Showing posts with label 1970s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1970s. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 19, 2024

Im Westen Nichts Neues (All Quiet On the Western Front).

 


He fell in October, 1918, on a day that was so quiet and still on the whole front, that the army report confined itself to the single sentence: All quiet on the Western Front.

He had fallen forward and lay on the earth as though sleeping. Turning him over one saw that he could not have suffered long; his face had an expression of calm, as though almost glad the end had come.

The last two paragraphs of All Quiet On The Western Front

I've never reviewed All Quiet on the Western Front, even though I'd long ago seen the prior two versions.  I just saw the newest, German made, production of the book, which in Germany was released under the novel's German title, Im Westen nichts Neues, which literally translates as "in the West nothing new".*

All Quiet On The Western Front has a reputation as being the greatest anti-war novel ever written.  I'm sorry to say that I haven't actually read it, which I'll have to do.  Indeed, the recent German made version of the novel sort of compels me to do so.

The novel was first adapted to film in 1930 in an American version, which is a great film in its own right.

It was later adopted to a television in 1979, in another version that is very well regarded.  In 2022 this German version was released and shown on Netflix.  My original intent was to review just that version, but you really can't.  You have to review all three.

The best of the three is frankly the first one, although it does suffer from being a film that, due to cinematography, and due to pacing, hasn't aged as well as it should have.  It's hard not to watch the 1930 version and not, at least at first, appreciate that you are watching an old film.  

Still, this version sets the story at well, and perhaps with more than a degree of unintended irony in that the film came before the Nazis came to power in Germany in 1932, and therefore the early scene of enthusiastic school boys being eager for the war were ominous, retrospectively.  It's a gritty, good protrayal.

The 1979 television version is good as well, but frankly I just couldn't quite get around Richard Thomas in the role of the main protagonist, Paul Bäumer.  Lew Ayres was better in that role.  For that matter, Ernest Borgnine, who almost always turned in a good performance, did in the 1979 version as well, but he's just way too old for the German NCO Stanislaus Katczinsky he portrays.  For that matter, Louis Robert Wolheim really was as well, at age 50, but he carries the role off better, even though he was within a year of his own death at the time.

Anyhow, Thomas was so whiny, in a way, in The Waltons that I just can't get around that in this film, which really isn't his fault.  I just can't see him going from a green, naive recruit to a hardened combat veteran.

Which takes us to the new production.

This is the first German production of the film, and it shows it.  The production values in the film are absolutely excellent.  the material details are superb and. . . . the plot massively departs from the novel.

And for that reason, frankly, it suffers.  

This film really carries the post World War Two German guilt/excuse into a World War One work that was a novel.  It doesn't, therefore, really get Remarque's warning about militarism across, so much as it portrays average Germans as victims of the Great War and future victims of the Second World War.  The death of Katczinsky, which is a completely pointless combat death in the novel and first two films, is a weird murder by a French child in this version.  

And the ending of this movie departs massively from the novel and looses the point of it.  The protagonist dies on a quiet day, like thousands of soldiers did.  In the new German version he died in a  massive late war German assault at the end of the war.  That's completely different.  

For that matter, that's a major departure from actual history and it ties in, just a tad, to the Stabbed In the Back myth. The Germans had an ongoing revolution at home and the Frontsoldaten were collapsing. You couldn't have ordered them into an attack in late 1918 no matter how hard you tried.

So, the first version is the best.  I don't think I could get through the second again, and the third version is worth watching, once.

*This review was started in October, 2022.

Monday, March 18, 2024

Monday, March 18, 1974. Embargo lifted.

Today In Wyoming's History: March 181974 The oil embargo against the US by oil producing Arab states, called in protest of U.S. support of Israel during the 1973 October War, is lifted. U.S. dependency on Arab oil was already well known to the government, given successful efforts to have the Arabs keep the price of oil from rising during later stages of the Vietnam War.

The Robert Redford version of The Great Gatsby appeared on the cover of Time.  It's frankly not all that good.

Last prior:

Monday, March 11, 2024

Monday, March 11, 1974. The Obstinate

Imperial Japanese Army Second Lieutenant Hiroo Onoda formally in the Philippines.  He had been recently informed by his former commanding officer, Major Yoshimi Taniguchi, that the war was over.


Originally part of a party of four such soldiers, one who abandoned the group in 1949 to surrender, they carried out guerilla raids which ultimately reduced Onoda to the sole survivor.  Their ongoing obstinacy was frankly irrational as well as deadly.

He found post-war Japan disappointing and became a cattle rancher in Brazil.

Contrary to popular belief, he was not the last Japanese soldier still holding out.  At least one more, Teruo Nakamura, who was Taiwanese, was in Indonesia.  He was actually a private and of native Taiwanese background, with a poor command of Japanese and Chinese.  He'd be captured in December 1974.  Another, Fumio Nakahara, may have been holding out in the Philippines as late as 1980, although that has never been determined.

A ceasefire between Iraq and the Kurdish Democratic Party was subject to an ultimatum, which provided that Kurdistan could be autonomous.  The offer would expire without acceptance, and a renewed war resumed.

The United Kingdom tended its Oil Embargo related state of emergency.

Last prior:

Friday, March 8, 1974. Exit Brady Bunch

Friday, March 8, 2024

Friday, March 8, 1974. Exit Brady Bunch

The iconic 1970s television show The Brady Bunch aired for the last time.  It first aired in 1970.

Marcia, Marcia Marcia. . . 

Maureen McCormick, perhaps the most recalled character of the series, as Marcia.

Last prior:

Wednesday, March 6, 2024

March 6, 1974. Tout-nucléaire

French Prime Minister Pierre Messmer announced his government's decision to implement the Tout-nucléaire ("Total Nuclear") plan for all electricity in France. The goal was to accomplish this by 2000.  The goals were mostly met.

The US could easily do this, but it would require a scientifically educated public that wasn't easily swayed by raving BS, an overall problem that confronts the US on every level currently.

Last prior:

Tuesday, March 5, 1974. Portugal decides to stay.

Tuesday, March 5, 2024

Tuesday, March 5, 1974. Portugal decides to stay.

Portugese troops in Mozambique.  By Joaquim Coelho, author from Espaço Etéreo, a compilation of texts and pictures from people involved in the war. Permission is granted here, and personal e-mails between me (Nuno) and Joaquim (backed up for reference). - The copyright holder of this work allows anyone to use it for any purpose including unrestricted redistribution, commercial use, and modification.Please check the source to verify that this is correct. In particular, note that publication on the Internet, like publication by any other means, does not in itself imply permission to redistribute. Files without valid permission should be tagged with {{subst:npd}}.Usage notes:If the work requires attribution, use {{Attribution}} instead.If this is your own work, please use {{Cc-zero}} instead., Copyrighted free use, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=685173

Portuguese Prime Minister Marcello Caetano informed the Portuguese National Assembly that Portuguese Guinea, Angola and Mozambique would retain their colonial status in spite of ongoing guerilla wars.  He stated that elections "would be inappropriate for the African mentality."

Ethiopian Emperor and absolute monarch Haile Selassie pledged democratic reforms in an unprecedented national address on radio and television.

Eva Mendes was born in Miami.

Last prior:

Monday, March 4, 1974. Suez.

Monday, March 4, 2024

Monday, March 4, 1974. Suez.

Israel completed the first phase of its withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula 24 hours ahead of schedule. This gave Egypt control of both sides of the Suez Canal for the first time since 1967.


Last prior:

Sunday, February 24, 1974. Advent of Fireforce, getting mad at Confucious.

Saturday, February 24, 2024

Sunday, February 24, 1974. Advent of Fireforce, getting mad at Confucious.

The Fireforce vertical envelopment tactic was used by the 1st Battalion of the Rhodesian Light Infantry in the first example of its use.  The tactic was developed as Rhodesian Aérospatiale Alouette III had a limited carrying capacity in comparison to the very large helicopters used by the US in similar roles.

Rhodesian Alouette III.

The use of aircraft outside of their original intended roles was fairly common in African wars of the 60s, 70s and 80s.

The People's Republic of China began a a nationwide campaign to discredit Confucius and Lin Biao as "reactionaries who tried to turn back the wheel of history" which was certainly cutting a pretty wide swath given that Confucius died in 479 BC, and Lin Biao in 1971.

Last prior:

Sunday, February 18, 2024

Legislatures. Back to the future and other diversions?

A scene from the early 1970s Wyoming legislatures at the Hitching Post?  See below.

Former Wyoming Legislator Tom Lubnau, who was truly one of the great ones in the old school Wyoming way, has taken up writing columns for The Cowboy State Daily. That's to the CSD's credit and shows its effort to become a real electronic journal, something that's impressive considering it was set up as a right wing organ.  Lubnau is a conservative Wyoming Republican, but a conservative Wyoming Republican, something that's becoming increasingly rare.  

Or maybe not.

He's not afraid of poking at the wolverine.

He recently wrote this interesting item:

Tom Lubnau: Legislating Private Parts Is Popular This Legislative Session

This op ed is written from the point of view that virtually defined Wyoming Republicans for my whole adult life, up until the Obama/Trump Era, when things began to get really radical in the legislature.

His article is illuminating and I'm linking it in for several reasons.

One of those is that Lubnau give a really nice discussion of the law as it used to be, on some of the same topics that I addressed here:

Until Death Do Us Part. Divorce and Related Domestic Law. Late 19th/Early 20th Century, Mid 20th Century, Late 20th/Early 21st Century. An example of the old law, and the old customs, being infinately superior to the current ones and a call to return to them.


I note this, in particular, from his article:

I guess in thinking about it, I came of age in the Disco Era and that's the law I'm familiar with.  Lubnau is right, the GOP in this state, from the 70s on, really didn't care what you were doing, with whom, behind closed doors, as long as you kept your business to yourself, and it also didn't really care if your marriages broke up, etc., as a result of it, or anything else.  I'd assumed it had long been that way, but as Lubnau's quote from the Wyoming Compiled Statutes, 1910, shows, that's not the case.

I looked it up in the actual 1910 Code, and Lubnau was a little off.  He must have been reading the 1970s vintage codification, or miscited it.  The provison, and those otherwise cited in this thread, were still there in 1957, the last version of the by then much expanded Wyoming statutes I had handy, and they were almost certainly there up until the early 1970s.  In 1910, it was a different statutory section that the cited number (and the number was different in 1957), but here, right from the 1910 book, is what it states.


This is in a section of the statutes on offenses to public morality, and in looking at it, I found that something else I had thought to be illegal, but couldn't later fine, was in fact illegal, that being cohabitation without being married.


So, in my earlier statement that I had thought it was illegal, was in fact correct.  It was illegal.

Seduction of minors, keeping in mind that the age of majority, was a crime, but not quite in the fashion modern statutes provide for it, which would now be a species of rape. At the time, seduction of underage women, at least "older" ones, was a misdemeanor, although this raises interesting questions given that women could clearly marry at 18, or younger, at the time. This relates back to the earlier discussion we had, in the threat noted above, regarding Seduction at law.


At the same time, however, Section 5803 of the 1910 Code provide that rape, conventionally defined, was a felony, as well as having carnal knowledge of a female under age 18.  The dual age of majority, long a feature of Wyoming's law, was apparently already there.  Particularly notable, however, is that the law didn't distinguish between rape and statutory rape, they were the same.

It did distinguish between male and female.  A man could not be a victim of rape under the statute, although that would have constituted assault in any event.

Lubnau goes on in his article to comment:
It seems, now, there is a trend to sponsor legislation to invite the State of Wyoming back into the bedroom.

One has to wonder if regulating bedroom conduct is the pressing issue of the day, or if there is some other motive such as creating a campaign issue for the election season, that is driving the legislation.  In other words, how many people do you meet every day whose biggest concern is lack of regulation of private parts? 
Following that, he takes a look at HB 50 (What is a Woman Act) HB 68 repealing the obscenity exception for school, college, university, museum or public library activities or in the course of employment of such an organization, HB 88 making it illegal to “publicly communicate” obscene material, Democratic HB 76, making it illegal to interfere with a woman’s right to an abortion if the fetus is not viable*, or in cases of rape, incest or threat to the life of the mother., HB 137 requiring a pregnant mother to receive an ultrasound prior to receiving a chemical abortion “in order to provide the pregnant woman the opportunity to view the active ultrasound of the unborn child and hear the heartbeat of the unborn child if the heartbeat is audible.”

And that's probably not all of these.

They all did fail, fwiw, most failing to secure introduction.  The reasons vary, including procedural, but it might actually show that more of the old style, post mid 1970s Republicans remain in the legislature than might be supposed.  For that matter, however, it might also show that a lot of the populist legislators everywhere, at the state and Federal level, aren't hugely familiar with the legislative process.  In Wyoming trying to advance a bunch of these bills in a budget session, after declaring that you had the strength to advance them, was likely a mistake.

The obscenity one is interesting, as the 1910 Code had a section on that, providing:


The failed proposed statues state:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0068

Obscenity-impartial conformance.

Sponsored by: Representative(s) Hornok, Angelos, Bear, Neiman, Ottman, Pendergraft, Penn, Rodriguez-Williams, Strock, Trujillo and Ward and Senator(s) Ide

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; repealing an exception to the crime of promoting obscenity regarding possessing obscene materials for specified bona fide educational purposes; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 6-4-302(c)(ii) is repealed.

Section 2.  This act is effective July 1, 2025.

And:

HOUSE BILL NO. HB0088

Public display of obscene material.

Sponsored by: Representative(s) Ottman, Davis, Hornok, Penn and Strock

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; prohibiting public communication of obscene material; providing a definition; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 6‑4‑301(a) by creating a new paragraph (vi) and 6‑4‑302(a)(iii) are amended to read:

6‑4‑301.  Definitions.

(a)  As used in this article:

(vi)  "Publicly communicate" means to display, post, exhibit, give away or vocalize material in such a way that the material may be readily and distinctly perceived by the public at large by normal unaided vision or hearing.

6‑4‑302.  Promoting obscenity; penalties.

(a)  A person commits the crime of promoting obscenity if he:

(iii)  Knowingly disseminates or publicly communicates obscene material.

Section 2.  This act is effective July 1, 2024.

The abortion bills, of which we have now had a variety, are interesting too, as I ran across the original 1910 statutes on that, which may well have been modified before 1973 (I don't know). Abortion was still illegal in 1973, I just don't know if the exact same text remained until then. In 1910, the law provided:
§ 5808. Attempted miscarriage. 
Whoever prescribes or administers to any pregnant woman, or to any woman whom he supposes to be preg- nant , any drug , medicine , or substance whatever, with intent thereby to procure a miscarriage of such woman ; or with like intent uses any instrument or means whatever, unless such miscarriage is necessary to preserve her life, shall if the woman miscarries or dies in consequence thereof , be imprisoned in the penitentiary not more than fourteen years .
§ 5809. Woman soliciting miscarriage . Every woman who shall so- licit of any person any medicine , drug or substance or thing whatever , and shall take the same , or shall submit to any operation or other means whatever , with intent thereby to procure a miscarriage (except when necessary for the purpose of saving the life of the mother or child), shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars and imprisoned in the county jail not more than six months ; and any person who , in any manner whatever, unlawfully aids or assists any such woman to a violation of this section , shall be liable to the same penalty.
I'm not going to comment on any of these, but I'm only noting that this provides a really interesting example of the evolution of the Legislature, and for that matter a Western legislature that's been Republican controlled the entire time. Republicans of the 70s and 80s would have a hard time recognizing the party today if they hadn't been there for the evolution.  I suppose that's true of the Democrats then and now as well.

I'm also noting it as I earlier quixotically argued that the heart balm statutes and accompanying provisions ought to be restored.  Lubnau has gotten into the weeks and found one of the statutes of that era that I didn't address, §7206 of the 1910 code.

Going back to that code, a fair amount of it would be unconstitutional today, as the United States Supreme Court had found that the sodomy provisions are contrary to some vague unwritten stuff in the penumbra of the Constitution having to do with privacy.  "Privacy" doesn't actually appear in the text of the Constitution.  The last crime noted, and the one about animals, is probably still capable of being illegal, and actually the last one, which would have to do with adults in relation to minors is probably actually still illegal elsewhere.  To some degree, with this statute, you have to read between the lines, but to some extent you do not.  The law basically criminalized anything contrary to nature, and it was pretty clear that there was an accepted concept of what nature, in this context, meant.  Frankly there still really is, although now, save for minors and "beasts" we license it societally.

The provisions on rape and abortion could probably have just been left alone, keeping in mind that abortion was legalized under Roe, and then taken back to the state under Dodd's.  Had that been all left untouched, the law would arguably have been clearer now than it is.  Interestingly, the statute drafters of that era tended to use an economy of words which tended to make their intent quite clear.

What about the statutes pertaining to "heart balm" and, well, sex?

Today's legislature of the Freedom Caucus variety, all over the country, clearly looks backwards to restoring society to what they imagine it was. This actually shows what it was.  And not just that, but the statutes regarding divorce as well.

Let's look once more.


"Shacking up" was illegal.  Given the present state of Constitutional Law, I doubt it could be made illegal (I'm quite certain it couldn't be).  Would the social warriors be game for trying?

This concept, quite frankly, underpins everyone other one regarding marriage.  It was designed to prevent what the 1910 statues called "bastardy" and the burden it created on society, and it grasped what marriage really was.  For that reason, quite frankly, I'd be for its return (although as stated, I don't think it can be under the current interpretation of the Constitution.  Those populist right-wingers who would not go that far, probably ought to reconsider their positions on things

Those who would be horrified by such a proposal, and frankly that's probably most people now, ought to reconsider their support for populism, if they are populists.

And then there is this:


Would the legislature of today go that far?  Again, this is clearly unconstitutional under the current law, and it would in fact outlaw homosexual conduct, as well as a bunch of non-homosexual conduct.  Presumably no modern legislature would be comfortable with what the pre 1970s Wyoming legislature, and pre 1970s Wyoming society, was in this era.  Probably nobody ought to be, as this is really invasive.

What about divorce, the subject that the other thread was sort of on, and this one sort of is on as well, and which again gets to the heart of the topic.

Ealier in the state's history, the legislature barred remarriage within a year, which is signficant if we consider that cohabitation without being married was flat out illegal.  The 1910 statutes provide:
§ 3951. Remarriage prohibited within one year . 
During the period of one year from the granting of a decree of divorce , neither party thereto shall be permitted to remarry to any other person . Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a mis- demeanor , and shall be fined in any sum not less than twenty - five dollars nor more than one hundred dollars , or be imprisoned in the county jail not exceeding three months , in the discretion of the court.
Frankly, I'd think this a worthwhile provision and it likewise, like the staute on cohabitation, ought to be restored.

Going from there, I'd note that in 1910 the statutes on dissolving marriages started off iwth annullement, which is now an afterthough in the statutes.  It wasn't theen, and was relatively extenisvely addressed, indicaditng that hte drafteres thought that a more likely event, potentially, then divorce.

Divorce required cause, those being:
§ 3924. Causes for divorce . 

A divorce from the bonds of matrimony may be decreed by the district court of the county where the parties , or one of them reside , on the application of the aggrieved party by petition , in either of the following.cases : 
First - When adultery has been committed by any husband or wife . 
Second - When one of the parties was physically incompetent at the time of the marriage , and the same has continued to the time of the divorce . 
Third - When one of the parties has been convicted of a felony and sentenced to imprisonment therefor in any prison , and no pardon granted , after a divorce for that cause, shall restore such party to his or her conjugal rights . 
Fourth - When either party has wilfully deserted the other for the term of one year . 
Fifth - When the husband or wife shall have become an habitual drunkard . 
Sixth - When one of the parties has been guilty of extreme cruelty to the other . 
Seventh - When the husband for the period of one year , has negected to provide the common necessaries of life , when such neglect is not the result of poverty, on the part of the husband, which he could not avoid by ordinary industry . 
Eighth - When either party shall offer such indignities to the other , as shall render his or her condition intolerable . 
Ninth - When the husband shall be guilty of such conduct as to constitute him a vagrant within the meaning of the law respecting vag- rancy . 
Tenth - When prior to the contract of marriage or the solemnization thereof, either party shall have been convicted of a felony or infamous crime in any state , territory or county without knowledge on the part of the other party of such fact at the time of such marriage . Eleventh - When the intended wife at the time of contracting mariage, or at the time of the solemnization thereof shall have been pregnant by any other man than her intended husband and without his knowledge at the time of such solemnization . [ R. S. 1887 , § 1571 ; R. S. 1899 , § 2988. ] 

 Evidence was required:

§ 3947. Corroborating evidence required . 

No decree of divorce, and of the nullity of a marriage, shall be made solely on the declara- tions , confessions or admissions of the parties , but the court shall in all cases require other evidence in its nature corroborative of such declarations , concessions or admissions . [ R. S. 1887 , § 1597 ; R. S. 1899 , § 3011. ] 

§ 3948. Proof of adultery insufficient when . 

In any action brought for divorce on the ground of adultery , although the fact of adultery be established , the court may deny a divorce in the following cases: 

First - When the offense shall appear to have been committed by the procurement , or with the connivance of the plaintiff . 

Second - When the offense charged shall have been forgiven by the injured party and such forgiveness shall be proved by express proof , or by the voluntary cohabitation of the parties with the knowledge of the offense . 

Third - When there shall have been no express forgiveness and no voluntary cohabitation of the parties but the action shall not have been brought within three years after discovery by the plaintiff of the of fense charged . [ R. S. 1887 , § 1598 ; R. S. 1899 , § 3012. ] 

Provisions were provided for to restrain and examine the husband during divorce proceedings, but not the wives.

Again, the old law here would work, or at least it would with modification. Would anyone be bold enough to suggest it be restored.

I doubt it, and therein lies an element of built in hypocrisy of the modern populist social warrior.  To really get at the core of this, you have to get to the core of it.  But hardly anyone is willing to even contemplate what that means.

Lubnau has pointed out that, at one time, the laws were much more restrictive in conservative Wyoming.  In the 1970s, the Republican Party, not the Democrats, radically liberalized them.  But not only did the US become much more liberal, all society did as well, for good or ill (probably mostly for ill).  Many of those who carry the banner for a return to what they regard as having been great aren't prepared to go back to what that really meant, but like Dr. Zhivago states in the novel, an operation cutting out corruption, if that's what you are really doing, is a deep operation.  

Put another way, you can't really address these social issues unless you are prepared to go to the very core of them, and that would mean addressing male/female, male/male, female/female "adult" relationships at their core.  The only thing that the populist far right is really willing to do is to address homosexuality in its various expressions. But that's relatively rare, and if you aren't willing to go further, and say that those relationships outside of marriage are wrong, and that you marry once and for life, well then, you really are just pointing fingers.

Our perfunctory favorite couples again.

Footnotes:

* This bill provides an example of  why the Wyoming Democrats go nowhere.  There's no reason for the Democratics here to be the party of death, like they insist on being elsewhere, and bills like this keep moderate Republicans who would cross over from doing so.  This is particularly the case as this bill stands less than 0 chance of being introduced.



Tuesday, February 13, 2024

Wednesday, February 14, 1974. Solzhenitsyn expelled.


A Soviet court revoked Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's citizenship and ordered him expelled from the USSR.  He was placed on an Aeroflot flight to West Germany with only the clothes on  is back.

His family was left in the Soviet Union.

The following day, the Soviet Ministry of Culture directed libraries containing One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich to remove them.

The novel is one of my favorites.

Last prior:

Thursday, February 7, 1974: Blog Mirror: "Blazing Saddles" Premieres

Wednesday, February 7, 2024

Thursday, February 7, 1974: Blog Mirror: "Blazing Saddles" Premieres


February 7, 1974: "Blazing Saddles" Premieres

I love that movie.

Mel Brook's great comedic spoof Western movies remains one of the all-time greats. It could not be made today.

Grenada became independent.

Prime Minister Edward Heath called for a dissolution of Parliament and new elections due to the governments' inability to resolve a coal miner's strike.

Coal mining had once been a major industry in the UK but was on its decline by the 1970s. The labor victory would be short lived as the Thatcher government of the 80s began to close coal mines down in a direction that indicated the industry was clearly done for, something she could do because of the nationalization of mines.  The trend had been going on since World War Two in any event.

Eight coal fired power plants remain in operation in the UK, all of which are slated to be closed this year. Six underground mines remain in operation, and two open pit mines. Mining communities have not been able to adjust to the change, something which should concern Wyoming.

The Nixon Administration entered into an agreement to revise the 1903 Panama Canal Treaty.

Moro rebels killed 25 civilians on a raid on Pikit, Mindanao.

The Laju Incident in Singapore ended as the combined terrorist attackers from the Japanese Red Army and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine released hostages in exchange for safe passage to the Middle East.

Supposedly the small Japanese Red Army disbanded in 2001, but Japanese authorities maintain a successor organization was founded, and Japanese police have continued to maintain that known members of the group should be arrested.  The PFLP still exists.  Both groups were/are Communist in nature.

Related threads:

Coal: Understanding the time line of an industry

Sunday, February 4, 2024

Monday, February 4, 1974. Patty Hearst kidnapped.

Patty Hearst, a grandchild of newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst, was kidnapped from her apartment in Berkeley, California by the  Symbionese Liberation Army.  She was 19 at the time.

Hearst right during later bank robbery.

The group had first appeared in November when it had murdered Marcus Foster, the black Superintendent of Oakland Public Schools, and wounded his deputy superintendent Robert Blackburn.

The name of the entity, it might be noted, came from this, according to the organization:

The name 'symbionese' is taken from the word symbiosis and we define its meaning as a body of dissimilar bodies and organisms living in deep and loving harmony and partnership in the best interest of all within the body.

It's hard to seem how murdering public school superintendents fits that supposed goal.  Robert Blackburn, who survived his wounds, noted:

These were not political radicals, They were uniquely mediocre and stunningly off-base. The people in the SLA had no grounding in history. They swung from the world of being thumb-in-the-mouth cheerleaders to self-described revolutionaries with nothing but rhetoric to support them.

Emblematic of the times, the goof ball entity was a kind of sort of Communist terrorist cell that rapidly became disenchanted with "the people" after distributions of food, which it had demanded as a ransom in Berkeley, didn't go well.

In April, the group raided a bank in San Francisco, in which Hearst seemed to take part, although she denied doing so willingly. She nonetheless was convicted due to the actions and served two years out of a seven-year sentence before Jimmy Carter, ever the kind man, had her released.  Bill Clinton pardoned her.

In May the organization moved from the Bay Area to Los Angeles, where they got into a shootout at a sporting goods store where Hearst, on guard duty, fired shots.  A shootout a couple of days later at a supposed safe house killed six of them.

Hearst was arrested in September 1975, back at a San Francisco safe house.

Hearst, as noted, was convicted, but she claimed she had never participated willingly, and had been raped and threatened while a captive.  Given the nature of the SLA, that's certainly possible. Early on, however, after her arrest she had said that she comported her thoughts to theirs and was given a choice of being freed or fighting with them, and she elected to fight.

After her release, Hearst married Bernard Lee Shaw, a policeman who was part of her security detail during her time on bail.  They had two children.  He died in 2013.

The Provisional IRA bombed a bus on the M62 Motorway in England, killing nine solders and three civilians, including two children.

The Yom Kippur War resumed, but only as between Syria and Israel, with 500 Cuban soldiers joining a Syrian tank unit.  Fighting resumed in the Golan Heights.

Time Magazine featured Speaker of the House Tip O'Neil on the cover, with the caption "The Impeachment Congress.

Friday, February 2, 2024

Should I Stay or Should I Go?

Questioner: "Why did you leave the Republican Party?"

George F Will: "The same reason I joined it. I am a conservative."



If I were to listen to people like Marjorie Taylor Greene, or some of the Freedom Caucus here in Wyoming, it would be go.

If I listen to lifelong residents here in the state, including some lifelong Republicans whom would currently be classified as RINO's by the newly populist Wyoming GOP, it would be stay.  Alan Simpson, who is an "anybody but Trump", former U.S. Senator, and who the Park County GOP tried to boot out as a elected precinct committeeman, is staying.

The problem ultimately is what time do you begin to smell like the crowd on the bus?

Konrad Adenauer of the Christian Democratic Union, West Germany's first post-war chancellor.  He worked towards compromise and ended denazification early, even though he'd speant the remaining months of World War Two in prison and barely survived.  By CDU - This file was provided to Wikimedia Commons by the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, a German political foundation, as part of a cooperation project., CC BY-SA 3.0 de, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=16173747

To put it another way, I'd give an historical example.  It's often noted that quite a few Germans joined the Nazi Party as it was just a way to get by, or advance careers, etc., during the Third Reich period of German history.  When I was a kid, there was a lot of sympathy, oddly enough, for that view amongst those who were of the World War Two generation, although at the same time, there was a widely held belief that militarism, combined with radical nationalism, were something that was basically in the German DNA.  The US, as is well known, didn't even particularly worry about letting former Nazis into the country.

The Germans themselves pretty much turned a blind eye towards this, so many of them had been in the Nazi Party.  Even post-war German politicians who had spent the war in exile did, as it was the programmatic thing to do.

Since that time, however, that view has really changed.  It started to in 1968 when German students rioted and exposed former Nazis in the police.  Germans haven't really come to terms with it, but having been a member of the Nazi Party is a mark of shame, and it's become to be something despised everywhere, even if a person did it for practical reasons and wasn't really involved in the party.

And it should be a mark of shame.

Americans have been sanctimonious about that for a long time, but starting in the 1970s lots of Americans became ashamed, in varying degrees, of our own ancestors in regard to various things.  Ironically, the backlash to that, symbolized by Confederate battle flags, is part of what brings us to our current crisis.

Ed Herschler, former Marine Corps Raider, and Democratic lawyer, who was Wyoming's Governor from 1975 to 1987.  Herschler probably wouldn't have a home in today's Democratic Party in Wyoming.

I registered as a Republican the first time I was old enough to vote. The first Presidential Election I was old enough to vote in was the 1984 Presidential election, in which I voted for Ronald Reagan. The first election I was old enough to vote in was the 1982 off year election.  I honestly don't know who I voted for Senator.  Malcolm Wallop won, but I very well have voted for the Democrat.  Dick Cheney wont reelection that year against Ted Hommel, whom I don't recall at all.  I probably voted for Cheney.  I know that I voted for the reelection of Democratic Governor Ed Herschler, who was one of the state's great Governors. 

A split ticket.

Split tickets were no doubt common in my family.  My father would never reveal who he voted for in an election.  The first Presidential election I recall was the 1972 Election in which Nixon ran against McGovern, and I asked who he voted for when he came home. He wouldn't say, and I don't know to this day.  

I knew that my father registered Republican, but not everyone in my father's family did.  My grandmother, for one, registtered Demcrat,somethign I became aware of when we were visiting her, which we frequently did, at her retirement apartment here in town.  She was pretty clear that she was an unapologetic Democrat, which made sense given that she was 100% Irish by descent.  Most Irish Americans, at that time, were Democrats, and all real ones were Catholic.  Reagan, who claimed Irish ancestry, woudl have been regarded a a dual pretender for that reason by many of them.

My father's view, and it remains mine, that you voted for the person and what they stood for, not hte party.

But being in a party means something, and that has increasingly come to be the case.

I switched parties after that 1984 election.  I was, and remain, a conservative, but the GOP was drifting further from a conservative center in that period, and as I've noted, the election of Ronald Reagan paved the path for Donald Trump, although I won't say that was obvious then.  And also, Democrats were the party that cared about public lands, as they still do, and cared about rural and conservation issues that I cared about and still do. The GOP locally was becoming hostile to them. So I switched.

Campaign image for Mike Sullivan, Democratic Governor from 1987 to 1995.

I remained a Democrat probably from about 1984 until some time in the last fifteen years.  Being a Democrat in Wyoming meant that you were increasingly marginalized, but finally what pushed me out was that it meant being in the Party of Death.  The Democrats went from a party that, in 1973, allowed you to be middle of the road conservative and pro-life.  We had a Governor, Mike Sullivan, who was just that.  By the 2000s, however, that was becoming impossible.  Locally most of the old Democrats became Republicans, some running solid local campaigns as Republicans even though they had only been that briefly.  Even as late as the late 1990s, however, the Democrats ran some really serious candidates for Congress, with the races being surprisingly close in retrospect.  Close, as they say, only counts with hand grenades and horseshoes, but some of those races were quite close.  The GOP hold on those offices was not secure.

Dave Freudenthal, Democratic Governor from 2003 to 2011.

Before I re-registered as a Republican, I was an independent for a while.  Being an independent meant that primaries became nearly irrelevant to me, and increasingly, as the Democratic Party died and became a far left wing club, starting in the 2000s., it also meant that basically the election was decided in the primaries.  Like the other rehoming Democrats, however, we felt comfortable in a party that seemingly had given up its hostility to public lands.  And frankly, since the 1970s, the GOP in Wyoming had really been sui generis.  Conservative positions nationally, including ones I supported, routinely failed in the Republican legislature. Abortion is a good example.  The party nationally was against it, I'm against it personally, but bills to restrict it failed and got nowhere in a Republican legislature.

The Clinton era really impacted the Democratic Party here locally.  Wyomingites just didn't like him.  That really started off the process of the death of the Democratic Party here.  As center right Democrats abandoned the party in response, left wing Democrats were all that remained, and the party has become completely clueless on many things, making it all the more marginalized.  But just as Clinton had that impact on the Democrats, Trump has on the GOP.

Throughout the 70s and 80s it was the case that Wyoming tended to export a lot of its population, which it still does, and then take in transients briefly during booms.  In the last fifteen or so years, however, a lot of the transient population, together with others from disparate regions, have stayed.  They've brought their politics with them, and now in the era of Trump, those views have really taken over the GOP, save for about three pockets of the old party that dominate in Natrona, Albany and Laramie Counties.  A civil war has gone on in some counties, and is playing out right now in Park County.  In the legislature, the old party still has control, but the new party, branded as the Freedom Caucus, which likes to call its rival the UniParty, is rising.  The politics being advanced are, in tone, almost unrecognizable.

Like it or not, on social issues the old GOP's view was "I don't care what you do, just leave me alone". That attitude has really changed.  Given a bruising in the early 1990s due to a Southeastern Wyoming effort to privatize wildlife, the party became pro public lands for awhile. That's change.  The party was not libertarian.  That's changed.  

Money helped change it, which is a story that's really been missed.

Like the Democrats of the 90s, a lot of the old Republicans have started to abandon the party.  If there was another viable party to go to, floods would leave.  A viable third party might well prove to be the majority party in the state, or at least a close second to the GOP, if there was one.

There isn't.

So, what to do?

While it'll end up either being a pipe dream or an example of a dream deferred, there's still reason to believe that much of this will be transitory.  If Trump does not win the 2024 Presidential Election, and he may very well not, he's as done as the blue plate special at a roadside café as the GOP leader.  Somebody will emerge, but it's not really likely to be the Trump clone so widely expected.  And the relocated populists may very well not have that long of run in Wyoming.  Wyomingites, the real ones, also tend to have a subtle history of revenge against politicians who betray their interests.  Those riding hiding high on anti-public lands, anti-local interests, may come to regret it at the polls later on.

The Johnson County invaders of 1892. The Republican Party, whose politicians had been involved in the raid on Natrona and Johnson Counties, took a beating in the following elections.

Or maybe this process will continue, in which case even if Trump wins this year, the GOP will die.  By 2028, it won't be able to win anything and a new party will have to start to emerge.

We'll see.

None of which is comfortable for the State's real Republicans.

Sunday, January 28, 2024

Monday, January 28, 1974. End of the Siege of Suez.

The Israeli siege of the Egyptian city of Suez ended at noon.  The IDF withdrew and the 20,000 encircled Egyptians were able to withdraw across the Suez Canal.

Suez.

Both Time and Newsweek's covers dealt with the Nixon tape. U.S. News & World Report's cover was on inflation.  

Sports Illustrated had a cheesecake photo, although it hadn't crossed over into pornography on the cover yet, for its swimsuit issue. Ann Simonton was the cover model, who was actually relatively covered.

Indonesian President Suharto took control of the country's internal security agency.

Bolivia was declared to be in a state of siege following a peasant uprising at Cochambamba.


Mohammed Ali and Joe Frazier fought for a second time in a non-title fight.  Ali won.

George Foreman was the heavyweight champion at the time.

Friday, January 26, 2024

Wednesday, January 26, 1944. Gatchina

Machine gun position, Borgen Bay, New Britain. January 26, 1944.

The Red Army captured Krasnogvardeisk.   The Germans set fire to Gatchina Palace and vandalizing much of the town's park on the way out.

Two days later, its pre-1923 name of Gatchina would was restored.

The US II Corps established a bridgehead over the Rapido.  The Free French Corps captured Colle Belvedere and advanced toward Monte Abate.

From Sarah Sundin's blog:

Today in World War II History—January 26, 1944: British landing ship LST-422 is damaged by a mine off Anzio; of 700 aboard, 454 US soldiers & 29 British sailors are killed.

Argentina severed diplomatic relations with the Axis powers.

 A.T.F. 9 Ordnance Section. 26 January, 1944. Kiska.

US Communist figure Angela Davis was born in Birmingham, Alabama.


She remains a radical leftist and is a professor at the University of California, Santa Cruz currently.

The moment the fatal wounds were afflicted.

How did we end up with two ancient, disliked men being advanced by their parties?

Well, we ended up here as the Democrats quit believing in democracy, favoring rule by the courts, until the courts decided they believed in democracy, and because both parties lied to their rank and file, working class, constituents for a period of fifty years.

We've dealt with this before.

However, it can nearly be determined with precision.

The date of the wounds were:

  • January 22, 1973
That's the date the United States Supreme Court issued the Roe v. Wade decision, replacing its judgment for that of state legislatures. As the dissent noted:
I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant women and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally disentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the woman, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.

And Democrats concluded they didn't really need to persuade voters anymore, the Courts would impose a new liberal regime on the besotted and benighted public without their participation.

And:

  • July 17, 1980.
That's the date that the GOP nominated Ronald Reagan for President. Reagan would go on to use the Southern Strategy to draw in Southern (and Rust Belt) Democrats who had lied to as the post World War Two economic prosperity collapsed. Thing is, the GOP didn't really listen to their concerns, just as the Democrats had quit doing. 

Seven years in which we went from two functioning political parties and put them on the path to being pure machines, breaking what they claimed to serve.

Wednesday, January 24, 2024

I had always thought my grandfather on my mother's side died at age 58. . .

but it turns out, he died in 1958.

He was, therefore, about 67 years of age.

Still not ancient by current standards, but not 58 years of age, either.

That was, FWIW, the same year my parents married.

His wife, my grandmother, died at age 89, however, which is a little younger than I remembered.  It was in 1979, which is later than I remember, which means that my recollection didn't make mathematical sense, either.  I was in high school at the time, but I don't recall it that way.

That also means that she lived long enough to see one of her children die, which I knew, and two of them fall into severe illness accompanied by mental decline, which must have been hard in the extreme to endure.

Saturday, January 20, 2024

Sunday, January 20, 1974. First flight of the F-16.

First flight of the F-16.

YF-16, the aircraft before official adoption, and YF-17, a Northrup aircraft that did not gain acceptance.

It was an accident.  During high speed ground test a horizontal stabilizer was damaged and the test pilot took the aircraft off due to the severe oscillations it was experiencing. 

One of the greatest fighter aircraft of all time, it remains in production, although not for the U.S.

English professional soccer was played for the first time in history on a Sunday.

Argentina's People's Revolutionary Army attacked the headquarters of the 10th Armored Cavalry Regiment in Azul in the Buenos Aires province. President Juan Perón vowed "to annihilate as soon as possible this criminal terrorism" later that same day.

The Dutch oil tanker Kopionella rescued 23 South Vietnamese sailors who had survived the Chinese sinking of the South Vietnamese Nhat Tao during the Battle of the Paracel Islands.

On the same day, the Chinese took 47 ARVN soldiers and one U.S. advisor prisoner, although they were later be released.

Friday, January 19, 2024

Blog Mirror: 1944 Intercom

 

1944 Intercom

Saturday, January 19, 1974. The Battle of the Paracel Islands.

The People's Republic of China and the Republic of South Vietnam engaged in combat, mostly naval, but some ground, over the Paracel Islands. The events had been preceded by maneuvers and landings the prior few days after South Vietnam found the Chinese had landed on an island and had armed vessels nearby.


The following day, January 20, the Chinese would prevail.

The South Vietnamese defeat would later be regarded as a Vietnamese one in general as North Vietnam also did not welcome the Chinese incursion and would, post Vietnam War, demand that the Chinese depart, which they have not.  North Vietnam, upon taking over the entire country, praised the efforts of the South Vietnamese troops who attempted to defend the islands.


The People's Republic of China, Republic of China (Taiwan) and Vietnam, all claim the islands

The French government floated the franc, which would continue for six months, in order to maintain its value.