, he tackles another. But Clinton does not have as much blood on his hands. Instead, most of Hitchens' blitzkriegs target Clinton for being a peerlessly sleazy, corrupt, debased fraud. Clinton seduced and raped women, then hushed them with threats. He pretended to be a populist, but pushed policies that benefited the elite at the expense of the people, especially the disadvantaged. He played to racial fears and stereotypes, and still managed to gain favor among minority voters. He and his wife, Hillary, pushed healthcare reform that favored the top four or five insurance companies. He tapped soft money resources and intentionally confused those secretive donations and private funds with public financing so he could use all the money to achieve his ends. He ordered bombing campaigns in Sudan, Afghanistan, and Iraq to provide political cover during his impeachment. He told lie after lie after lie. Hitchens is merciless here, peppering his insults with wit and delivering this diatribe in pointed prose. His sourcing leaves something to be desired, but Hitchens fires off good arguments that should give pause to any Clinton supporter.


Note: 
I sometimes come across conspiratorial claims about Clinton (and his political machine) murdering opponents or anyone capable of implicating his family in a crime. There is no such content here.


Friday, April 04, 2014

"The Wizard of Oz" and "Mad Men"


The classic film "Wizard of Oz" depicts a young farm girl journeying through the fantasy land of Oz; the highly rated TV show "Mad Men" follows Don Draper, a highly successful executive in the golden age of advertising. What do the two have in common?

Oz is a magical place; when she first awakes there, Dorothy is dazzled by all the rich color and imagination-defying people and places. But soon she encounters Oz's darker passages, the bends in the road populated by witches and angry trees. Dorothy herself is believed by the populous to be a witch capable of and gifted with extraordinary ability. But, of course, she's really just a simple farm girl. Her journey through--and eventually out of--Oz is a a journey of self discovery. The land of Oz proves to be a dream, a world of false promise. Dorothy tries to find her heart's desire only to discover she had it all along back home with her family.

Advertising in 1960s-era New York City is widely considered the industry's golden age. Don Draper starts life as dirt-poor Dick Whitman, a farm boy who spent much of his formative years meekly in a whorehouse. But during the Korean War, he takes up the identity of a fellow soldier who, unbeknownst to most of the world, actually died in combat. With this identity, and entering the world of advertising, the new Don has the chance to escape his troubled, humble past and build a new life with his confident good looks and intelligence. But the business of advertising, while high in status and flush with cash, hides a competitive world of illusion, promising a life of fulfillment and happiness that can never be delivered. Don's journey on "Mad Men" is proving to also be one of self discovery in which our protagonist returns to his roots and his family.

So Oz and advertising are both worlds of illusion. Both Dorothy and Don are thought of as something they are not. Both characters journey though a land seeking something that ultimately they had all along. Etc ... you can figure out the rest.

Notes:
  • There could be (and probably are) more specific correspondences between the film and TV show. For example, Don's partners could fit the roles of the talking lion, tin man, and scarecrow; Pete Campbell is the Cowardly Lion, Roger Sterling is the Tin Man, and Peggy Olson (and maybe Joan Holloway) is the Scarecrow.
  • When we last saw Don Draper, he had returned with his family to the whorehouse-home Dick Whitman grew up in. Similarly, at the end of her journey, Dorothy ends up back home in Kansas, surrounded by the family who loves her.



Friday, March 21, 2014

something about "The Trial of Henry Kissinger" by Christopher Hitchens


British-American author, intellectual, and journalist Christopher Hitchens spent most of his political life on the left, but spent much of his later years defending neoconservatives. Ideologically he seemed to move from socialist to constitutional republican with Marxist sympathies. Despite this shift, Hitchens consistently attacked abuses of power. One great abuser, in Hitchens' view, was Henry Kissinger.

Kissinger served as National Security Advisor and Secretary of State under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. For Hitchens, Kissinger's Realpolitik approach to foreign policy led him eventually to violate international human rights law, the law of armed conflict, international criminal law, and US domestic law. In The Trial of Henry Kissinger, Hitchens seeks an indictment; in fact, he expects it.

Hitchens organizes his case against Kissinger neatly, addressing each crime separately, giving crisp narratives describing the immediate contexts, characters, and instances of moral failings for which Kissinger should be held accountable. Kissinger's six worst crimes as detailed by Hitchens: mass killings in Indochina (Vietnam and places nearby), killings and assassination in Bangladesh, coup and killings in Chile, coup and violence in Cyprus, genocide in East Timor, plotting to kidnap and/or kill a journalist in DC. Hitchens thinks Kissinger guilty of all this (and more) via his complicity or direct responsibility, depending on the case and how much we feel comfortable deducing from the evidence.

Before reaching a verdict about Kissinger's guilt, I'd argue a jurist would need at least two things: (1) an understanding of Realpolitik in light of American foreign policy, and (2) a briefing on the broader Cold War context in which much of these events occurred. But Hitchens doesn't give us this context; for him, this has nothing to do with either. This a time to exact punishment on a man who acted out of pure, cold ambition.

This is a short, fast read, and Hitchens' style goes down smoothly. A good read for a quick primer on some very dirty politics.



Friday, March 14, 2014

(or posts) Kreator, "Stream Of Consciousness"





There is no difference between death and life
Just a circle to be closed by time
Creatures comforts in this earthly plane
Have become more hallowed than wisdom today

In the stream of consciousness, we cannot see the truth
Play your role so perfectly no matter which life we choose

Emotional terror confusing our minds
Love and hate keeping us blind
Pretend death is the end of the line
Expect reward in paradise

In the stream of consciousness, we cannot see the truth
Play your role so perfectly no matter which life we choose

Living in an ice age, emotions gone numb
The truth once so near, but now so far away
So turn another page, get our daily work done
All the nightmares are clear and happening today

Mindless fools obey all rules
Lost all worth, born to serve

Emotional terror confusing our minds
Hate and love is keeping us blind
Creature comforts in this earthly plane
Have become more hallowed than wisdom today

There is no difference between death and life
Just a circle to be closed by time
Pretend death is the end of the line
Expect reward in paradise

In the stream of consciousness, we cannot see the truth
Play your role so perfectly no matter which life we choose



Friday, March 07, 2014

Rocky Balboa and baptism under fire


In the film "Rocky Balboa" (aka, "Rocky VI"), our protagonist, Rocky, is now a retired former heavyweight champ almost two decades past his prime; the reigning heavyweight champ is Mason Dixon. But pundits say the current roster of boxers lacks true champs, leaving Dixon plagued by doubts about his legacy and legitimacy. The implied message here is that his fighting Rocky would give him credibility and, unofficially, it would harken a new boxing era. At one point in the film, Dixon's trainer delivers this: 
Martin: You got everything money can buy, except what it can't. Its pride. Pride is what got your ass out here, and losing is what brought ya back. But people like you?, they need to be tested. They need a challenge. 
Dixon: But you know that ain't never gonna happen. There ain't anybody out there, Martin. 
Martin: There's always somebody out there. Always. And when that time comes and you find something standing in front of you, something that ain't running and ain't backing up and is hitting on you and you're too damn tired to breathe; you find that situation on you--that's good. 'Cause that's baptism under fire! Oh, you get through that and you find the only kind of respect that matters in this damn world: self-respect.


Saturday, March 01, 2014

Alan Parsons Project lyric


The sun in your eyes made some of the lies worth believing.


Friday, February 28, 2014

briefly about "Mortality" by Christopher Hitchens


British-American author and public intellectual Christopher Hitchens was diagnosed with cancer in the summer of 2010 and died December 2011. Mortality is his final work, a meandering collection of essays penned during his painful physical decline. Mentally and emotionally, however, judging by this book, Hitchens stayed the picture of health. In these pages he imparts the experience of dying slowly, offers up a couple memories and lessons learned, and renews his atheism. Hitchens subtly urges us to appreciate health--our speaking voice, in particular. And, about that health, he aims to disabuse us of the idea that what doesn't kill us makes us stronger. This last point is not to say that Hitchens regrets his steady flow of cigarettes, scotch, wine, and the late nights he spent with friends; it just seems that life--his especially--necessitates many loosely calculated risks. In the way of an end-of-life perspective, he writes,
So we are left with something quite unusual in the annals of unsentimental approaches to extinction: not the wish to die with dignity but the desire to have died.