The Central American Mess and Citations to the Statue of Liberty. Nobody is going to do anything, probably.

The Statue of Liberty from a distance view, the way its likely often seen by people who live in the neighborhood.

Somewhere on this blog I have some posts about arguments you shouldn't make. That is, things that when you hear them, you ought to just quit listening as the argument has become a cliche of a cliche ("think of the children" is one such example, although I still haven't posted that example, which remains in draft).

One of the things I should include in that list would be citations to the poem The New Colossus and references to the Statue of Liberty in general.  Indeed, I've made that argument here before.  But sure enough, any time a debate on immigration comes up, somebody will drag out The New Colossus as if its a foundational document for the country.  It isn't.  It's just bad poetry.

Frankly, I'm not all that super wild about the Statue of Liberty either, although I will credit it a great deal more.  Our copy of the statue is version 2.0, a prior smaller one having existed in France, where its designers lived.  It's a fairly typical French statue of the period, which tended to feature women with very muscular features (as in the French Railway Workers Memorial post the other day).  I'm not exactly sure what was up with that, but it was quite common at the time.  The Statue of Liberty is actually one of the better examples of such statues and it is attractive, which doesn't make it over all absolutely great art, save for its gigantic size.

Anyhow, any time the question of immigration comes up, if the suggestion is anything other than just open the borders up in a country that has the most open borders on the planet, somebody will drag out the Statue of Liberty and the poem and post it as an argument.  I just saw the first one regarding the refugees from Central America in the paper this morning in the form, predictably, of a political cartoon in which the statue wonders if she should go back to France (which is a totally absurd argument given that the annual immigration rate into Europe is minuscule as a rule compared to the United States.)

This symbolizes a lot of the American problem with fixing immigration in the country, and it desperately needs to be fixed.  The current system, a byproduct of the mushy thinking of Senator Edward Kennedy, amplified by the destruction of internal immigration law enforcement in the 1970s, assumes that the United States is physically growing like a cancer cell and that its impossible to reach the point where the population of the country, mostly growing due to immigration, is harming the country as a whole both economically and environmentally  It's likely that we achieved that point quite some time ago, perhaps in the 1970s itself.

Which makes most of the arguments about immigration complete and unadulterated baloney.  Large immigration rates like we have are not necessary to sustain the economy in any fashion whatsoever, which is the the prime intellectual argument on their behalf.  It only serves to depress wages in a country in which the lower middle class is already having a very hard time.  In an era in which computerization is wiping out jobs, and in which General Motors just announced its taking out 14,000 jobs in manufacturing, importing no skilled labor is really detrimental to the lower middle class laboring demographic, let alone American born urban minorities, whom it directly impacts.  Indeed, ironically, at one time the leadership of the largely Hispanic United Farm Workers was actually violently opposed to illegal immigration for that very reason, and it could hardly have been regarded as a right wing organization.

What importing no skill labor does do is to create a pool of very low wage labor at the bottom end which is great for the upper middle class and the wealthy and it makes for low class domestic servant labor.

It's also okay, but not really great, for the immigrants who come in, in that class, which is why their plight can't be ignored and they can't be disregarded.  But simply citing a poem as policy is, frankly, stupid.

Immigration at the current rate, we should note, is also fueling, although only in part, the ongoing mass urbanization that chews up American rural areas daily, which is arguably an environmental disaster (again, that's only part of the explanation and in fact probably not the primary one. . . most immigrants don't live in those places and could hardly ever afford to).  And then there's the argument that "we're a nation of immigrants", which is a sort of race based argument taking the position, more or less, that the original native population doesn't really county (they were here, they weren't immigrants) and which isn't an argument anyhow rather than a statement.  A better argument related to that is that our diversity gives us strength, which likely is true, up to a point, but which doesn't actually counter the problems which immigration at our current levels create.

Which takes us to the current flood of Central American refugees trying to get into the United States, the members of the recent caravan being only part of a movement that commenced some time last year.

Refugees are a different deal entirely, and perhaps citation to the "Give me your tired" and all makes sense there.  I've posted along those lines here as well.  All peoples and nations have a duty to refugees no matter where they are from.

But what if you can solve the root problem causing the refugee crisis?

I.e., what if the United States, or a combination of nations including the United States, can solve the problem?

Something is clearly going on in Central America causing people to flee there, but what?  What's motivating this?

What's going on in Central America is what is always going on in Central America, but at epic levels.  

Anarchy is going on in Central America. . . or at least a lot of it.

Occasionally Naive Reddit Rubes will wax philosophic on Reddit's various economic forums about how anarchy would be nifty.  If you think so, just move to Honduras.  They have it.

Flag of the Federated Republic of Central America.  A Central American republic that existed in 1821, and then again from 1823 to 1840. There's been efforts to put it back together ever since.  From Wikipedia Commons, by grant of Huhsunqu.

To some degree, they always have, and all the things that flow from anarchy, including massive corruption, crime and violence.

The flag of Honduras.  Honduras became independent, in a sense, in 1821 when it became independent from Spain as part of the first federated Central American state.  Almost immediately after that, however, it became First Mexican Empire.  In 1823 it became independent of Mexico and part of the new United Provinces of Central America, a democratic federated Central American state.  That state repeatedly failed and Honduras carried on as an independent nation, but sadly it was one of the Central American countries that was most in favor of a single Central American nation, something that would have gone a long ways toward preventing the current crisis and much of the regions tragic history from occurring.  The United States intervened in Honduras militarily in 1903, 1907, 1911, 1912, 1919, 1924 and 1925.

Things are so bad in Honduras, which underwent a coup in 2009 and then reemerged as a democracy about a year later, that even Dunkin' Donuts have armed security guards.  The majority of the current emigrants are from Honduras, and have traveled through helpless Guatemala and into Mexico (which resisted it at its southern border, something that's been largely missed in the news).  Things are otherwise not perfect in the neighborhood either.  El Salvador has become enormously lawless.  Nicaragua has gone form being a major tourist destination from being in crisis in just a year, following the removal of economic supports from Venezuela, which is also a mess.  Honduras, Guatemala (which is doing much better) and Nicaragua together are in a titanic economic and social mess or have the potential to be.  Only Costa Rica and Belize seem to be doing well.

Guatemala's flag, noting its 1821 independence date from Spain.  Guatemala's Independence came within the United Provinces of Central America, not as an independent nation.  The United States overthrew a left leaning democratic governing in the late 1950s (an earlier plan to do that in the early 50s was aborted when details started to leak) and the country fought a bitter civil war that came to an end in 1996.  Since then the Catholic Church provided enormous assistance in providing a means by which the country could overcome its violent past, something that's generally not appreciated by Protestant missionary groups that oddly regard the region as missionary territory.  The country has been doing well and recovering overall but at the current time it cannot help but be stressed by the massive human influx from Honduras.

They do have governments, to be sure, but those governments are not wholly admirable and the entire region has become embroiled in what is essentially a series of gang wars as the economy collapses. That's why people are leaving.  Entire regions are now controlled by criminal gangs and the governments, which in many instances in the past have been pretty criminal in and of themselves (I'm not familiar with any of the current governments).

The blue and white flag of El Salvador. . .notice the theme here?  Like Mexico, El Salvador went into rebellion when a Catholic Priest made a cry for justice and the same, in its case in 1811.  A revolution ensued.  It too was a province of the original Central American state which could not stay together.  Very densely populated, the country fought a war with its former co-province Honduras in 1969.  The country itself went into a civil war in 1979 that lasted until 1992, with the United States backing the right wing side and the left wing forces, including the Soviet Union and Cuba, backing the left wing side in one of the Cold War's proxy wars.

And that makes their plight genuine.

Nicaragua's flag, which is nearly indistinguishable from El Salvador's.

But nobody seems to be taking the root problem into account.

Unless the United States and Mexico are willing to absorb the entire population of Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua and El Salvador, a solution needs to be found what is going on.  And the agonizing truth of the matter is that the solution isn't going to come from inside any of those countries, or at least it appears unlikely that it will.  It's going to have to be imposed on them, or at least that can be argued for Honduras.  And they'll resist it, most likely.  And not without justification.

Indeed, we've had similar examples from Africa in the past couple of decades, and there have been local solutions that have worked.  They all principally involved an armed invasion by an upset neighbor.

And there you have it. The problem, the solution, and whether the solution is a problem itself.

At one time, what is going on inside of these countries, would have been solved by now.   Theodore Roosevelt would have solved it.  William Howard Taft would have solved it. Woodrow Wilson would have solved it.  Do we dare solve it in that fashion, and should we?  Would it be moral to?

Indeed, we're getting an ironic lesson, for which we do not appreciate the irony, and for which we aren't paying much attention, on why an entire series of Presidents didn't think twice about interfering in the affairs of Central American states and toppling their government.

Which may be both a theoretical solution today, as much as we hate to admit it, but which is also part of the root of the problem on what's going on today.

Today's crisis is partially a byproduct of our own actions, dating back to the 1950s, when we started heavily interfering in these nations in a Cold War context.  No, that's only partially true. . .their governments at the time and the forces inside those countries also reflected reaction and counteraction to actions we'd taken dating back to about 1900 or so. Well even that isn't right, as the entire region had an odd and chaotic 19th Century history.  But the Cold War interference was major and has cast a very long shadow.  We propped up a military government in El Salvador that prompted a left wing insurrection.  We did the same in Nicaragua with worse results which resulted in that country falling to a left wing government which turned out to be less left wing than we supposed but which is still in power and not completely democratic. That conflict helped spread another one into southern Mexico.  We overthrew the government of Guatemala. Our gunboat diplomacy evolved into CIA diplomacy, and now neglect is letting the boils that developed at that time really fester.  The whole region, save for Costa Rica, Belize and Panama, is a mess.

And its a mess that those countries probably can't fix themselves.

Of course, not only can they not fix them, those countries really shouldn't exist.  Frankly, they're too plagued with internal problems and too small to be able to address them. A federated state comprised of all of them, and probably Panama, would make more sense and be more stable but that's not going to happen.  Indeed, in a different context, it would have been easy to imagine the enter Central American region outside of Panama (which the U.S. created by backing a regional uprising against Columbia) being part of Mexico, given that it differs little culturally from southern Mexico.  Mexico, no doubt, is highly relieved that this never came about, but it shows the degree to which Mexico lacked territorial ambition as the United States, had it been in Mexico's geographic position, would undoubtedly have adsorbed the entire region.

But all of that could have occurred, and indeed darned near did.  In fact, it briefly did. . . more than once.

Emperer Augustin I, formerly Gen. Augustin Itubide, the first Emperor of Mexico.  When Mexico became an independent state those who brought that about weren't necessarily looking for a liberal democracy by any means.  In fact, while the revolution was initiated by a liberal Catholic Priest, it was taken up by Mexican Spanish aristocracy who didn't have a problem with aristocracy. . . just aristocracy in Spain.  Iturbe was from a Basque aristocratic family and have lived an aristocratic life.  He initially fought for the crown and against the Mexican rebels until switching sides.  He was actually a fairly popular emperor but the country was divided from the start and he served only briefly before going into exile, first in Italy and then in England.  He'd return later to Mexico where he was executed under dubious circumstances.  His last words were "Mexicans! In the very act of my death, I recommend to you the love to the fatherland, and the observance to our religion, for it shall lead you to glory. I die having come here to help you, and I die merrily, for I die amongst you. I die with honor, not as a traitor; I do not leave this stain on my children and my legacy. I am not a traitor, no."  He's interned in a cathedral in Mexico City.

Most of Central America became independent of Spain in 1821.  Interestingly, most of it became independent by default when Mexico obtained its independence.  With the exception of El Salvador, Central American countries did not rise up against the Spanish Empire. El Salvador did in 1811, however, the year after Mexico did, and by way of the same initiating source, the cry to rebellion by a Catholic Priest. The rest of the region found itself independent, however, in 1821 when Mexico was released by Spain.

The flat of the Mexican Empire, the nation that obtained independence from Spain, and which collapsed in 1823.

When that occurred, interestingly enough, two of the forces noted above in fact occurred.  There was a movement to form an independent confederation, but at first the region became a province of the Mexican Empire. The Mexican Empire, however, was itself short lived and collapsed under widespread opposition in 1823, at which time the Central American provinces formed their own country, the Federal Republic of Central America.  The country even expanded up into what today is the Mexican state of Chiapas.  Only Panama, which was part of Columbia, was not part of it.

Had the Central American Republic persisted, much would be different about the region today.  It only held together, however, until 1840 when it fell apart in civil war. All of the modern nations of Central America that were in it use a flag that's based on the one the Central American Republic had, and some of them use a national crest that's based upon it.  Even though the state fell apart, in some ways it was never forgotten and there were real efforts to recreate it, sometimes by force.  In 1907 all of its former regions, except for Belize, joined together in a political agreement to integrate their economies in a manner that all but contemplated future union. The agreement remains in force, but union has not been achieved.  In 1921 all of the old participants except for Nicaragua and Belize signed a treaty of union but did not follow up on it, making the 1921 agreement moribund.

All of which shows that what I've noted here is not simply wild speculation.  The region was united as a province by Colonial Spain, achieved independence as a nation briefly, was absorbed by Mexico as a province, and then achieved statehood again before division drove the nations apart. Ever since then there's been efforts on their part to reunite, but they have not succeeded.

 The flag of Belize, a self governing English possession.  Belize was, early on, part of the Central American Republic but it quickly became a British possession in the wake of the republic's collapse.  The English have made efforts to make it an independent country but its' resisted.  Like much of Central America, Belize's economy has been dominated by foreign interests in its agriculture sector, in this case oddly enough in moder times by Coca Cola, but its developed a successful tourists sector and British political influence has lead to a stable political culture.

Had the Central American republic been able to hold together, it would still be a small nation, but it would be a bi-coastal nation with a somewhat diverse modern economy.  Indeed, if we somewhat assume that the rest of history played out as it did (not a safe assumption at all), it would be a nation today that would be surprisingly diverse in some ways.  Belize, which was part of it, fell into British rule almost as soon as the republic fell apart but today, in spite of having an economic monoculture like much of the various Central American states, has a stable economy and and a booming tourist trade, is surprisingly multicultural even including an Amish farming population.  Costa Rica is likewise booming due to the tourist trade and, for good or ill, has an increasingly large American ex-patriot population as well as a surprising number of citizens who immigrated from South America and Europe.

Costa Rica's flag.  Costa Rica's history in Central America has become unique as during the 20th Century, following upon the fall of a military dictatorship, it abolished its standing army. Thsi made the democratic regime highly stable and seemingly immune from American intervention in spite of its early democratic government being very left leaning.  Costa Rica's modern economy is dominated by the tourist industry.

Additionally, if the Central American Republic had managed to hold things together, it would have helped prevent the region from being sort of the "anti United States" in the Star Trek bizarro world way.  That is, almost everything that seemingly happened to make the US successful didn't happen in Central America.

 U.S. Marines in Nicaragua in 1926, displaying a captured Sandinista flag.  Nicaragua was occupied by the United States from 1913 to 1933.

Indeed, right from the outset, while the advantages  of union were obvious, as the region had been granted Independence due to the Mexican rebellion, rather than its own, there was no real unity in political views.  Now, that's the case with the early U.S. to a degree as well, but this was very much so for the small political class in Central America. As with Mexico, some of this class remained monarchist in view and had no real problem with their former Spanish rulers.  Others were radically republican in an era in which radical republicanism was spreading in Europe. . . after all, this was the era of Napoleon Bonaparte.  That basically doomed the republic and it frankly also made a mess of early Mexican history.  Liberals couldn't bet along with monarchists on anything, and the country simply fell apart. 

That early history carried on for decades and made political cohesion difficult in any of the individual states.  Moreover, it mean that the small states were always economically weak due to their economic monocultures and they were constant prey to foreign, i.e., European and American, economic and military intervention, the only often following the other.  That fact in turn further weakened them, and that all carried through well into the 20th Century.

All of which takes us back to the problem.  A person could argue that a regional or perhaps international mandate should be issued requiring states that aren't flying apart in the region to intervene and impose order.  That would amount to a type of invasion.  The type of invasion that the OAS has occasionally sanctioned in the past, and to which everyone has turned a blind eye, but nobody in the world would turn a blind eye to this.

 Panama's flat.  Panama was never part of the Central American Republic, it was part of Columbia until a U.S. sponsored rebellion separated it in 1903, although in fairness a long running war of rebellion had been trying to do the same for quite some time, and there had been prior efforts to do that as well.  While it doesn't share the history of the other Central American nations in once having been part of a unified nation, it would make sense that it would be, if one ever came together.

Nor perhaps should they.  These are all sovereign nations and while things seem to be flying apart now, they all made huge strides towards functioning democracy after the 1960s.  Even El Salvador, which fell in revolution to a government we thought was going to be a Communist one, didn't really take that turn and the Communists turned into liberal democrats, for the most part.

And would that type of intervention be even moral?  It's very doubtful.  Can in an international body suspend sovereignty in that fashion?  It could declare that it could, but that's problematic.  Of course, at some point governments can descend into such anarchy that they don't exist at all for a country in question, such as in the example of pre 9/11 Afghanistan.

Well, it's all academic. Nobody is going to do anything.  Instead we'll get trite arguments about the Statute of Liberty. 

Poster Saturday; the November 30, 1918 Saturday Evening Post

Another Leydecker illustration in which all the technical details are correct, but his color is off, way off.

It's really strange.  Leydecker obviously studied his topic so as to get material details to the point of high accuracy, including in this illustration the World War One vintage "Pershing Boots" issued to soldiers in Europe.  But his colors were almost always wrong for the U.S. Army uniform of World War One and in fact much closer to those for the German uniform.

I wonder why that was?

Watch on the Rhine, and on the Rio Grande, and on the Pimega. December 1, 1918.

Col. C.H. Hodges, First Division and interpreter, making arrangements with Inspector Ludveg, a German officer, for the use of Maximin Marracks. Treves, Germany. December 1, 1918.

American troops were pouring into Germany, and into occupation duty, on this day in 1918.

 Eighteenth Regiment Infantry. First Division , crossing bridge over Mosell River into Germany at Kalender Muhl. Kalender Muhl, Germany. December 1, 1918.

 View showing interest of German populace as Army mess kitchen goes through Treves. Treves, Germany, December 1, 1918.

 USS Orizaba which left Hoboken, New Jersey on Dec. 1, 1918 for Europe with journalists, photographers and others attending the Peace Conference after World War I

The press, meanwhile, was pouring into Europe as well, to watch and report on the drama of the peace negotiations.

That drama was clearly building.

At the same time, Villa's fortunes appeared to be reversing again.  And the Red Army suffered a reversal near Archangel in an action in which U.S. troops had played a part.

Cheyenne received some good news in the form of learning it was going to be an air mail hub, which it in fact did become.  And fans of the Marine Corps received some as well in learning that the Marines were going to keep on keeping on for at least awhile.

Stupid Headline of the Week: "Donald Trump Is Destroying My Marriage"

From the New Yorker:

IN MY EXPERIENCE NOV. 27, 2018

Donald Trump Is Destroying My Marriage

Seriously?

For this to be the case, you'd have to be the shallowest married couple ever.

November 30, 1918. Americans enter Germany for the first time, Villa threatens Juarez, Wyomingites get Reserve Plates, Teenage Bride Mildred Harris Chaplin rumored to be planning a visit home, No beer for New Years.

The first Americans to cross into Germany, November 30, 1918.  1st Division.  Wormeldauge Luxembourg to Winchrenger Germany.

On this date in 1918 the U.S. Army entered Germany from Luxembourg.

Gen. Campbell King, left, in Luxembourg on this date in 1918.  King was Harvard educated before attending becoming a lawyer in Georgia.  He entered  the Army in 1897 as a private and was commissioned an officer in 1898.  He was a Major entereing World War One and was breveted the rank of Brigadier General and served as Chief of Staff of the Third Army.  He retired as a Major General in 1932 and lived until 1953.  The officer on the right is an unidentified Marine Corps officer.  Note the much darker uniform and the different pattern of overseas cap, with that type being the type that would later become the service wide pattern after the war.

Headquarters for the occupation force remained, on this day, in Luxembourg itself.

Cheyenne residents read Gen. Pershing's address to his troops and the Governor was demobilizing the Home Guard.

And Wyoming was introducing its coveted "reserve plates" for motor vehicles, in which you could get the same license plate number every year (at a time in which you received new plates every year. . . which was the case at least into the 1970s).

In the other Cheyenne paper readers learned that yes, Villa was threatening Juarez again. So he'd returned from near defeat back to threatening and was back on the very top of the front page yet again. . . just as he had been prior to World War One.

Mildred Harris Chaplain at approximately this time. Her stardom was in ascendancy at the time but her life was is in turmoil.  She's married much older Charlie Chaplain at only age 16, something that would have wrecked both of their careers in and of itself in the present age, under the false belief that she was pregnant.

Cheyenne was hoping for a visit, we also learned, from Mildred Harris, now Mrs. Mildred Chaplin, who had turned 17 years old only the day prior.

In Casper the headline, like on many other papers, dealt with Woodrow Wilson's decision to lead the American peace delegation, something that was not a popular decision with Congress.  Casperites also read of the terrible massacre of the Jews in Lemberg (Lvov) by the Poles.

Casperites also were reading of the disbandment of UW's military training unit.

Casperites also read, in the other paper, Pereshing's Thanksgiving day address.

They also read that the Kaiser was that no longer.

And suds for New Years would be no longer as well. The committee that had suspended brewing as of the first of the year declined to rescind its order now that there was peace.

Boxing match in Archangel Russia between enlisted U.S. and French servicemen, November 30, 1918.

Thanksgiving Day, 1918

The first Thanksgiving of the peace (keeping in mind that the United States only went through one wartime Thanksgiving in which it was a combatant), occurred on this day, in 1918.

I posted an item on this yesterday in that one of the Cheyenne newspapers ran an article about things being closed in Cheyenne today, and there having been late shopping last night, a century ago. Sounds a lot like today, eh?  In today's Casper Daily Press you can tell that they sent the employees home (keeping in mind that newspapers are put together the prior evening, if they're morning papers) so there'd be no paper on Friday.

That was so that people could enjoy the holidays on an American holiday that has remained much like it has always been, which is a refreshing thing to realize.

One of the things about Thanksgiving, which we've also already posted on, is a big gathering.  I've also posted on that here as well, in this entry:

Blog Mirror: Hundred-year-old Thanksgiving Menus

From A Hundred Years Ago:

Hundred-year-old Thanksgiving Menus

It's interesting to note what's on the menu not only for what's on it, but what isn't.  The authors of these menus didn't necessarily think that you had to have turkey.  Indeed, turkey is only on one of the menus.  "Roast fowl" is on two of them. But what sort of fowl were they thinking of? Any fowl?  Pheasant?

And wine isn't on the menu at all.  I note that as if you spend any time watching the endless Thanksgiving shows that will now be appearing on the Food Channel, or whatever, they're all going to have a part, or at least some surely will, where somebody talks about pairing wine with turkey (as they're all going to feature turkey. . . which is okay as I like turkey).

They're all going to have pumpkin pie as well. . . which only one of these does.  One of these, for that matter, has Maple Parfait. What's that?

Interesting stuff.

One of the things I didn't note in that entry, but which I should have, is that there was no "local food movement" at the time as all food was local.  Indeed, the most recent comment on this blog made me realize there's an element of that I'm not aware of, and as that's the purpose of this blog, exploring such topics, I'll be posting a query thread on that soon.  Anyhow, when I noted that some of these menus had "fowl" on them, it should have occurred to me that obtaining a fresh turkey probably presented greater or lesser difficulties (especially in 1918) for the cook depending upon where you lived.  Most folks probably could go to the butcher and obtain a turkey, and almost certainly some local farmer, even in Wyoming localities, raised them for the Holidays specifically.  Still, some hosts probably had menus that featured freshly obtained game, such as pheasant or, in Wyoming, ducks, geese or even sage chickens, all of which I find pretty darned tasty.

Of course, a lot of Americans were eating Thanksgiving Day dinners overseas in a mess hall of some sort in 1918.  What sort of menu did they find in the offering?  The authors of the excellent Roads to the Great War blog have that one covered:

Roads to the Great War: Thanksgiving Day 1918: Happy Thanksgiving from the Roads Editorial Team Much of the American Expeditionary Force found itself stuck in France after the Armis...

I don't know what "Dardanelle Turkey" is, unless that was the menu author's play on words Turkey keeping in mind that the recently defeated Ottoman Empire controlled the Dardanelles.  Perhaps.  But "White Fish" also on the menu. . .?  That one surprised me.

As it probably surprised some folks that Thanksgiving Day in 1918 was on November 28.  But as readers here will recall, the current calendar position of the holiday is a recent one, as this holiday used to move a fair bit around the month of November.

Any way you look at it, for most people this was likely a happier holiday than the one in 1917 had been. . . although for thousands of others, it was likely a profoundly sad one.

Vae victis

Woe to the Vanquished

Brennus

Brennus statement, made as a Gallic conqueror, is true in more sense than one, not as a brazen command upon the defeated, but as an existential fact.

Of course, in keeping with the nature of fate, which we've had some quotes on recently, while Brennus sacked Roman and generally acted like a bady, his troops came down with the trots in the city and the Romans ended up tossing him and followers out rather effectively somewhat later.  That may say about as much on this topic as the quote itself.

Some Gave All: British Empire Memorial, Cathedral de Notre Dame d...

Some Gave All: British Empire Memorial, Cathedral de Notre Dame d...

November 27, 1918. The Consumer Economy appears and the Nation resumes a Peacetime Economy.

The Laramie Boomerang reported that the country was resuming a peacetime economy and cutting appropriations, which in fact was done very rapidly, and with a somewhat disastrous impact on the national economy and individual businesses. At the same time, the paper was reporting that a giant military commitment of 1,200,000 men would remain in Europe for the time being.

At UW, the campus military training detachment was standing down.  Mass military training at UW came to an end.

The Casper newspaper, however, was focused on Thanksgiving, which in 1918 occurred on November 28.

To my surprise, Thanksgiving was clearly already associated with shopping, giving evidence to that phenomenon having existed much earlier than I would have supposed.  Indeed, an occasional topic of historical focus in some areas of historical focus is when the consumer economy first appeared.  Whenever that was (and its generally regarded as having its origins prior to World War One, it was clearly before 1918 as the stores in Cheyenne were going to be open to 9:00 this evening.

In war there is no substitute for victory.

In war there is no substitute for victory.

Douglas MacArthur.

Thanksgiving and Black Friday, Small Business Saturday, Cyber Monday, oh my!

Today is Cyber Monday, originally so named as this was the day when workers returning to their offices, work stations, cubicles etc., chose to shop on company time, rather than dive right back in.

Not surprising really.  Those with a long weekend tend to return for the most part with the post holiday blahs.

Retailers, however, picked up this pretty quickly and started offering Cyber Monday deals, making it a real thing.

How about you, have you participated in the Consumer Culture Bacchanalia?  It's sort of hard not to, although I support Small Business Saturday.

Which doesn't mean I participated in it.  I don't like shopping much anyhow.  And my land line phone has broken so that the message light hasn't been going off.  Given that, I missed an invitation to a book signing, but truth be known as I was very much looking forwards to four days in a row with now work, perhaps that was to my benefit in another sense.  Book signings make me really tense as I'm highly introverted by nature, something that people who know me only in a professional sense would be surprised to learn.

Anyhow, I guess it isn't true that I didn't participate entirely. That Saturday I did run out and stop by a sporting goods store to get something I required anyhow.  Things were marked way, way down and it wasn't until I got home that I realized that it must have been a Small Business Saturday sale.

My daughter and wife did participate, however. They went to a collection of small local businesses on Saturday to shop for Christmas.  Good for them.

Thanksgiving was otherwise low key but odd. As already noted on these pages, we went to our in laws where an elderly hunter died in a field while we were out there.  Strange melancholy experience. The next day I had a message from one of my employees about a medical emergency of epic proportions in their family, very distressing indeed.  All that caste a sort of tense gloom over things.  I didn't work, however, and did go hunting a couple of times.

Cyber Monday?  Who knows, perhaps even I'll participate a bit.

Some Gave All: St. Joan D'Arc, Notre Dame de Paris

Some Gave All: St. Joan D'Arc, Notre Dame de Paris: Memorial to St. Joan D'Arc, the patron saint of France, at the Cathedral de Notre Dame de Paris.

November 26, 1918. Letters home with scruffy photos. News photographs with polish appearance. Wyoming for Pershing? The murder of the Jews of Lvov, Rumors of War between Peru and Chile.

Post card home of Harold A. Stivers, 311th Infantry, 78th Division.  Stivers refers to his dress, which he regarded as a little rough.  It is interesting.  He's wearing the by then standard overseas cap and a leather jerkin.  American troops wore the jerkin much less often than the British, with whom it had become standard late in the war.  He notes that his puttees aren't wrapped correctly.  Puttees, used by the British and the French during the war, were adopted by the Americans but they didn't completely replace leggings.  After the war, the American Army quickly went back to leggings.

The contrasting photograph of Gen. Leroy S. Upton, commander of the 57th Bde, 29th Division, who presents a much more polished appearance. Gen. Upton is wearing private purchase lace up, and thick soled, riding boots with speed laces. . . a much preferable piece of footgear for actual field conditions than the standard field boots of the time.

One of the Cheyenne newspapers was declaring that Wyoming would support drafting Pershing for a 1920 Presidential run, or otherwise supporting him in that effort.

No doubt, the news was not in error.  Pershing was the son in law of Francis E. Warren, Wyoming's Senator, and very well remembered there.

And the tax on automobiles was coming off.

The other Cheyenne paper was reporting about the looming war between Chile and Peru, and on the horror of ethnic genocide in Lvov.  And there was fighting, of a different type, in the streets of New York City.

Roads to the Great War: Silent Landscape at Gallipoli Reviewed

Roads to the Great War: Silent Landscape at Gallipoli Reviewed by Mike Han...: Silent Landscape at Gallipoli: The Battlefields of the Dardanelles, One Hundred Years On by Simon Doughty (Author), James Kerr ...

Quod differtur, non aufertur

That which is postponed is not dropped. Inevitable is yet to happen.

St. Sir Thomas More

Pershing and Villa share headlines again. November 25, 1918.

Probably not since the Punitive Expedition wrapped up had John J. Pershing and Francisco "Pancho" Villa appeared on the front page in headlines.

Pershing, still in command of the American Expeditionary Force in Europe, which was going into occupation duty in Germany, showed up as Ohio Republicans were imagining him as a candidate for the 1920 Presidential Election.

The speculation would not prove to be idle. While Pershing would see a major promotion on the horizon elevating him in 1919 to the rank of General of the Armies of the United States, a rank higher than that occupied by any other U.S. officer during his own lifetime, Pershing did somewhat entertain the move.  He later announced that he would not campaign for the office, but he wouldn't decline it if offered either, sort of splitting the Shermanesque position that is so famously quoted. As luck would have it, however, Gen. Leonard Wood, well regarded in Republican circles, and not beholden for career success to a Democratic President, as Pershing was, would be the martial early favorite before his campaigned flamed out in favor of Warren G. Harding.

The presence of Villa on the front page should give the reader now, and should have then, some pause in regard to the Pershing boosterism.  How successful of a general was he really?  He's come down in history as a major American military success but the record is frankly rather thin on that.  Prior to the Great War he had been a very successful combat officer in the Philippines, but he wasn't the only one and that was, after all, an ongoing, embarrassing, low grade guerrilla war.  That doesn't mean that Pershing was bad at it, but guerrilla wars aren't usually major conflicts, and the Philippine Insurrection, while it started off as one from the American prospective, really wasn't by the end.

That wasn't Pershing's first combat command, indeed he saw service in the late stages of the Indian Wars and he'd commended troops in the field in Cuba during the Spanish American War.  But none of those events had really raised him to prominence.  It would take the Punitive Expedition to do that.  But how well did he do, really?

Well, a person can debate it.  He kept the American effort going and it didn't cost a lot of American lives.  It also did not capture Villa, or put him out of commission, which had been its singular goal.  Late in the expedition he made recommendations that would have undoubtedly have caused a major escalation of the war which would have almost certainly converted it from a border conflict into a full blown war with Mexico.  We could have won that, surely, but it would have put us in the position of occupying a hostile revolutionary Mexico which was proving difficult for its own successive governments to manage.  That effort would have likely have been so taxing on the United States that our later participation in World War One may very well not have occurred, which in turn may very well have meant that Germany's 1917 and 1918 efforts would have paid off and Imperial Germany emerged the victor.

Pershing can't be faulted for not seeing that far forward, but he can be for not realizing that a small police action shouldn't risk being expanded into a full blown war.  And in regard to his suitability for national leadership, that's important.

Of course those boosting Pershing were thinking of his hero status that came about due to the Great War.  But here too, real questions can be raised.  Americans have believed since the very onset that Pershing was absolutely correct in keeping the U.S. Army out of action until it could be committed as a singular large command, but the evidence shows that this is somewhat of a myth and, moreover, the AEF was not really well commanded in some regards.  In reality American troops started to go into action under French and British control both in order to get combat experience and because the German 1918 Spring Offensive required the deployment of American troops in defense actions. They did well but when counterattacks began American troops took horrendous casualties in part because they were so green but in part because the American military steadfastly refused to accept lessons from the French and the British regarding the circumstances of 1918 European combat.  American military efforts were successful, but at huge and at least partially unnecessary cost and at least one American offensive, the St. Mihel Offensive, was unnecessary yet conducted at American insistence.  When the Germans began to break in 1918 they were impressed with the recklessness of American operations and the individual American fighting man, but at the same time its notable that the French and the British were advancing with less loss.  Moreover, Pershing was one of the generals, although certainly not the only one, who insisted that combat continue right up until the last minute of the war, something which at least now appears to be not only a miscalculation but perhaps a bit more than that.

All in all, retrospectively, Pershing's record is pretty mixed and open to question.  Nothing really existed to suggest that he would have been a good President.  In the end, the GOP didn't decide to run him.

Some Gave All: Parisian Railway Workers Memorial, Paris France

Some Gave All: Parisian Railway Workers Memorial, Paris France: A memorial to Parisian railway workers for World War One.  Photo by MKTH.

Sunday Morning Scene: Churches of the West: Cathedral Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi, Santa Fe, New Mexico

Churches of the West: Cathedral Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi, Santa...:

Cathedral Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi, Santa Fe, New Mexico

This is the Cathedral Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi in Santa Fe, New Mexico. This Catholic Cathedral was built from 1869 through 1886  in the Romanesque style, although the style is not completely obvious as the spires planned for the church, a prominent feature of that style, were never installed.

The cathedral was built on the location of an earlier church, La Parroquia, which had been built in 1714 through 1717, and which itself stood on the location of a church built in 1626 that had been destroyed in the Pueblo Revolt.  A small portion of the earlier church was incorporated in the construction of the cathedral.

An interesting feature of this church is that it is located only two blocks away from San Miguel church.  This tends to show the Catholic concentration of the community at the time these various churches were built, as they were being built in close proximity to each other.  Santa Fe retains at least one more downtown Catholic church today.

Best Post of the Week of Novembver 18, 2018.

The best posts of the week of November 18, 2018.

Some weeks we have very little that fits the "best" category.  Some weeks a lot. This week we have an unusually large number.  But then, there was a lot to pass on this week.

"‘Great War’ brought Catholics, bishops into mainstream of US society"? Not so much.

Crappy but predictable career advice

Crossing borders, November 20, 1918.'

The American Veterans of the Great War. Who were they?

Le Grande Tombe de Villaroy, Île-de-France, France.

Monument to 13 Executed from Choisy Le Roi, Seine. August 13, 1944

Hommage aux combattants parisiens de la Grande Guerre. Paris France

Traveling after the victory.

A Thanksgiving Passing

A Thanksgiving Passing

I didn't know him.

He was an old man, upper 70s, at an age when some men are older than others.

I'd heard of him first in October.  We were at the farm for dinner with the in-laws and his truck was parked in a field.  My father in law related that he'd been coming out white tail deer hunting, but it seemed that what he mostly loved to do was just to watch the deer. 

He was in very poor condition, my father in law related.  That is, he was in very bad health.

On Thanksgiving his truck went by again.  We never heard a shot.  Some time later his son drove in and didn't stop. And then he drove back out. When he returned, the sheriff was right behind him and they again drove through the farm yard and out to the field.  By the time my father in law and I were in the yard getting ready to drive out to see what was gong on, an ambulance was driving in.

When we arrived, the sheriff, county fire, an ambulance, his son and his grandson were all there. But he'd passed.  He had finally shot a deer, a nice white tail buck, but his heart started failing in the effort to drag him in.  He'd called his son for help, but it was too late. He was gone by the time his son arrived and I'm certain that he was gone soon after that call.

His son was in his fifties and related that he wished he'd come to their Thanksgiving gathering nearby, but the paused to note that it could have happened at any time.  The adult grandson noted "better here than in the office".  I think that grandson was right.  The sheriff deputy stated "he went doing something he loved".

And indeed he had.

November 24, 1918. Cheyenne closes again, Horses being eaten in Russia, Revolution in Germany and Gasoline Alley

The papers were starting to report that the Spanish Flu Pandemic was easing, but in truth November was one of its peak years (and in other parts of the globe it'd rage on for the entire next year).  Reality hit as things were closed back up.

As bad as that was, the horrors of the Russian Civil War were pushing their way onto the front page of the local papers.  And there was legitimate reason to fear that the result of the Great War in Germany might be communist revolution throughout the defeated empires of Europe, a disaster that was being appreciated, if not perhaps in its full potential extent.

Elsewhere, in Chicago, the very first issue of Gasoline Alley made its appearance in the newspaper.

Gasoline Alley was, at first, only a Sunday paper in the black and white Sunday cartoons of the Chicago Tribune.  It soon became a daily.

The cartoon strip was one that appeared regularly, and maybe still does, in the Denver Post and occasionally in the Rocky Mountain News and I used to read it there.  It's a cartoon I like, but as it's a serial, its never one that I'm current on the story line so I was never up on what was going on in it.  The interesting thing about it for years and years, beside the content of the cartoon in general, is that it was a celebration of American garage culture.  In that context, it's pretty significant that it appeared in 1918 when automobiles, if not wholly new, were sill very much a new things.  They'd become common enough to be the subject of a cartoon at this point, which says something.

Traveling after the victory.

A French poster urging people to travel to the liberated areas of France and help.

Some Gave All: Hommage aux combattants parisiens de la Grande Gue...

Some Gave All: Hommage aux combattants parisiens de la Grande Gue...: 94,415 flowers planted in honor of the 94,415 Parisians killed in combat in World War One.

Some Gave All: Monument to 13 Executed from Choisy Le Roi, Seine....

Some Gave All: Monument to 13 Executed from Choisy Le Roi, Seine....: This monument is dedicated to 13 residents ("Fusilles", which means shooters, so presumably partisans) of Choisy Le Roi (a tow...

Today Is Small Business Saturday for 2018

Granted, it's sponsored by American Express, but that's a reflection of our time.  People seemingly operate extensively on credit cards and it isn't like there are any local ones.

But there are a lot of local outfits of all kind no matter where you are.  Give them a chance. Some deserve it, and some don't, but you won't know if all you do is click on Amazon.

Healthy local businesses in the end help support us all.  And there's simply something about them.  The healthier the small business economy of your area is, the healthier the economy in general is, right there where you live.

Roads to the Great War: Remembering the Tommies

Roads to the Great War: Remembering the Tommies: The 1914 Original BEF Shortly After Arriving Unlike France, Russia, Germany, and Austria-Hungary, Great Britain entered the First ...

Roads to the Great War: The AEF Keeps Fighting After the Armistice—in Northern Russia

Roads to the Great War: The AEF Keeps Fighting After the Armistice—in Nort...: An Eyewitness Account of the Battle of Toulgas From: The History of the American Expedition Fighting the Bolsheviki Campaigning in North ...

November 23, 1918. Marching into turmoil

American troops entering Metz by truck.

American troops marching into Thionville on foot.

Opening of  an American Red Cross canteen in Paris.

Army Air Service School, Rockwell Field, San Diego.  Trained pilots who wouldn't be going to Europe.

Some Gave All: Le Grande Tombe de Villaroy, Île-de-France, France...

Some Gave All: Le Grande Tombe de Villaroy, Île-de-France, France...: This monument in the Île-de-France region of France marks an ossuary which contains the remains of, among others, French poet Charles Peg...

Roads to the Great War: Canada's Golgotha

Roads to the Great War: Canada's Golgotha: "Canada's Golgotha" is a 32-inch-high  bronze sculpture by the British sculptor Francis Derwent Wood, produced in 191...

Roads to the Great War: 100 Years Ago: Whither Alsace and Lorraine?

Roads to the Great War: 100 Years Ago: Whither Alsace and Lorraine?: French Troops Occupy Strasbourg Alsace, except the Belfort district, and Lorraine had been annexed by the German Empire on 14 Augu...

Roads to the Great War: President Trump's Armistice Day Speech: 11 Novembe...

Roads to the Great War: President Trump's Armistice Day Speech: 11 Novembe...: Suresnes American Cemetery, France 11 November 2018 President Trump on Behalf of the American People Presents a Flag to Major General ...