Poster Saturday: Team work wins.

Tolerance and Helplessness.

It was in the early 1990s, when my mother started to be harassed by a mentally unstable individual.

He was, ostensibly, a student at the local community college.  My mother's house wasn't far from the college, which is one of the reasons she liked the house.  She had an active mind for most of her 90 plus years and that allowed her to be close to the college to take courses if she wished to.  It was also close to the YMCA.  She could walk to either, which she did frequently, as she didn't drive.

The young man yelled vile abuse at her and threatened her.  Horrible profane language and threats.  In an earlier age, most people would have regarded him as possessed.  And frankly, it's not impossible that he was.

He dressed in a bizarre fashion.  A huge beret like French alpine troops, but only French alpine troops, wear and a long black trench coat.  His path lead him occasionally past her house and he'd catch her on her way to or from the YMCA.

Soon after it happened, and it became clear it was going to repeat, I called the police.  The female police officer I spoke to was blasé about it.  Yes, they knew who he was.  Yes, they knew about him.  No, nothing could be done "until" he'd done something violent.

Until then.

I looked into filing a stalking action, again in an attempted cooperation with the police.  "Well, Officer Blasé informed me, even if I did that, they really wouldn't be able to do anything "until" he did something violent.

My dear aunt was also aware of my mother's plight, and did some checking.  The young man was the son of a physician and he lived at home.  He was well past community college age but he was an "art" student.  The art professors at the college were in desperate fear of him as he acted up badly in class. They were passing him through with flying colors in the hopes he'd leave.  His undoubtedly distraught parents were warehousing him while this process went on, apparently not knowing what else to do.

I thought about going over to their house or calling them and demanding they intervene.  But obviously, their backbones were made of noodles and they weren't going to.  

This went on for years.  I'd occasionally catch glimpses of the fellow but never in any sort of act.  His behavior towards my mother would die down, and then come back.  It decreased over the years but never fully went away until he obtained a scholarship, no doubt based on his bogus grades, to a four year university somewhere and left.

None of this should have occurred.  The police were no help. Society was no help.  Only my relatives were help.  I felt like I failed, and I probably really did.

I've grown a lot older.  Now, I doubt I'd handle it the same way.  People believe that with age comes caution but it's not really true.  Now, I'd probably confront the man, but who knows how that would have gone.  It's clear that the law and the authorities not only were no help, they weren't even interested in being help.

In a much earlier era, well even into the 1970s, the law would have helped.  Some of that help would have been, quite frankly, illegal, but it happened.  And self help was highly tolerated.

The world has gotten better in so many ways, and we can say for at least now, perhaps in most ways.  But in regards to some thing, the demand for tolerance has turned to helplessness.

The Cheyenne State Leader for February 16, 1918. Revolution in Mexico and Victory Pies

The Leader was correct, a new revolution had broken out in Mexico even as the contesting forces of Zapata and Villa continued their struggle against Carranza.

As the Mexican culture site puts it:

On February 16, 1918, soldiers loyal to the governor of the state of Guerrero, General Silvestre Mariscal, arrested Santiago Tlatelolco in the military prison, who took up arms to try to free his leader. Nearly 300 men who were under the command of Mariscal and had accompanied him to the Federal District took up arms in the Escuela de Tiro de San Lázaro, where they were quartered.

They were immediately repulsed by the law and order forces, under the command of General Miguel Madrigal, who defeated them and forced them to flee. Some escaped towards Peñón. Others, toward Tlalpan, where they tried to join the Zapatista armed forces that devastated the southern region of the Federal District.

So things really weren't settled south of the bordern.

North of the border restrictions on wheat were resulting in Victory Pies in restaurants.

Victory pies?

Well, what those apparently entailed is substituting out 1/3 of the flour substance for something other than wheat. 

Dancer turned aviator Vernon Castle was reported killed in an aviation accident in Texas.

Things were getting unsettled in Austria, which appeared to be teetering towards bowing out of the war.  Close to home, the war looked like it was bringing the Medical corps or cavalry back to Cheyenne. Cavalry had certainly had a presence there previously..

Today In Wyoming's History: Updates for February, 2018

Today In Wyoming's History: Updates for February, 2018: February 2:  Groundhog illustration added. February 2, 1918:  Cheyenne newspaper added with discussion on "Heatless Days".  D...

Lithuania declares independence, 1918

The Council of Lithuania declared its independence on this day, in 1918.

It would retain independence until invaded by the Soviet Union in 1940, was occupied by the Germans in 1941, was reoccupied by the Soviets late in World War Two, and then regained independence in 1990.

German Greed and Trotsky Goofs. . . and the Allies

We've been reading here, of course, in the century old news that Germany and Russia. . . Soviet Russia that is, had arrived upon a peace taking Russia out of the war.

Of course, Russia was taking itself out of the war anyway.  The Civil War was on, lots of regions of Imperial Russia were saying Прощай, or Hyvästi, or do widzenia or до побачення, or hüvasti and so on, all on their own . . and not only to the war, but to Russia itself.  Russia was flying apart and the Russians had started tearing each other apart.  This in turn seemed to be inspiring German greed as they kept advancing when they should have been sending troops out of Russia as quickly as possible in anticipation of their upcoming presumed offensive in the Spring.

Which of course was just the perfect time for Trotsky to do something stupid.  And that was his declaration of neither war nor peace at the peace conference with Germany. The Russians were just going to pack up their bags and go home.  That delcaration came on February 10.  The Germans weren't impressed.

And so a Trotsky blunder encouraged German avarice.

Yes, but. . . and what the Germans were desperately lacking in 1918.

Horseless Age, volume 43, number 4, February 15, 1918, page 50.

Four horse transport at No.4 Remount Depot in Boulogne, 15 February, 1918

Kipling, February 15, 1918.

If you will allow me, 1 will tell you a story.

HB 94 Fails

Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: The 2018 Wyoming Legislative Ses...: I'm already running a thread on the 2018 Wyoming Legislative Session, which is supposed to be a budget session.  That thread is here: ...

House Bill 94, I'm pleased to note, died a rapid death.

World Radio Day

Shoot, I missed it.  It was February 13.

Well, here's to World Radio Day. . . belated though I am.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2018 Wyoming Legislative Session. At What Point Is Enough, Enough?

I'm already running a thread on the 2018 Wyoming Legislative Session, which is supposed to be a budget session.  That thread is here:

Lex Anteinternet: The 2018 Wyoming Legislative Session.: Another one of our trailing posts. It hardly seems possible, but the 2018 Wyoming Legislative session is soon to begin and bills are n...

But I'm adding this short comment as at some point, enough should be enough.

Once again, in spite of massive public opposition to it, some hardcore right wing legislators are trying to lay the groundwork for a proposal that's actually banned by the Wyoming Constitution; that being acquiring land from the Federal Government.  The post above addresses that here:

And here we go yet again.

Yet another misguided effort to get the Federal domain transferred to the state.

HOUSE BILL NO. HB0094

State lands-net gain in acreage.

Sponsored by: Representative(s) Jennings, Clem, Edwards, Halverson, Lone, Miller, Stith and Winters and Senator(s) Hicks

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to state lands; providing that the acquisition of lands from the federal government may increase total trust land acreage; and providing for an effective date.

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

Section 1.  W.S. 36‑2‑111 is created to read:

36‑2‑111.  Acquisition of trust lands.

Subject to any other limitations as provided by law, the board is authorized to acquire land from the federal government or any federal agency that would increase total trust land acreage held by the state.  Any land acquired under this section shall not be included in any rule, policy or formula that limits the total trust land acreage which is or can be held by the state.

Section 2.  This act is effective July 1, 2018.

This one the sponsors managed to sneak in somehow without much notice.  Boo Hiss.

This will go to the floor this morning, February 14, 2018.   Call your legislature and leave a message.  Enough of this.

To make sure we keep public lands in public hands, call the the House Floor receptionist before 10 a.m.—307.777.7852—and tell your legislator to VOTE NO on HB 94.

This proposal is illegal.

Illegal.

The Wyoming Constitution prohibits this and the public doesn't want it.

Regarding that public, it's interesting to note that one of the legislators proposing this was appointed to his position and was sued as he doesn't even live in his disctrict.

I mean, come on.

Likewise there's this:

In other bills, Chuck Gray has proposed a bill to bypass the Attorney General of Wyoming and allow the legislature to hire an attorney to sue the State of Washington over coal terminals. This is a really bad idea and it won't go anywhere.

If it were to pass, it would fund some lawyer for an expensive suit that would surely fail.  It would be more productive to simply burn the cash.

This is a horrifically bad ideal. The lawsuit would lose.  It has no chance  whatsoever of success.  Everyone ought to know that.

That a few gadfly bills get in every year is, I suppose, not surprise.  But attacking the will of the people on public lands, again, is appalling.

And the right wing elements of the legislature that have become so enamored with filing lawsuits ought to step back and realizes that what they do, is lose.

Come on guys.  If you want to be in court all the time, go to law school and become a public defender.  You'll be in it constantly.  And if you the idea of the Federal Government owning public land. . .New York is calling you.

The secular left's perpetual surprise at arriving at the Catholic past.

 

 Cathedral of the Madeline, Salt Lake City Utah.

I started this post a very long time ago, something like over a year ago, and I"m just getting back around to it now.

Today is the start of Lent, Ash Wednesday, that more or less forty day period prior to Easter in which Catholics and the Orthodox, and often the faithful who closely base their practices on the Catholic Church, observe a penitential season that includes fasting and abstinence from meat on certain days.  The fast and abstinence practice, we should note, is considerably more rigid in the Eastern churches, both the Orthodox and the Catholic, than in the Western ones.  

That called this old post to mind, but it isn't what got it rolling.

Sometimes a person cannot help but be amused.

Meatless Monday is global movement with a simple message: once a week, cut the meat. Launched in 2003, Meatless Monday is a non-profit initiative of The Monday Campaigns, working in collaboration with the Center for a Livable Future (CLF) at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

That's what brought this post to mind.

Meatless Monday.

 

 Meatless Days, Wheatless Days, and Porkless Days (and Heatless Days) all became a feature of civilian life during World War One, in an effort to conserve food resources.  True to form, the government didn't put the Meatless Days on Friday, which means that Catholics and the Orthodox got all these days plus the existing Friday one they already had.

Frankly, I'm not hugely impressed with the various "meatless" movements and to a certain degree I think they reflect the increasingly effete and disconnected nature of Western Society.  There's a real fear of nature anymore in our highly urban-centric world which has lead to people being afraid of their own shadows, including their food, and a weird sort of belief that if only they do this or that, or avoid this or that, they'll live forever.  They won't.

Part of that, in very real terms, is that people have so lost a sense of the Divine, and a spiritual life, that they don't know what it is. They grasp for it, and oddly, and amusingly to some of us in the Apostolic faiths, they eventually grasp and grope their way around to something they think is new, but which is ancient. But in grasping on it ,they don't really get the point.

Let's start with Meatless days.

Usually you'd hear something like we live in an era when meat is more common on the plate than every before, but that's not really universally true.  Some cultures in some parts of the world have always had very large quantities of meat in the overall percentage of their diets. Some less so. All have had meat in their diets, contrary to some erroneous beliefs.

In Western societies abstaining from meats, as a form of penance and religious observance, was at one time the absolute norm.  So Meatless Days aren't a concept that the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health thought up by a long shot.  All Catholics at one time abstained from meat, which was not defined to include fish, from some point a very long time ago up until, in some countries, but not all, after Vatican II.  It was a universal Catholic practice and even bad Catholics observed it.

 

 The government during World War One didn't consider fish a meat either, so while secularist today will sometimes scoff at the Catholic exception for fish, society at large has always had this view itself.

Catholics still observe it during Lent, and the fact that 22% of Americans are Catholics shows this time of year as all the fast food joints suddenly start serving fish sandwiches.  A lot of them do this only during Lent, although they never specifically note that's why they're doing it.  Some traditionalist Catholics in North America still do this on every Friday of the year as they simply kept on after the United States Council of Catholic Bishops changed the rule for the United States.  At that time, Catholics were still supposed to do something else penitential, which is widely ignored and which, frankly, if they'd been thinking would been something that they'd know would have been widely ignored.  "Spirit of Vatican II".  Hmph.

And as noted the Orthodox their own rules, as do the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church, which include much  more strict abstinence rules.   Over Lent, or Great Lent as they call it, they step out the abstinence rules so that, over time, they give up fats, oils and alcohol.  By the end of Lent their diet restrictions are, therefore, pretty significant.  I'm not sure what the various branches of the Eastern churches do otherwise, but at least at one time their abstinence periods were fairly significant.

Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral in Salt Lake City.  There are enough members of this church in Salt Lake to support a respected elementary school.

That this is a Catholic thing I think implicitly shows as while the Catholic Church is the largest church in the United States, a majority of Americans are not Catholics, and so the old Protestant prejudice shows in avoiding putting the Meatless Days on our Day of Abstinence, Friday.  Even if we throw in the few percentage of Orthodox in the mix (the Orthodox are only a significant religious demographic geographically in some locations in the US) we're still only a quarter of the overall population.  So 75% or so of Americans aren't Catholics.  Having said that, probably at least another 10% follow Catholic customs to some degree, and we have to note that both Jewish and Muslim Americans also have some dietary laws that are seasonally unique.  Anyhow, so when John Hopkins discovers what it thinks is this nifty secular penitent practice, it puts it on Monday, not on Friday.

Wouldn't want to be too Catholic there, is apparently the thought.

This is amusing enough, but recently people have been discovering intermittent fasting.

I'm not a dietician and I'm not going to make any recommendations let alone opine on the safety of anything for anyone, but intermittent fasting is something that's recently made an appearance here and there.  Indeed, hardcore fasting has in some places.  Again, it's interesting to see a secular and somewhat left wing fad come riding in on the unacknowledged path long trod by various religions, including the very ones that such people spend so much time pretending they are avoiding.

Fasting can mean more than one thing to more than one person, but basically in this context it means abstaining from food for a discernible period.  In the Catholic and Orthodox faiths it means, on days of fast, to abstain from food save for one meal.  As I'm not closely familiar with the Eastern practice I'll only note that in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church what that means is to take one primary meal and you can take two minor ones to sustain yourself during the day. . . not much of a fast really.  Some people will take that further and omit a meal.  Or some will take it further yet and only eat the primary meal. This is what in secular terms is intermittent fasting.

There are faiths that go further than this, we should note.  Muslims during Ramadan eat only after dark and not at all during the day.

It's weird to read about intermittent fasting from secular sources as they'll go on and praise things like clarity of mind, or weight loss, and the like.  But at the end of the day, there's always some perceived spiritual nature of it from people who are desperately trying to avoid being spiritual.

Indeed, it's interesting how all of this works.  In this very secular age in which so many people are lost and struggling for a center, and in which the social left is constantly thinking it comes up with something new and brilliant, what they've come up with recently is the unacknowledged rediscovery of Fasting and periodic Abstinence of the Catholic type, let alone, at the same time, a rediscovery that more and more a lot of the old rules about personal conduct that they liberated us from starting in the 1960s were really good ideas in the first place.

But then, they're not going to admit that, or give credit perhaps where credit should be given.

Oh well.  Have a good and productive Lent. . . no matter how you approach it.

Railhead: February 14, 1918. Baldwin locomotive at a U.S. assembling plant in France, February 18, 1918.

Railhead: February 14, 1918.:

Baldwin locomotive at a U.S. assembling plant in France, February 18, 1918.

Russia swithes to the Gregorian Calendar. February 14, 1918.

Thank goodness.

For a person tracking events prior to this date, Russian ones are a mess.

At least the Communists got this one right.

Big Brown Closes

Big Brown in Fairfield Texas, a coal fired power plant that used Wyoming coal, has closed, the victim of natural gas.

We've been tracking this trend for some time.  It's this trend, the phasing out of coal for electrical power generation, that's causing the decline in demand for Wyoming coal. And this trend will continue.

It's worth noting, a day after Natrona County's Chuck Gray introduced a quixotic bill to sue Washington State over it's "no" to a coal terminal in its state, thereby proposing to bypass the Attorney General who no doubt know that such an effort is doomed to failure, that this is not only a national trend, but set to become a global one.  Indeed, it hit in Europe in some ways before here, and its in full swing here.  People who look to Asian markets to save coal are fooling themselves.  Sure, they might consume it at an increased rate briefly, but at the speed this conversion is occurring, it will be brief indeed.

As we have also noted, this is a trend line that is over a century old.  We always only live in our own times and therefore have a hard time appreciating that. But if we really want to sue somebody. . .sue the Royal Navy.  They really accelerated this change.

 

Me, third from right, when I thought I had a career in geology, and probably in coal.

What is the Purpose of our YouTube Channel?

The Big Picture: Auxiliary Remount Depot 309, Captain Oscar Blue, G.M.R.C. commanding, Camp McClellan, Ala., Feb. 13th, 1918

The Intrusion Of Modern Politics On Our YouTube Channel

So boat shoes have a special needle for re-lacing them?

Who knew?

And how aggravating.

Bitcoin and the law of unintended consequences

An interesting energy related, sort of, news item.

KEFLAVIK, Iceland — Iceland is expected to use more energy “mining” bitcoins and other virtual currencies this year than it uses to power its homes.

With massive amounts of electricity needed to run the computers that create bitcoins, large virtual currency companies have established a base in the North Atlantic island nation blessed with an abundance of renewable energy.

The new industry’s relatively sudden growth prompted lawmaker Smari McCarthy of Iceland’s Pirate Party to suggest taxing the profits of bitcoin mines. The initiative is likely to be well received by Icelanders, who are skeptical of speculative financial ventures after the country’s catastrophic 2008 banking crash.

Keflavik has always been odd.  It was founded in the 16th Century by Scottish engineers and entrepreneurs and became a flight hub for the Allies during World War Two.  It's noted for its musicians the Icelandic rock and roll hall of fame is located in the city of 15,000.

Now, Bitcoin.

February 12, 1918. The bad news. Some good. And a Holiday.

The paper was expressing the worries that a lot of people no doubt had.

The King had addressed his nation.

It turned out that the recently sunk Tuscania did have some Wyoming men on board it, but they had survived.

Cheyenne was named as a future air hub for airborne travelers to Yellowstone, and interesting forward looking thought.

And it was Lincoln's Birthday, a holiday.

Sunday Morning Scene: Inside the World’s Only Surviving Tattoo Shop For Medieval Pilgrims

Okay, recently I posted on tattoos here, and if I didn't diss them (and I don't think I did) I was somewhat critical of them.

Here, however, is something a bit different.  Indeed, much different.

Inside the World’s Only Surviving Tattoo Shop For Medieval Pilgrims

The Razzouk family has been inking religious pilgrims in the Middle East for 700 years.

I get this.

This strikes me the same way, I'd note that Marine Corps tattoos do.  There's an element of devotion here that's not only sincere, but which requires effort on the part of the person who obtained it.

I guess, while I fear to do so, that I'll contrast this with the recent tattoo obtained by a young man I've known for years, upon his obtaining age 18. It also expresses a religious devotion and. . .it's hideous.

Indeed, while it expresses a religious devotion, it's not obvious that this is the case.  That's the worst sort of message to send   Amongst people who ponder advertising that's regarded as a classic advertising "fail".  If people didn't get it, your message was pointless.

Of course, tattoos aren't necessarily meant to send a message to anyone but yourself.  Or maybe they are.  Or maybe they do, no matter what you meant.  And the difficulty of obtaining them might mean something as well.

Anyhow, these stand apart to me.

Woodrow Wilson's Address to Congress of February 11, 1918.

Monday in 1918 was starting off on a serious note, as Monday so often does.  President Wilson addressed Congress regarding our enemies as the war.

Gentlemen of the Congress:

On the eighth of January I had the honor of addressing you on the objects of the war as our people conceive them. The Prime Minister of Great Britain had spoken in similar terms on the fifth of January. To these addresses the German Chancellor replied on the twenty-fourth and Count Czernin, for Austria, on the same day. It is gratifying to have our desire so promptly realized that all exchanges of views on this great matter should be made in the hearing of all the world.

Count Czernin's reply, which is directed chiefly to my own address of the eighth of January, is uttered in a very friendly tone. He finds in my statement a sufficiently encouraging approach to the views of his own Government to justify him in believing that it furnishes a basis for more detailed discussion of purposes by the two Governments. He is represented to have intimated that the views he was expressing had been communicated to me beforehand and that I was aware of them at the time he was uttering them; but in this I am sure he was misunderstood. I had received no intimation of what he intended to say. There was, of course no reason why he should communicate privately with me. I am quite content to be one of his public audience.

Count von Hertling's reply is, I must say, very vague and very confusing. It is full of equivocal phrases and leads it is not clear where. But it is certainly in a very different tone from that of Count Czernin, and apparently of an opposite purpose. It confirms, I am sorry to say, rather than removes, the unfortunate impression made by what we had learned of the conferences at Brest-Litovsk. His discussion and acceptance of our general principles lead him to no practical conclusions. He refuses to apply them to the substantive items which must constitute the body of my final settlement. He is jealous of international action and of international counsel. He accepts, he says, the principle of public diplomacy, but he appears to insist that it be confined, at any rate in this case, to generalities and that the several particular questions of territory and sovereignty, the several questions upon whose settlement must depend the acceptance of peace by the twenty-three states now engaged in the war, must be discussed and settled, not in general council, but severally by the nations most immediately concerned by interest or neighborhood. He agrees that the seas should be free, but looks askance at any limitation to that freedom by international action in the interest of the common order. He would without reserve be glad to see economic barriers resolved between nation and nation, for that could in no way impede the ambitions of the military party with whom he seems constrained to keep on terms. Neither does he raise objection to a limitation of armaments. That matter will be settled of itself, he thinks, by the economic conditions which must follow the war. But the German colonies, he demands, must be returned without debate. He will discuss with no one but the representatives of Russia what disposition shall be made of the people and the lands of the Baltic provinces; with no one but the Government of France the "conditions" under which French territory shall be evacuated; and only with Austria what shall be done with Poland. In the determination of all questions affecting the Balkan states he defers, as I understand him, to Austria and Turkey: and with regard to the agreement to be entered into concerning the non-Turkish peoples of the present Ottoman Empire, to the Turkish authorities themselves. After a settlement all round, effected in this fashion, by individual barter and concession, he would have no objection, if I correctly interpret his statement, to a league of nations which would undertake to hold the new balance of power steady against external disturbance.

It must be evident to everyone who understands that this war has wrought in the opinion and temper of the world that no general peace, no peace worth the infinite sacrifices of these years of tragical suffering, can possibly be arrived at in any such fashion. The method the German Chancellor proposes is the method of the Congress of Vienna. We cannot and will not return to that. What is at at stake now is the peace of the world. What we are striving for is a new international order based upon broad and universal principles of right and justice, -- no mere peace of shreds and patches. Is it possible that Count von Hertling does not see that, does not grasp it, is in fact living in his thought in a world dead and gone? Has he utterly forgotten the Reichstag Resolutions of the nineteenth of July, or does he deliberately ignore them? They spoke of the conditions of general peace, not of national aggrandizement or of arrangements between state and state. The peace of the world depends upon the just settlement of each of the several problems to which I adverted in my recent address to the Congress. I, of course, do not rnean that the peace of the world depends upon the acceptance of any particular set of suggestions as to the way in which those problems are to be dealt with. I mean only that those problems each and all affect the whole world; that unless they are dealt with in a spirit of unselfish and unbiased justice, with a view to the wishes, the natural connections, the racial aspirations, the security, snd the peace of mind of the peoples involved, no permanent peace will have been attained. They cannot be discussed separately or in corners. None of them constitutes a private or separate interest from which the opinion of the world may be shut out. Whatever affects the peace affects mankind, and nothing settled by military force, if settled wrong, is settled at all. It will presently have to be reopened.

Is Count von Hertling not aware that he is speaking in the court of mankind, that all the awakened nations of the world now sit in judgment on what every public man, of whatever nation, may say on the issues of a conflict which has spread to every region of the world? The Reichstag Resolutions of July themselves frankly accepted the decisions of that court. There shall be no annexations, no contributions, no punitive damage. Peoples are not to be handed about from one sovereignty to another by an international conference or an understanding between rivals and antagonists. National aspirations must be respected; peoples may now be dominated and governed only by their own consent. "Self-determination" is not a mere phrase. It is an imperative principle of actions which statesmen will henceforth ignore at their peril. We cannot have general peace for the asking, or by the mere arrangements of a peace conference. It cannot be pieced together out of individual understandings between powerful states. All the parties to this war must join in the settlement of every issue anywhere involved in it; because what we are seeing is a peace that we can all unite to guarantee and maintain and every item of it must be submitted to the common judgment whether it be right and fair, an act of justice, rather than a bargain between sovereigns.

The United States has no desire to interfere in European affairs or to act as arbiter in European territorial disputes. She would disdain to take advantage of any internal weakness or disorder to impose by own will upon another people. She is quite ready to be shown that the settlements she has suggested are not the best or the most enduring. They are only her own provisional sketch of principles and of the way in which they should be applied. But she entered this war because she was made a partner, whether she would or not, in the sufferings and indignities inflicted by the military masters of Germany, against the peace and security of mankind; and the conditions of peace will touch her as nearly as they will touch any other nation to which is entrusted a leading part in the maintenance of civilization.. She cannot see her way to peace until the causes of this war are removed, its renewal rendered as nearly as may be impossible.

This war had its roots in the disregard of the rights of small nations and of nationalities which lacked the union and the force to make good their claim to determine their own allegiances and their own forms of political life. Covenants must now be entered into which will render such things impossible for the future; and those covenants must be backed by the united force of all the nations that love justice and are willing to maintain it at any cost. If territorial settlements and the political relations of great populations which have not the organized power to resist are to be determined by the contracts of the powerful governments which consider themselves most directly affected, as Count von Hertling proposes, why may not economic questions also? It has come about in the altered world in which we now find ourselves that justice and the rights of peoples affect the whole field of international dealing as much as access to raw materials and fair and equal conditions of trade. Count von Hertling wants the essential bases of commercial and industrial life to be safeguarded by common agreement and guarantees but he cannot expect that to be conceded him if the other matters to be determined by the articles on peace are not handled in the same way as items in the final accounting. He cannot ask the benefit of common agreement in the one field without according it in the other. I take it for granted that he sees that separate and selfish compacts with regard to trade and the essential materials of manufacture would afford no foundation for peace. Neither, he may rest assured, will separate and selfish compacts with regard to provinces and peoples.

Count Czernin seems to see the fundamental elements of peace with clear eyes and does not seek to obscure them. He sees that an independent Poland, made up of all the indisputably Polish peoples who lie contiguous to one another, is a matter of European concern and must of course be conceded; that Belgium must be evacuated and restored, no matter what sacrifices and concessions that may involve; and that national aspirations must be satisfied, even within his own Empire, in the common interest of Europe and mankind. If he is silent about questions which touch the interest and purpose of his allies more nearly than they touch those of Austria only, it must of course be because he feels constrained, I suppose, to defer to Germany and Turkey in the circumstances. Seeing and conceding, as he does, the essential principles involved and the necessity of candidly applying them, he naturally feels that Austria can respond to the purpose of peace as expressed by the United States with less embarrassment than could Germany. He would probably have gone much farther had it not been for the embarrassments of Austria's alliances and of her dependence upon Germany.

After all, the test of whether it is possible for either government to go any further in this comparison of views is simple and obvious. The principles to be applied are these:

First, that each part of the final settlement must be based upon the essential justice of that particular case and upon such adjustments as are most likely to bring a peace that will be permanent;

Second, that peoples and provinces are not to be bartered about from sovereignty to sovereignty as if they were mere chattels and pawns in a game, even the great game, now forever discredited, of the balance of power; but that

Third, every territorial settlement involved in this war must be made in the interest and for the benefit of the populations concerned, and not as a part of any mere adjustment or compromise of claims amongst rival states; and

Fourth, that all well defined national aspirations shall be accorded the utmost satisfaction that can be accorded them without introducing new or perpetuating old elements of discord and antagonism that would be likely in time to breaks the peace of Europe and consequently of the world. 

A general peace erected upon such foundations can be discussed. Until such a peace can be secured we have no choice but to go on. So far as we can judge, these principles that we regard as fundamental are already everywhere accepted as imperative except among the spokesmen of the military and annexationist party in Germany. If they have anywhere else been rejected, the objectors have not been sufficiently numerous or influential to make their voices audible. The tragical circumstance is that this one party in Germany is apparently willing and able to send millions of men to their death to prevent what all the world now sees to be just.

I would not be a true spokesman of thc people of the United States if I did not say once more that we entered this war upon no small occasion, and that we can never turn back from a course chosen upon principle. Our resources are in part mobilized now, and we shall not pause until they are mobilized in their entirety. Our armies are rapidly going to the fighting front, and will go more and more rapidly. Our whole strength will be put into this war of emancipation, -- emancipation from the threat and attempted mastery of selfish groups of autocratic rulers, -- whatever the difficulties and present partial delays. We are indomitable in our power of independent action and can in no circumstances consent to live in a world governed by intrigue and force. We believe that our own desire for a new international order under which reason and justice and the common interests of mankind shall prevail is the desire of enlightened men everywhere. Without that new order the world will be without peace and human life will lack tolerable conditions of existence and development. Having set our hand to the task of achieving it, we shall not turn back.

I hope that it is not necessary for me to add that no word of what I have said is intended as a threat. That is not the temper of our people. I have spoken thus only that the whole world may know the true spirit of America -- that men everywhere may know that our passion for justice and for self-government is no mere passion of words but a passion which, once set in action, must be satisfied. The power of the United States is a menace to no nation or people. It will never be used in aggression or for the aggrandizement of any selfish interest of our own. lt springs out of freedom and is for the service of freedom.

In other grim news, readers of the Monday paper were learning that the Ukraine had indeed accepted German protectorate status and that Romania  now appeared on the brink of bowing out.  U.S. troops were pouring into Europe, but at the same time, German troops already in Eastern Europe should have been pouring back the other way.

I guess in cheerier news, the weather in Cheyenne was really warm for February, the warmest ever at that time.   And a holiday was coming up.  Readers of the Laramie paper were encouraged that Heatless Days, which were in fact Mondays, might be coming to an end.

Sunday Morning Scene: St. Theresa of the Child Jesus Catholic Church, Meeteetse Wyoming

St. Theresa of the Child Jesus Catholic Church, Meeteetse Wyoming

This is St. Theresa Catholic Church in Meeteetse Wyoming. The church was built in 1915 in Cody, and later moved to this location.  It is served by St. Anthony of Padua Church in Cody.

Best Posts of the Week of February 4, 2018

ENDOW Study. Air Travel First

The Alpine Ambulance: February 9, 1918.

Poster Saturday: Soviet Realism.

No idea what the poster is for, but a good example of Soviet Realism style, a guilty pleasure.  I'm about as far from being a fan of Communism as a person can get, but I'll admit to liking the art style.

Fairly typical late Soviet female portrayal as well, with a fairly stout young Russian woman being portrayed.

106th Supply Train, Major Carl L. Seals, commanding, Camp Wheeler, Ga., Feb. 10th, 1918

Today In Wyoming's History: The City of Casper ponders closing Fort Casper Mus...

Today In Wyoming's History: The City of Casper ponders closing Fort Casper Mus...:  I've photographed Ft. Caspar a zillion times, but of course I can't find any of my photos of the post itself right now.  Anyhow...

The Wyoming Tribune, February 9, 1918. Different Times

Cheyenne high school cadets were having a competition.  They were, of course, all male.  "Pretty Cheyenne High School Girls" had been chosen to sponsor the teams.  This would probably spark some sort of protest today.  Whose times are more honest?

On the same day, those cadets and their female sponsors could read that the Germans had gotten the best of fresh American infantry once again in a trench raid. The Germans were testing American troops. . .but also giving American troops who survived the test combat experience.

The sinking of the Tuscania remained in the news.  Revolution in Russia continued to grab headlines.  Ukraine had bowed out of the war as an independent state, freed of Moscow, and had stepped into what was to be the first of two German "protectorates" of the 20th Century for that country.

And Theodore Roosevelt was ill.

At least the weather looked good for autoing.

The Alpine Ambulance: February 9, 1918.

Three invalided French soldiers, by their caps Chasseurs Alpin, and an ambulance in the Alps on this day in 1918.

Blog Mirror: A Hundred Years Ago: Hundred-Year-Old Food Advertisements Poem

An interesting look at advertising of some years back:

Hundred-Year-Old Food Advertisements Poem

Today In Wyoming's History: February 8. An Enduring Controversy

Today In Wyoming's History: February 8: 1918  Oral arguments heard in the United States Supreme Court in Wyoming v. Colorado.  The controversy surrounded appropriations on the Laramie River

The Stars and Stripes commences publication. February 8, 1918.

On this day in 1918 the famous military newspaper, The Stars and Stripes, commenced publication.

Some would say it resumed publication, as there was a military newspaper, of limited circulation, also named that during the Civil War.  However, that paper, as noted, had a limited circulation amongst Illinois regiments alone and can't really be regarded as the originator of the later soldier's newspaper.

The World War One Stars and Stripes was a high quality newspaper that was published until June 1919.  Some of its staff would go on to major literary careers of various types.  It was revived during World War Two in which it resumed its prior high quality and its still in print as a daily soldiers newspaper today.

Those baggy pantaloons. Blog Mirror: Why US Wool Trousers fit like garbage bags

Why US Wool Trousers fit like garbage bags

Many people do not realize that trousers from the 1940’s were cut differently than those made today. They tended to have higher waists, fuller thighs and very unflattering seats. The wartime pants designed for the US Army took these traits to new highs . . .

An interesting look into why things from the past don't look, or fit, the way things do today.  Follow the link to the rest of the story.

And while we're dealing with goofiness and the North . . .

we have the example of Canada changing the words to its National Anthem, to be gender neutral.

Which it had been in the first place.

This is just silly.

Okay, the lyrics of Oh Canada are, or now:

O Canada! Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.
With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!
From far and wide, O Canada,
We stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee. 

You can see how shockingly sexist that is.

You can't? 

Well perhaps that's because you aren't hypersensitive.  But in recent years being over sensitive to such things has seemingly become a sort of Canadian thing.

Here's what that lien is being changed to:

True patriot love in all of us command.

What might be better noted here is that the line "True patriot love in all thy sons command" is incredibly awkward, even though Oh Canada is a pretty song.  What might also be noted is that "True patriot love in all of us command" is also incredible awkward.  Indeed, I'm not even sure if the grammar is proper.  It's certainly a rather odd sentence.

Of interest, the original English words (which weren't the original words) of the poem that was later set to music, written by Stanley Weir, were:

O Canada! Our home and native land!
True patriot love thou dost in us command.
We see thee rising fair, dear land,
The True North, strong and free;
And stand on guard, O Canada,
We stand on guard for thee.

So it was also awkward, but gender neutral, if in archaic language.  It's grammar isn't strained, however, if archaic.

But perhaps no more archaic than having "thy" in a song, a word that hasn't been used in regular speech since the time that Cromwell was just a difficult child in the 7th grade.

Not everyone was keen on the change.  One Canadian member of parliament stated; "If this is Justin Trudeau’s Senate, we are certainly trampling upon democracy. And we’re putting the government on notice today"  Trudeau of course followed up with his comment on "peoplekind".  And this sort of hypersensitivity, which is spawning I'd note a serious debate in Canada with some columnist really taking this to be a serious matter, should given Canadians pause, but not because its serious.  It's a true "first world problem".  If this is a matter of real debate, can "Real Housewives of Quebec City" be far behind, which Justin Trudeau taking a weekly cameo role?

I wonder what the Canadian Senate intends to do with one of the later lines of the poem:

O Canada! Beneath thy shining skies
May stalwart sons and gentle maidens rise,
To keep thee steadfast through the years
From East to Western Sea,
Our own beloved native land!
Our True North, strong and free!

Son?  Maidens?

Oh my.

Maybe that part isn't in it anymore.  Or is never sung, like the really aggressive later lines of The Queen, the British National Anthem that the original French language version of Oh Canada was written to counter (have you folks forgotten that?)

God save our gracious Queen!

Long live our noble Queen!

God save the Queen!

Send her victorious,

Happy and glorious,

Long to reign over us,

God save the Queen. 
 

Thy choicest gifts in store
On her be pleased to pour,
Long may she reign.
May she defend our laws,
And ever give us cause,
To sing with heart and voice,
God save the Queen.

And those are the cleaned up non militaristic lines.

Perhaps the Senate should go one further and take out all of the potentially offensive words, including nativists and and aggressive ones. The song could then start off:

O Canada! Our home and mmmmmm land!
True neutral non offensive  love thou dost in us mmmmmmm.
We see thee rising fair, dear land,
The mmmmm North, strong and free;
And stand mmmmmmm, O Canada,
We mmmmmmmmm for thee.

The song, by the way, was originally written with French lyrics.  Not English.  Perhaps it would be better to go back to the French ones, which have nearly 40 years on the English ones.  That would be a nice bone to toss to Quebec, after all, right.  So what are those lyrics?

O Canada! Terre de nos aïeux,
Ton front est ceint de fleurons glorieux.
Car ton bras sait porter l’épée,
Il sait porter la croix.
Ton histoire est une épopée,
Des plus brillants exploits.
Et ta valeur, de foi trempée,
Protégera nos foyers et nos droits.
Protégera nos foyers et nos droits.

So, how's that translate?

O Canada! Land of our ancestors.
Your brow is covered with glorious flower garlands.
Because your arm knows how to wield a sword
And knows how to carry a cross
Your history is an epic
Of brilliants exploits
And your valour is steeped in faith
Protect our homes and our rights
Protect our homes and our rights

Hard to see a Parliament that's so concerned with the PC of a single line being able to take up the tune of the original song at all.  After all, it expresses an opinion. That might offend somebody.

Speaking of French national anthems, consider Les Marseillaise:

Allons, enfants de la Patrie
Le jour de gloire est arrivé!
Contre nous, de la tyrannie
L'étendard sanglant est levé
Entendez-vous dans les campagnes
Mugir ces féroces soldats?
Ils viennent jusque dans nos bras
Égorger nos fils, nos compagnes!
Aux armes, citoyens!
Formez vos bataillons
Marchons, marchons!
Qu'un sang impur
Abreuve nos sillons!

The translation?

Arise, children of the Fatherland
The day of glory has arrived
Against us tyranny's
Bloody banner is raised
Do you hear, in the countryside
The roar of those ferocious soldiers?
They're coming right into your arms
To cut the throats of your sons, your women!
To arms, citizens!
Form your battalions
Let's march, let's march
Let an impure blood
Water our furrows!

Oh my.

It's almost like the French, and British, are proud of their countries and aren't that worried about offending you.  Gosh.

North American Right and left daftness

It would figure that in an age when the American President says thing that are shockingly rude and abrasive, we would have a Canadian Prime Minister whose is freakishly on the opposite side of the coin in a matter/anti matter manner.  Consider this:

During a town hall meeting on Friday, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau requested a woman say "peoplekind" instead of "mankind," as part of a larger effort by the Canadian government to make language inclusivity a priority. On Thursday, the Canadian senate passed a bill making the country's national anthem gender neutral. While Trudeau's intent with his comments was to promote inclusivity, he was widely mocked by critics for his remarks.

As well he should have been. What a wuss.

Trudeau is taking a lot of heat, to include Canadian heat, for saying such a goofball, did anyone see where he parked his unicorn, remark.

Not that it's been the first time.  The Toronto Sun, for example, noted following this, regarding Trudeau's various remarks:

Some are just goofy, like his claim that we need to “rethink concepts as basic as space and time.” Others offer a window into his political philosophy, like his admiration that China’s “basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime and say ‘we need to go green fastest.’”

Then there are gaffes that have serious public policy consequences, such as his claim “the budget will balance itself” which he proved wrong all by himself.

Regarding peoplekind the Sun stated:

If this is the sort of progressivism he’s trying to insert into the NAFTA text, no wonder President Trump’s thinking of tearing it all up.

Canadian politics can be more than a little difficult to follow from afar.  Canadians take an intense interest in American politics, and generally many aren't too keen on Trump. But then neither are many Americans. The difference is that you can usually discern why Americans are unhappy with a leader, but telling what's upsetting Canadians is pretty difficult  Many Canadians took a huge dislike to Steven Harper, but I have to see an explanation of what exactly it was that upset them.  I'm not saying there wasn't a reason, I'm just clueless what it was.  And for the same reason it's difficult to tell what the attraction of Trudeau was or is.

But then that's how North American politics have been recently.  It's not that there aren't really good options out there.  We can only hope that gravitas takes over everywhere sooner or later.

What a person is forced to wonder, however, is that if the respective leaders of the two countries reflect exaggerated views of their nations, or at least certain sectors of their nations.  American discourse has truly become more rude in the age of the Internet and views that were once expressed only privately if at all now seem to surface all the time.  President Trump is a mirror back on that.

Just as Justin Trudeau is a mirror back on a self imposed exaggerated form of liberalism that Canadians have taken on since the 1960s, and now seem to feel that they have to be the standard bearer for.  Canada was at one time aggressively English and rural, but now its aggressively passive and hyper urban.  It's taken a national habit of politeness to the extreme of being a national virtue.  So we have, on one hand, a nation that has an excessively brash in your face leader and another that worries about vapid manners of speech.

Is there an adult somewhere in the middle?

Are there any adults even in the room?  Surely there are conservative and liberal leaders who can still muster public attention who are serious men and women (or to keep Justin from fainting, people), aren't there?

But who knows, maybe that day has passed. 

Can Oprah be far behind?

Some Time Ago we published this item here on Lex Anteinternet: Coal: Understanding the time line of an industry

 North Antelope Coal Mine, Converse County Wyoming, 2005.  Taken from space with a Kodak 760C digital camera fitted with a 400 mm lens.

Lex Anteinternet: Coal: Understanding the time line of an industry:   Me, third from right, when I thought I had a career in geology, and probably in coal. There is a lot of speculation about a revival...

And today news is published in the Tribune to the effect that in spite of a recovery, to an extent, in coal, and in spite of a new regulatory environment, coal will not only never become what it once was it is, yes, on a continued downwards slide in the near term.

More specifically, the Tribune reports:

Production in Wyoming’s Powder River Basin could fall to about 260 million tons by 2023, according to the Annual Energy Outlook. Of the three coal regions in the country, the West and Appalachia are both poised to lose. Midwestern coal production may increase slightly.

This down from a pre crash output of 400 million tons.

Why?

. . . declining demand for coal to burn in power plants has rapidly eroded coal’s dominance in the electricity market. In the last three years, coal went from producing about 40 percent of the country’s electricity, to 30 percent. Wyoming in particular has lost nearly 1,000 miners since 2015, though a fraction has returned.

 * * *

Low natural gas prices are the key factor in the challenge to coal, said Linda Capuano, administrator of the Energy Information Administration, in a live release of this year’s outlook data.

As gas outcompetes coal in the electricity sector, the most expensive coal plants to run will continue to be shut down, she said.

Wyoming has already lost customers to this trend. Two coal-fired power plants slated to close in Texas bought the majority of their coal from Peabody Energy’s Rawhide mine north of Gillette.

Yup.  Just what I reported here a year ago.

Not that this should be news.  As I also reported, this trend is a century old now.  It's just entering a final and accelerated phase.  A phase which Wyomingites need to take note of, given the role coal has played in our budget for years.

Indeed, on that budget, we learned just yesterday that one of the legislators, contemplating the end of the a Federal severance tax that funds the Abandoned Mines fund, wishes to replace that tax with a state one. That would have no impact on the overall tax rate on coal, it would remain the same, and therefore it's not a bad idea.  But at the same time this report demonstrates why funding models based on coal have to be temporary in nature, or that they certainly can't occupy the place they once did.

A new revolt in Mexico? The Laramie Boomerang, February 7, 1918

Wyomingites in recent weeks had been increasingly reading, in their local papers, about food shortages and unrest in Germany and Austria.  It was beginning to seriously look like the war was devolving into a race.  Would the Central Powers be able to move enough troops off the Eastern Front prior to starving to launch a crushing spring offensive, or would starvation and revolution overtake them at home as American troops began to pour into France.

Today, however, the news was a bit different, and not at all settling, not that it had been otherwise.  German naval power, in the form of submarines, was more than adequate enough to continue to be a danger in the Irish Sea.  The loss of the American transport Tuscania came as unwelcome news on this day.  The loss of life wouldn't include Wyomingites, but it would include a lot of National Gaurdsmen as the ship was carrying Federalized Wisconsin and Michigan Guardsmen, as well as soldiers of the Regular Army.

Also on this day, at least in Laramie, Wyomingites were learning that things might be getting out of hand once again in Mexico.  Carranza's grip on power, it seemed, might not be as strong as had been supposed in recent months. . .

117th Field Artillery, Lt. Col. Nelson E. Margetts, commanding, Camp Wheeler, Ga., February 7th, 1918

117th Field Artillery, Lt. Col. Nelson E. Margetts, commanding, Camp Wheeler, Ga., February 7th, 1918

The Scary Flu Epidemic of 2018

I missed this when it occurred and just heard about it the other day in a meeting:

Today In Wyoming's History: January 5:

2018  Leslie Blythe, well know figure and spokesperson for Rocky Mountain Power fell victim to the terrible flu epidemic afflicting the nation.

I don't usually worry much about the annual influenza outbreaks, but this year's is truly scary.  I heard in the same meeting that there's been four deaths in the county, which would not be the norm at all, and lots of people have been hit.

So far, it's anything like the 1918 Influenza Pandemic, but it's scary enough, and its hard not to recall that horrible event of a century ago.  And there's a lot of flu season left to go.

February 6, 1918. Some Women, and all Men 21 and up, gain the vote in the United Kingdom

On this day in 1918 the Representation of the People Act of 1918 passed into law.

Representation of the People Act, 1918

AN ACT TO 

Amend the Law with respect to Parliamentary and Local Government Franchises, and the Registration of Parliamentary and Local Government Electors, and the conduct of elections, and to provide for the Redistribution of Seats at Parliamentary Elections, and for other purposes connected therewith.  

(1) A woman shall be entitled to be registered as a parliamentary elector for a constituency (other than a university constituency) if she –

(a) has attained the age of thirty years; and 
(b) is not subject to any legal incapacity; and
(c) is entitled to be registered as a local government elector in respect of the occupation in that constituency of land or premises (not being a dwelling-house) of a yearly value of not less than five pounds or of a dwelling-house, or is the wife of a husband entitled to be so registered.

2) A woman shall be entitled to be registered as a parliamentary elector for a university constituency if she has attained the age of thirty years and either would be entitled to be so registered if she were a man, or has been admitted to and passed the final examination, and kept under the conditions required of women by the university the period of residence, necessary for a man to obtain a degree at any university forming, or forming part of, a university constituency which did not at the time the examination was passed admit women to degrees. 

3) A woman shall be entitled to be registered as a local government elector for any local

government electoral area-

(a) where she would be entitled to be so registered if she were a man; and
(b) where she is the wife of a man who is entitled to be so registered in respect of premises in which they both reside, and she has attained the age of thirty years and is not subject to any legal incapacity. or the purpose of this provision, a naval or military voter who is registered in respect of a residence qualification which he would have had but for his service, shall be deemed to be resident in accordance with the qualification.

And so all British men upon reaching age 21, and soldiers who had obtained age 19, were fully extended the franchise (that part of the text is omitted).  That was an expansion of the franchise in and of itself.  And British women, upon reaching age 30 obtained the franchise if they were married, married to a member of the Local Government Register, a property owner, or a graduate voting in a University constituency.

No doubt to modern readers this seems more than a bit odd, but it wasn't until World War One that all British men were extended the vote.  The UK had a parliament, of course, and had for centuries, but it had never been the case that 100% of men had the vote.  With this act, they did, upon reaching age 21. They even did if they were 19 and in the service.

The voting age in the UK now is 18 for legally binding votes, although in the recent Scottish referendum the vote was dropped down to 16 years of age, a pretty amazing fact if you have 16 year olds in your household.

Most of the "we recall" type posts about this today will be about women obtaining the vote and the more informed commentary will note that this was restricted.  Still, while restrictions were in place, they door had been opened, and this was a massive change in what had been the case before.

While this day would have come, the connection of the event to World War One is fairly obvious.  The nation's manhood was at war and down to the desperate levels in terms of replacements by this point in the war. . .extending the vote to all of them was only fair. And women were manning the home front and the factory floor, so the same was true of them.