Podcasts about George Shultz

In this episode, we explore the life of Dr. John LaCasse, a man whose journey spans from the heights of wealth and business success to the depths of metaphysical exploration. Born with an innate fascination for adventure and the unknown, John spent 25 years as a successful yacht broker, forming relationships with powerful figures like George Shultz, Gene Hackman, Jacques Cousteau, and even notorious crime figures like Meyer Lansky. But despite the wealth, the fast cars, and the glamorous lifestyle, something profound shifted in John's life—he began asking, “Why am I living this life?”This question led to a series of bold decisions, personal loss, and a deep search for meaning, ultimately culminating in a Ph.D. and a new calling as an academic and storyteller. John LaCasse shares his incredible story of reinvention, including his fearless approach to life, a transformative encounter with Native American leadership, and how his personal journey evolved into a cosmic narrative.As a former faculty member at the prestigious Forbes School of Business, John seamlessly blends his academic expertise with his metaphysical discoveries. He is the author of the critically acclaimed series, including Deals Danger Destiny, Floppy Feathers, The Hunters, and The Game. His work combines science, history, spirituality, and metaphysics, creating a captivating and thought-provoking journey that challenges the boundaries of faith, science, and the universe.Join us as we discuss the unique intersection of John's life in business, academia, and cosmic exploration, diving deep into themes of faith, humanity's place in the universe, and the profound storytelling that emerged from his quest to find divine connection.

This panel discussion on the legacy of George Shultz, former US secretary of state and Hoover Institution senior fellow, features the Hoover Institution's director, Condoleezza Rice; Israeli politician and human rights activist Natan Sharansky; and Abraham Sofaer, the former legal advisor to the State Department under George Shultz and the George P. Shultz Senior Fellow in Foreign Policy and National Security Affairs at the Hoover Institution. Together, they reflect on Shultz's contributions to US foreign policy, human rights, and the end of the Cold War. The discussion explores Shultz's deep commitment to human rights, particularly in supporting Soviet refuseniks and advancing the cause of freedom in the USSR. The panelists recount how Shultz worked alongside President Ronald Reagan to integrate human rights into diplomatic negotiations, leverage the Helsinki Accords, and challenge the Soviet Union's authoritarian system. Sharansky, a former Soviet dissident imprisoned for 12 years for his activism, shares personal experiences of Shultz's support for Soviet Jews and recounts the political maneuvering that contributed to his own release. Rice and Sofaer discuss Shultz's diplomatic philosophy, his strategic role in Reagan's administration, and his ability to bridge the gap between hardline anti-communism and pragmatic diplomacy. The conversation also touches on the role of ideas in shaping policy and whether current generations fully grasp the stakes of international conflict in the way Cold War leaders like Shultz and Reagan did. The panelists debate modern revisionist views on the end of the Cold War with a strong defense of Reagan and Shultz's deliberate strategy to weaken the Soviet Union. Ultimately, the discussion serves as both a tribute to the life and times of George Shultz and a reflection on leadership, diplomacy, and the enduring battle of ideas in world affairs. Recorded on February 12, 2025.

  Peter Golden is an award-winning journalist, novelist, and historian. His novels include Comeback Love, Wherever There Is Light, Nothing Is Forgotten , and Their Shadows Deep, just published, in which John F. Kennedy is a major character. During the course of his career, Mr. Golden has interviewed Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, and George H.W. Bush; Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig, George Shultz, and Lawrence Eagleburger; Israeli Prime Ministers Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, and Yitzhak Shamir; and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. He lives with his wife near Albany, New York.   The KunstlerCast theme music is the beautiful Two Rivers Waltz written and performed by Larry Unger

Preview: Ronald Reagan: Soviet Union: Author Max Boot, "Reagan: His Life and Legend," speaks with George Shultz, the Reagan Administration Secretary of State, and asks if there was a plan to topple the Soviet empire. More tonight.   1928 Moscow

Philip Taubman, a lecturer at Standford University, joined the Institute to discuss his book “In the Nation's Service: The Life and Times of George Shultz” and one of his earlier books, “The Partnership: Give Cold Warriors and Their Quest to Ban the Bomb.” This episode was recorded in April 2023. Hosted by John Shaw. Produced and edited by Jaclyn Durcholz. This podcast is produced through a partnership with WSIU Public Radio.

(0:00) Intro(1:06) About the podcast sponsor: The American College of Governance Counsel.(1:53) Start of interview.(2:37) Tyler's "origin story." (4:50) His beginnings at Theranos.(7:07) On the culture of the Theranos, "the company was extremely secretive and paranoid."(9:41) On the lack of equity compensation for Theranos employees.(10:32) On Theranos' board of directors.(16:50) Some of the prominent investors in Theranos, and lack of due diligence.(19:24) On Elizabeth Holmes and Sunny Balwani fraud convictions, FOMO, and value of credibility from early backers (e.g. Channing Robertson, Don Lucas, George Shultz, etc).(23:57) How Tyler became a whisteblower at Theranos. His contact with John Carreyrou, at the time a WSJ reporter.(26:57) On his legal challenges (and high fees) as a whistleblower. George Shultz (his grandfather) would tell him: "I'm 90 years old. I ended the Cold War. I fought in a world war. I've seen a lot of things in my life. I've seldom been wrong. And I know what I'm looking at. And I know I'm right about this."(30:24) On the SEC's whisteblower program and his personal experience with this process. *Reference to E130 with Mary Inman (his Whistleblower attorney).(34:58) On the NDA and confidentiality agreements, "fraud is not a trade secret."(37:56) Why Elizabeth Holmes wanted Theranos to remain private and never go public.(39:04) Stanford's problematic connection to frauds. See: "What's the Matter with Stanford?"(42:14) The role of executive and board compensation in startups.(46:20) Book that he recommends reading: Salt in My Soul by Mallory Smith (2019).(48:00)  His mentors: George Shultz (his grandfather) and J. Leighton Read.(50:01)  Quotes that he thinks of often or lives his life by: "You Get What You Screen For"(51:17) An unusual habit or absurd thing that he loves.(52:53) The living person that he most admires: Dr Anthony Fauci."I often think back to a famous quote about character, which is, character is what you do when nobody's watching. And I actually think that the opposite is true. I think character is what you do when everyone's watching. And I experienced that."(53:57)  His current endeavors.Tyler Shultz is a former Theranos employee who became a key whistleblower, exposing the company's fraudulent practices. As the grandson of former Secretary of State George Shultz, who was on Theranos' board, Tyler's decision to speak out carried significant personal and professional risks. You can find out more about Tyler at his website: https://www.tyler-shultz.com/ You can follow Evan on social media at:Twitter: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__You can join as a Patron of the Boardroom Governance Podcast at:Patreon: patreon.com/BoardroomGovernancePod__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Content warning for discussion of genocide, torture, mutilation, rape, and slavery Hey, Hi, Hello, this is the History Wizard and welcome back for Day 11 of Have a Day w/ The History Wizard. Thank you to everyone who tuned in for Day 10 last week, and especially thank you to everyone who rated and/or reviewed the podcast. I hope you all learned something last week and I hope the same for this week. This week we're going to be talking about the currently ongoing humanitarian crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the long history of capitalist exploitation, western imperialism, and systemic racism that led to it. But first, as is tradition, let's take a trip over to the Alchemists Table to see what potion we've got for today. Today's libation has a lot going on in it, it's called Underworld Vacation. It starts by adding some strawberries and blueberries to the bottom of your shaker with .75 of an ounce of rose simple syrup before muddling the fruit. Then add one ounce each of pomegranate and elderflower liquor followed by 2 oz of Hendricks Lunar gin, add ice to your shaker and then stir for about 30 seconds before straining into a highball glass and topping with about 4 oz of prosecco. With that out of the way it's time to talk, once again, about the most important part of history. The proverbial devil in the literal details, context. Because to understand what is happening in the DRC today you need to understand the Kivu Conflict, and to understand that you need to understand the Second Congo War, and to understand that you need to understand the First Congo War, and to understand that you need to understand the end of the Rwandan Genocide and the Congo Crisis of the 1960s, and to understand that you need to understand the Scramble for Africa, The Berlin Conference and King Leopold !! of Belgium. So, we've got a lot to cover, and we're going to be doing it in fairly broad strokes, but it might still take us a while, so let's get started with the Berlin Conference. Near the end of the 19th century there was very little European colonial and mercantile presence in Africa. There were some port towns, to be sure, and there was trade, but very little of the African continent was under the control of European powers at this time. But, European greed for gold and, especially, ivory wouldn't allow them to ignore African riches for much longer. The Berlin Conference was organized in 1885 at the request of King Leopold II of Belgium and was organized by Otto von Bismarck of Germany.   Leopold had been using the explorations of Henry Morgan Stanley, and his own organization, the International African Association to quietly try and create his own private colony in central Africa that would be called the Congo Free State, but France found out and started making moves, and then Britain and Portugal found out and began trying to grab land which led Germany to do the same. War was brewing quickly as these various European powerhouses all sought as much land, wealth, and power as they could grab. This, ultimately, would be why the Berlin Conference was called and why it was so successful. These European powers decided, instead of going to war and killing each other over Africa they'd just all meet and carve it up like a pecan pie and settle it all peaceful like. There were 14 nations/empires in attendance at the Berlin Conference, Germany, Austria Hungary, the International Congo Society (this really means King Leopold II of Belgium), Spain, Denmark, the United States, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Sweden-Norway, and the Ottoman Empire. And while all 14 of those countries were in attendance at the Berlin Conference and had a say in the final decisions that were made, only 7 countries were actually going to colonize Africa once it was over. Those countries were Belgium (really just King Leopold II, this would be his own private colony), Germany, Spain, France, Great Britain, Portugal, and Italy. At the time of the Berlin Conference less than 10% of the African continent was under European control, but by the time World War 1 broke out only Liberia and Ethiopia were still independent. Although, Liberia certainly only existed because of US colonial power, and so doesn't REALLY count as independent.  This period of New Imperialism is what we tend to call The Scramble for Africa. Sof ar we've been talking about this all in fairly clinical terms, as if these European countries simply sat around a table and calmly decided who would get what land in the second largest continent on the planet and then it just happened, with no additional muss or fuss. Anyone who has studied even the barest amount of human history knows that nothing happens without muss or fuss. There were wars, and battles, and massacres that led to Europe gaining control of African territory, but that's not the topic of today's podcast. We now need to talk a bit about the Congo Free State, and how King Leopold of Belgium, a frail weakling (compared to the other European powers) managed to worm his way into the conference and into one of the most lucrative colonies in Africa. The Congo Free State was a truly massive colony that was owned personally by Leopold. It was NOT, at least between the years 1885 and 1908, part of the Belgian Empire, it was not owned by the Belgian government and was ruled entirely separately, it just happened to be ruled by the King of Belgium. Leopold was able to gain this massive colony by convincing the monarchs of Europe that he was engaged in humanitarian and philanthropic work, and that the Congo Free State would be an area of free trade in Africa.  Leopold maintained a guise that he was not trying to use the Congo Basin to increase his own wealth and economic and political power. He maintained that his presence in the region was, as was a huge part of the ethos of New Imperialism, to civilize the savages of the Congo Basin and to bring them closer to God and good European cultural supremacy.  Of course, all of that was a lie, and that lie would reveal itself over the intervening years. The Congo was home to something that would become one of the most important natural resources in the entire world, rubber. There are only two sources of natural rubber in the world. The sap of the Hevea brasiliensis, or rubber tree that grows in the Amazon River Basin, and the sap of Landolphia owariensis, a species of woody vines that grow in the Congo. I mean, technically there are 2500 species of plants that produce natural latex and rubber, but those two are the big ones. Today 99% of natural latex and rubber comes from the Amazon, but Leopold was able to make massive profit off of his colony. The economic system in the Congo Free State was known as the red rubber system. It was a slave economy that Leopold enforced through the use of his armed forces known as the Force Publique. Each slave in the Congo Free State was required to harvest a regular quota of rubber sap. What that quota was was often arbitrarily decided based purely on profit based concerns. Workers who refused to supply their labour were coerced with "constraint and repression". Dissenters were beaten or whipped with the chicotte, hostages were taken to ensure prompt collection and punitive expeditions were sent to destroy villages which refused. The policy led to a collapse of Congolese economic and cultural life, as well as farming in some areas. Failure to meet the rubber collection quotas was punishable by death. Meanwhile, the Force Publique were required to provide the hand of their victims as proof when they had shot and killed someone, as it was believed that they would otherwise use the munitions (imported from Europe at considerable cost) for hunting or to stockpile them for mutiny. As a consequence, the rubber quotas were in part paid off in cut-off hands. A Catholic priest quotes a man, Tswambe, speaking of the hated state official Léon Fiévez, who ran a district along the river 300 mi north of Stanley Pool: “All blacks saw this man as the devil of the Equator ... From all the bodies killed in the field, you had to cut off the hands. He wanted to see the number of hands cut off by each soldier, who had to bring them in baskets ... A village which refused to provide rubber would be completely swept clean. As a young man, I saw [Fiévez's] soldier Molili, then guarding the village of Boyeka, take a net, put ten arrested natives in it, attach big stones to the net, and make it tumble into the river ... Rubber causes these torments; that's why we no longer want to hear its name spoken. Soldiers made young men kill or rape their own mothers and sisters.” One junior officer in the Force Publique had this to say about the quota system: The baskets of severed hands, set down at the feet of the European post commanders, became the symbol of the Congo Free State. ... The collection of hands became an end in itself. Force Publique soldiers brought them to the stations in place of rubber; they even went out to harvest them instead of rubber ... They became a sort of currency. They came to be used to make up for shortfalls in rubber quotas, to replace ... the people who were demanded for the forced labour gangs; and the Force Publique soldiers were paid their bonuses on the basis of how many hands they collected. Within the Congo Free State there was also rampant famine and disease that killed hundreds of thousands of people, a type of residential school where children were sent to learn to be either workers or soldiers. About 50% of the children who entered these schools died. There were also several reputable reports of Congolese people turning to cannibalism in the face of their lack of food resources. With everyone being forced to harvest rubber there was no one to farm or gather or hunt for food. It is generally accepted that over the course of Leopold's rule in the Congo Free State, between 1885 and 1908 that at least 10 million Congolese people were killed. Eventually word got out of what was happening in the Congo Free State and a conclave of the European powers of the Berlin Conference was called as, even they, decided that Leopold was going too far. Leopold offered to reform his government and economic system in the Congo, but no one would give him the chance, but also, no one wanted to take on the responsibility of rebuilding the Congo. Eventually, after two years of debate, the Belgian Parliament took over control of the Congo. Leopold would die about a year later in 1909. The Congo would remain under under Belgian control for another 50+ years, and while the abuses and overwhelming violence of King Leopold's rule were curbed. They even added a clause to the new Colonial Charter to outlaw slavery. Article 3 of the new Colonial Charter of 18 October 1908 stated that: "Nobody can be forced to work on behalf of and for the profit of companies or privates", but this was not enforced, and the Belgian government continued to impose forced labour on the indigenous people of the area, albeit by less obvious methods. So, even without King Leopold, the Belgian Congo was still a European colony, which means it was still exploited for profit. African independence movements existed throughout the entirety of European colonialism and imperialism in Africa, excepting Liberia the first country in Africa to gain independence from direct European control would be South Africa which would nominally gain its independence in 1910 after the creation of the Union of South Africa and would formally gain official independence when the last vestiges of British parliamentary control would leave the country in 1931 with the Statute of Westminster, and while there would be other successful independence movements after World War 1, such as Egypt, most African decolonization would come after World War 2, including the Congo's.  Nationalist movements popping up in various African nations and agitating for Independence is, generally speaking, what would eventually cause all of African independence, and this would be no different for the Congo. Though, something that is often also common in the case of independence movements that emerged between the end of World War 2 and the early 1990s is that they would become proxy wars for the US and the USSR during the Cold War. To make a long, complex story very short, the US came out on top in this war. The nationalist movements within the Congo largely emerged amongst a class of people called the évolués, which is a term that was used in French and Belgian colonies for “evolved ones”, people of African descent who had become somewhat Europanized through education.  One of the deciding moments in Congolese independence came in the form of the Leopoldville Riots of 1959. Joseph Kasa-Vubu, who would become the first President of an independent Democratic Republic of the Congo, was the leader of the ABAKO political party, the Alliance of Bakongo. The riots began because many young folks and members or sympathizers of the ABAKO party felt that the government was forbidding them from organizing and protesting. The riots broke out on the 4th of January, 1959. The crowd began throwing rocks at police and attacking white motorists. The initial group of protesters were soon joined by 20,000 Congolese leaving a nearby soccer stadium. At the time press accounts estimated that 35,000 Africans were involved in the violence, which quickly spread as the rioters attempted to enter the European section of the capital. Rioters allegedly smashed and looted storefronts, burned Catholic missions and beat Catholic priests. Many demonstrators chanted "indépendance immédiate" The Belgian Parliament established a commission of inquiry to investigate the cause of the riots. The commission found the disturbances to be the culmination of discontent with racial discrimination, overcrowding, and unemployment. It also concluded that external political events, such as France's decision to grant self-governance to the neighboring French Congo, to be a contributing factor, and criticized the colonial administration's response to the riot. On 13 January the administration went forward with its scheduled announcement of reforms, including new local elections in December, the institution of a new civil service statue that made no racial distinctions, and the appointment of more Africans to advisory bodies. The Belgian King, Baudouin, also declared for the first time that independence would be granted to the Congo in the future. January 4th is still celebrated as an auspicious day in the DRC, it's the Day of the Martyrs and denotes a turning point in the independence movement. Congolese independence was officially declared, as planned, on the 30th of June, 1960, with Kasa-Vubu of the ABAKO elected as president and Patrice Lumumba of the Congolese National Movement appointed as the Prime Minister. Now, despite the DRC formally being declared as independent at this day, they still relied heavily on Belgian colonial institutions that had been in place previously, like the Force Publique and various white technical experts who couldn't be replaced in the face of a lack of ready replacements available amongst the Congolese people. The fact that this lack of available peoples being a result of European colonialism forbidding Congolese people from higher education wound up being somewhat irrelevant, but absolutely caused greater levels of resentment among the newly independent Congolese. In the face of this lack of change and in the face of an address given by Lieutenant General of the Force Publique Émile Janssens, many of the Congolese troops mutinied. The address went as follows: "Independence brings changes to politicians and to civilians. But for you, nothing will be changed ... none of your new masters can change the structure of an army which, throughout its history, has been the most organized, the most victorious in Africa. The politicians have lied to you." Instead of sending in Belgian troops to put down the mutiny, as Janssens wanted, Lumumba fired him and began to institute some reforms, including immediately remaining the Force Publique to the Armée Nationale Congolaise (ANC) and promoting all black soldier by at least one rank. While this had success in Leopoldville and Thysville, it failed in the rest of the country and the mutiny intensified. The government attempted to stop the revolt—Lumumba and Kasa-Vubu intervened personally at Léopoldville and Thysville and persuaded the mutineers to lay down their arms—but in most of the country the mutiny intensified. White officers and civilians were attacked, white-owned properties were looted and white women were raped. The Belgian government became deeply concerned by the situation, particularly when white civilians began entering neighbouring countries as refugees. The international press expressed shock at the apparent sudden collapse of order in the Congo, as the world view of the Congolese situation prior to independence—due largely to Belgian propaganda—was one of peace, stability, and strong control by the authorities. The Congo Crisis would run for 5 years and would end with the torture and assassination of Patrice Lumumba, with Joesph Kasa-Vubu dying while under house arrest, and with the military dictator Mobuto Sese Seko “elected” as the president of the Republic of Congo-Leopoldville. This would note just one in the long string of times that the US helped to install a military dictator in order to overthrow a democratically elected left wing government, just because they had support from the USSR and the US feared (and fears) any threat to their capitalist hegemony. Between 1965 and 1971 Mobutu consolidated his hold on power as much as he could, removing all provincial control over anything and bringing every scrap of infrastructure he could under the control of himself and his central government. In 1971, with his hold on power relatively secure and as part of his policy of Africanization of the Congo's culture and government Mobutu renamed the Republic of Congo Leopoldville to Zaire, a name that was derived from the Kikongo wore nzere, meaning “river that swallows all rivers”. Mobutu would remain as “president” of Zaire all the way until 1997, but his hold on power would begin to crumble with the First Congo War that began in 1993. Now comes the time for more context. What started the First Congo War? Honestly, to a certain extent we can view the First Congo War as an extension of the Rwandan Genocide. The Rwandan Genocide began in 1994 as a final culmination of ethnic tensions that were exacerbated by, first, German and the Belgian colonialism. See, Rwanda used to be a German colony, Rwanda was one of the nations that Germany got as part of the Scramble for Africa, but after World War 1, with the signing of the treaty of Versailles Germany was forced to give up all of its overseas colonies. Belgium gained control of Rwanda. Belgium maintained many of the systems of power and oppression that Germany had put into place, most notably the fact that they put the Tutsi ethnic group in positions of authority and disenfranchised the Hutu and Twa ethnic group. The Twa are the indigenous ethnic group of Rwanda, but by the time the Rwandan genocide occurred they were only about 1% of the population, about 85% were Hutu and the remaining 14% were Tutsi. Still, based on the indicators of European scientific racism and phrenology the Tutsi had more “European features” and so were considered superior to the Hutu ethnic group and placed, exclusively, in positions of authority. The sudden shift in power dynamics after Rwandan independence is what would lead to the Rwandan Genocide as Hutu supremacists decided to vent their fury on the Tutsi people. We won't go into any more detail than that for the Rwandan genocide. Suffice it to say that when it ended hundreds of thousands of ethnic Tutsi people had fled the nation of Rwanda to neighboring African countries, such as Zaire. Roughly 1.5 million ethnic Tutsi people wound up settling in Zaire. There were also about 1 million Hutu extremists in eastern Zaire who had fled the retaliation of the Rwandan Patriotic Front at the end of the Rwandan Civil War and the Rwandan Genocide. As mentioned previously, the First Congo War, also known as Africa's First World War can most simply be seen as an extension of the Rwandan Genocide. Zaire had been in decline since Mobutu gained power in 1965. He was a terrible leader and the average GDP of Zaire dropped by about 65% during his reign. Eastern Zaire was a region of massive instability that was only made worse by the number of Hutu extremists who fled to the region following the Rwandan Genocide. Rwanda, just fully, invaded Zaire in 1996 in order to put down various Hutu rebel groups that were extant in the region. These rebel groups were actively funded and supported by Mobutu's government leading to this war that lasted for some 6 months. It involved several African nations including Rwanda, Uganda, Angola, Burundi, Zambia, ZImbabwe, South Sudan, Tanzania, South Africa, Ethiopia, Chad, China, Israel, and Kuwait. Following the war Mobutu went into exile in the nation of Togo where he eventually died of prostate cancer in 1997. Zaire came under the rule of the communist aligned Laurent-Désiré Kabila. Kabila had heavy support from Rwandan, Burundian, and Ugandan forces during his rise to power in the form of the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire. Kabila also came to be seen as an instrument of the foreign regimes that put him in power. To counter this image and increase domestic support, he began to turn against his allies abroad. This culminated in the expulsion of all foreign forces from the DRC on 26 July 1998. The states with armed forces still in the DRC begrudgingly complied although some of them saw this as undermining their interests, particularly Rwanda, which had hoped to install a proxy-regime in Kinshasa. Several factors that led to the First Congo War remained in place after Kabila's accession to power. Prominent among these were ethnic tensions in eastern DRC, where the government still had little control. There the historical animosities remained and the opinion that Banyamulenge, as well as all Tutsi, were foreigners was reinforced by the foreign occupation in their defence. Furthermore, Rwanda had not been able to satisfactorily address its security concerns. By forcibly repatriating refugees, Rwanda had imported the conflict. This manifested itself in the form of a predominantly Hutu insurgency in Rwanda's western provinces that was supported by extremist elements in eastern DRC. Without troops in the DRC, Rwanda was unable to successfully combat the insurgents. In the first days of August 1998, two brigades of the new Congolese army rebelled against the government and formed rebel groups that worked closely with Kigali and Kampala. This marked the beginning of the Second Congo War. The Second Congo War is generally considered to be the deadliest war since World War 2. Over the course of this war some 5.4 million excess deaths took place.  Now comes the time where I need to define what an excess death is. In epidemiology, the excess deaths or excess mortality is a measure of the increase in the number deaths during a time period and/or in a certain group, as compared to the expected value or statistical trend during a reference period (typically of five years) or in a reference population. It may typically be measured in percentage points, or in number of deaths per time unit. To put it more simply, disease, depravation, and starvation were so rampant during the Second Congo War that the overwhelming majority of deaths weren't caused directly by the fighting, but were caused by the residual damage of the fighting. The Second Congo War involved many of the same issues of the First Congo War. It would end with Laurent-Désiré Kabila assassinated in 2001 in his office by an 18 year old former child soldier. Laurent would be replaced as president by his son Joseph Kabila, who was elected unanimously by the Congolese parliament. To further highlight the complexity of the Congolese Wars, In April 2001, a UN panel of experts investigated the illegal exploitation of diamonds, cobalt, coltan, gold and other lucrative resources in the Congo. The report accused Rwanda, Uganda and Zimbabwe of systematically exploiting Congolese resources and recommended the Security Council impose sanctions. All conflicts within Congolese territory will ultimately go back to economic exploitation and capitalist overreach. The Congo Basin is full of some of the most valuable natural resources that exist on the planet, and people will always be fighting over them. This leads us into the Kivu conflict. The Kivu conflict is an umbrella term for a series of protracted armed conflicts in the North Kivu and South Kivu provinces in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo which have occurred since the end of the Second Congo War. This includes, but is not limited to Effacer le tableau, which was a genocidal extermination campaign against the Mbuti Pygmy ethnic group. The Bambuti were targeted specifically as the rebels considered them "subhuman", and it was believed by the rebels that the flesh of the Bambuti held "magical powers". There were also reports of cannibalism being widespread. It is estimated 60,000 to 70,000 Pygmy were killed in the campaign, and over 100,000 more were displaced. There are more than 120 distinct rebel groups involved in the Kivu Conflict, including the March 23 Movement, which a UN report indicates was created by the Rwandan government in order to potentially take over the Congolese government. Conflict began in 2004 in the eastern Congo as an armed conflict between the military of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (FARDC) and the Hutu Power group Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The United Nations Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUSCO) has played a large role in the conflict. With 21,000 soldiers in the force, the Kivu conflict constitutes the largest peacekeeping mission currently in operation. In total, 93 peacekeepers have died in the region, with 15 dying in a large-scale attack by the Allied Democratic Forces, in North Kivu in December 2017. The peacekeeping force seeks to prevent escalation of force in the conflict, and minimise human rights abuses like sexual assault and the use of child soldiers in the conflict. In 2007 and 2008, in several news and TV reports, the BBC published own evidence about Pakistani MONUC peacekeepers in Mongbwalu had entered in a gold-for-guns trading relationship with Nationalist and Integrationist Front (FNI) militia leaders, eventually drawing Congolese army officers and Indian traders from Kenya into the deal. Following its own investigations, the UN concluded that there was no involvement of Pakistani peacekeeper in any such trade relationship. Namely Human Rights Watch harshly criticized the UN for the way it handled the investigation, providing detailed information from several UN documents, arguing that serious allegations of wrongdoing by Pakistani peacekeepers in the Democratic Republic of Congo were ignored, minimized or shelved by the UN's Organization of Internal Oversight Services. MONUC officials say nothing of substance about mining in Congo, which proceeds in parallel with the bloodletting, arms trading and extortion. For example, Anvil Mining has been involved in massacres in DRC. Anvil directors include former U.S. Ambassador Kenneth Brown, who served at U.S. embassies in Brussels, Kinshasa, Congo-Brazzaville and South Africa. Brown was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Africa (1987–1989) under George Shultz and George H.W. Bush and Director of Central African Affairs (1980–1981). Interestingly, Brown succeeded William Lacy Swing—head of MONUC in DRC—as Ambassador to the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville). Meanwhile, the former top internal intelligence and security chief of the United Nations Observer's Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUC) has been worked for Anvil mining in Katanga since 2006. There have been numerous cases of sexual misconduct by UN peacekeeping forces in the Congo. This has been acknowledged by the UN itself (such as the letter of 24 March 2005 from the Secretary-General to the President of the General Assembly). So, basically foreign powers both within Africa and outside of it are actively fighting within the Congo Basin in order to secure control of the vast amount of natural resources that exist within the nation. The DRC currently produces about 70% of the world's cobalt, and 80% of the cobalt mines in the DRC are owned by China. The leading use of cobalt in modern technology is in rechargeable batteries. So your cell phone battery, your laptop batteries, any kind of rechargeable battery you have is likely created using Congolese cobalt, which is a direct cause of the millions of deaths and displacements that are occuring in the DRC.  The DRC is, effectively, the site of a capitalist proxy war as the region is fought over by foreign governments and local rebel groups for control over Congolese natural resources. No one in Europe or the US would even begin to care about an African country if it wasn't for the battery technology resources that are so abundant in the region. Between 1885 and today it is, very easy, to say that roughly 20 million people have been killed by capitalist excess and exploitation.  We can, absolutely call what is happening in the DRC a genocide, though it can be difficult to always pinpoint who, exactly are the victims. Broadly speaking the victims are the Congolese people, all of them, who are being killed over a desire to control the cobalt mines. This has gone far beyond simple ethnic conflict between Hutu and Tutsi, though that conflict, which is still ongoing, definitely added to the fire. This is a genocide of the people of the DRC by capitalism itself. Capitalism has always been, and will always be an inherently genocidal institution. It craves the acquisition of individual wealth at the expense of the working class. You cannot have a system predicated on infinite growth within a closed system. Capitalism will always require that resources and wealth be stolen from people who need them. And when so much of our wealth is tied up in food, water, and housing, the theft of those resources from the working class will lead to our deaths. For the past century and a half the Congo Basin has been subjected to genocide after genocide in the name of capitalism. What is happening right now is only an extension of that, though made far more complicated by the literal hundreds of competing groups and the lack of any international will to see peace achieved. That's it for this week folks. No new reviews, so let's get right into the outro. Have a Day! w/ The History Wizard is brought to you by me, The History Wizard. If you want to see/hear more of me you can find me on Tiktok @thehistorywizard or on Instagram @the_history_wizard. Please remember to rate, review, and subscribe to Have a Day! On your pod catcher of choice. The more you do, the more people will be able to listen and learn along with you. Thank you  for sticking around until the end and, as always, Have a Day, and Free Congo.    

At the start of the 21st century, several groups began efforts aiming not just to control nuclear weapons but to eliminate them altogether. The so-called Gang of Four, William Perry, George Shultz, Sam Nunn and Henry Kissinger, wrote numerous powerful op-eds, urging us to work towards a world without nuclear weapons. Bruce Blair turned from academics to founding Global Zero, dedicated to the same goal. And a coalition of activist groups formed the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, ICAN. In 2017, the United Nations adopted the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and ICAN was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Philip Taubman, a lecturer at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation, discussed his latest book, In the Nation's Service: The Life and Times of George P. Shultz. The conversation touched on the legacy of Secretary Shultz, his approach to the Soviet Union, and is filled with anecdotes from Philip's time in Moscow at the end of the Cold War.

As a top ranking career diplomat, Matlock was at the very center of the U.S.-Soviet relationship. He was there for everything from the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 to the Breakup of the Soviet Union almost 30 years later. In this 2004 interview Matlock discusses his book Reagan And Gorbachev, and reveals the special role played by the keaders' wives. Get Reagan and Gorbachev by Jack MatlockAs an Amazon Associate, Now I've Heard Everything earns from qualifying purchases.You may also enjoy my interviews with George Shultz and Madeleine Albright For more vintage interviews with celebrities, leaders, and influencers, subscribe to Now I've Heard Everything on Spotify, Apple Podcasts. and now on YouTube Photo by #Coldwar #Russia #Diplomacy #Ronaldreagan

Today's subject? The President's diplomatic efforts with China in 1984. Yes, in those years, there were positive diplomatic efforts. In fact, the administration developed a relationship with Ziyang who was a reformer, in office from 1980 to 1987. Shortly after George Shultz became Secretary of State, he completed an initiative with Ziyang in August 1982, […]

Today's subject? The President's diplomatic efforts with China in 1984. Yes, in those years, there were positive diplomatic efforts. In fact, the administration developed a relationship with Ziyang who was a reformer, in office from 1980 to 1987. Shortly after George Shultz became Secretary of State, he completed an initiative with Ziyang in August 1982, that arranged for acceptance of a joint US-China communique that limited US arms sales to Taiwan in exchange for a vague pledge by the Chinese government to strive for “peaceful unification of the Motherland.” While many criticized Reagan for supporting this, knowing of his staunch support for Taiwan, it was a sign of reciprocity. Ultimately, Ziyang lost power because he criticized the government's handling of the Tiananmen Square protests and empathized with the students. He believed China should become a liberal democracy and was placed on house arrest until his death in 2005. So let's get started by listening to an excerpt from the President's welcoming remarks.

Richard Norton Smith is a renowned historian, a former director of five presidential libraries, & author whose latest work - Ordinary Man - chronicles the life and career of Gerald Ford. In this conversation, we talk the insurgent rise of Ford as he takes on the local GOP machine, his ascent through the House GOP of the 50s and 60s, the fortuitous events that led him to become Vice President and then President upon Nixon's resignation, his very narrow loss in 1976, & why the Ford Presidency and his enduring impact on America is much more consequential than often realized.(To donate to support The Pro Politics Podcast, you may use this venmo link or inquire by email at mccrary.zachary@gmail.com)IN THIS EPISODEWhat made Ford the “first post-New Deal President”...One of the rare times Ford lost his temper in politics...Ford's “political father figure”, Senator Arthur Vandenberg…The story behind Ford's first insurgent bid for Congress…The secret society within the House that helped propel Ford's career…The story behind Ford's attempt to become Richard Nixon's running mate in 1960…The never before disclosed “deal” that nearly gave House Republicans the majority in the early 1970s…The one politician who could've disrupted Ford's path to become Nixon's VP in 1974…The proposed “constitutional coup” that could have replaced Richard Nixon with a Democratic President…Two meetings with the same influential senator only days apart demonstrate Ford's quick growth in office…The political damage done to Ford by his pardon of Richard Nixon…Two late factors that might have cost Ford in his narrow loss to Jimmy Carter…The political impact of First Lady Betty Ford in the 1976 campaign…Ford's leftward drift after he left the White House…Richard reads a bit of what he feels is Ford's best speech as President…Two of Richard's favorite recommendations for off-the-beaten-path historical sites around DC… AND Bella Abzug, Sprio Agnew, Carl Albert, apartheid, asterisks, Doug Bailey, bar stools, the Bicentennial, Phil Buchen, butcher knives, the CIA, Chevy Chase, Dick Cheney, concealed resentments, John Connally, docile acceptance, Bob Dole, Tom Dewey, English muffins, Barry Goldwater, grizzly bears, Jesse Helms, the Helsinki Accords, Leon Jaworski, Billy Kidd, Leslie King, Henry Kissinger, Tom Korologos, Mel Laird, Henry Cabot Lodge, Russell Long, The Marshall Plan, Sara Jane Moore, non-descript committee rooms, OSHA, Old Bulls, John Rankin, Ronald Reagan, the road to Damascus, Nelson Rockefeller, John Rhodes, Rhodesia, the Rules Committee, Bob Schieffer, Phyllis Schlafly, Hugh Scott, scoundrels, George Shultz, ski chalets, Oliver Sipple, Ted Sorensen, Robert Taft, transitional figures, Harry Truman, the UAW, the Warren Commission & more!

As Ronald Reagan's US Secretary of State during the 1980s, George Shultz played a key role in bringing an end to the decades-old Cold War. He helped build relations with USSR leader Mikhail Gorbachev, as well as countries in the Asia-Pacific region.  In 1989, Shultz was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his services, the United States' highest civilian honour. He passed away in February 2021, having lived to the ripe old age of 100. But before he did, he shared one of the secrets behind his productivity and difficult decision-making: the Shultz Hour. And it's something a lot of us could do with in this modern age. So what is it actually? It's often hard to find time to think, isn't it? How can I go about creating my own Shultz Hour? In under 3 minutes, we answer your questions! To listen to the latest episodes, click here: What is conscious quitting? Why is Israel going through a major political crisis? How should I organise my fridge? A Bababam Originals podcast, written and produced by Joseph Chance. In partnership with upday UK. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Eric and Eliot are joined by former New York Times reporter and editor Philip Taubman, current lecturer at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation, and the author of In The Nation's Service: The Life and Times of George P. Shultz (Stanford University Press, 2023). They discuss the character of George Shultz, his role in executing the Reagan Administration's strategy towards the Soviet Union, the internecine bureaucratic infighting that characterized the Reagan years, the Shutlz-Weinberger and Shultz-Kissinger relationships, and the end of the Cold War. In the Nation's Service: The Life and Times of George P. Shultz by Philip Taubman (https://www.amazon.com/Nations-Service-Times-George-Shultz/dp/1503631125) The Partnership: Five Cold Warriors and Their Quest to Ban the Bomb by Philip Taubman (https://www.amazon.com/Partnership-Five-Warriors-Their-Quest/dp/0061744077) The Rebellion of Ronald Reagan: A History of the End of the Cold War by James Mann (https://www.amazon.com/Rebellion-Ronald-Reagan-History-Cold/dp/0670020540/) “The Sources of Soviet Conduct” by “X” (George Kennan) (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/1947-07-01/sources-soviet-conduct) "Reagan's Piece:" The SotR Episode with Will Inboden (https://www.thebulwark.com/podcast-episode/reagans-peace/) National Security Decision Directive 75 (https://irp.fas.org/offdocs/nsdd/nsdd-75.pdf) “A World Free of Nuclear Weapons” by George P. Shultz, William J. Perry, Henry A. Kissinger, and Sam Nunn (The Four Horsemen Op-Ed) Eric's Tribute to Shultz: “Secretary of the American Century” (https://thedispatch.com/article/secretary-of-the-american-century/) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Eric and Eliot are joined by former New York Times reporter and editor Philip Taubman, current lecturer at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation, and the author of In The Nation's Service: The Life and Times of George P. Shultz (Stanford University Press, 2023). They discuss the character of George Shultz, his role in executing the Reagan Administration's strategy towards the Soviet Union, the internecine bureaucratic infighting that characterized the Reagan years, the Shutlz-Weinberger and Shultz-Kissinger relationships, and the end of the Cold War. In the Nation's Service: The Life and Times of George P. Shultz by Philip Taubman (https://www.amazon.com/Nations-Service-Times-George-Shultz/dp/1503631125) The Partnership: Five Cold Warriors and Their Quest to Ban the Bomb by Philip Taubman (https://www.amazon.com/Partnership-Five-Warriors-Their-Quest/dp/0061744077) The Rebellion of Ronald Reagan: A History of the End of the Cold War by James Mann (https://www.amazon.com/Rebellion-Ronald-Reagan-History-Cold/dp/0670020540/) “The Sources of Soviet Conduct” by “X” (George Kennan) (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/1947-07-01/sources-soviet-conduct) "Reagan's Piece:" The SotR Episode with Will Inboden (https://www.thebulwark.com/podcast-episode/reagans-peace/) National Security Decision Directive 75 (https://irp.fas.org/offdocs/nsdd/nsdd-75.pdf) “A World Free of Nuclear Weapons” by George P. Shultz, William J. Perry, Henry A. Kissinger, and Sam Nunn (The Four Horsemen Op-Ed) Eric's Tribute to Shultz: “Secretary of the American Century” (https://thedispatch.com/article/secretary-of-the-american-century/) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On this episode of Reaganism, Roger sits down with Philip Taubman, a lecturer at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation who was previously a reporter and editor at The New York Times for thirty years. Roger and Philip discuss his new authoritative biography of George Shultz, who served as Secretary of State under […]

On this episode of Reaganism, Roger sits down with Philip Taubman, a lecturer at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation who was previously a reporter and editor at The New York Times for thirty years. Roger and Philip discuss his new authoritative biography of George Shultz, who served as Secretary of State under President Ronald Reagan and help to bring about the end of the Cold War. Philip's new book is titled, In the Nation's Service: The Life and Times of George P. Shultz.

Bad Blood Full Chapter Book SummaryMore Content On Bookey Best Book Summary App. For nearly a ten billion dollar fraud, what meticulous planning is required? How did a school dropout with no medical background deceive the medical technology establishment and even political giants? In “Bad Blood”, the author, John Carreyrou, uses a calm and objective style of writing to reveal the shocking fraudulent activity at the heart of Theranos, Elizabeth Holmes' company. In his research for the book, Carreyrou interviewed over 150 people, including sixty former employees. He drew upon the comprehensive background detail they provided to uncover the truth. Carreyrou tears apart the legendary company that built on lies. He reveals to the reader how the fraud was executed. Overview | Chapter 1Hi, welcome to Bookey. Today we will unlock the book Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup. Before we begin, let us try to imagine a particular type of product, a portable medical “magic box”. It can be kept at home, produce a diagnosis, and suggest a treatment plan. Whenever you feel physically unwell, all you need to do is to open this magic box, use the needle on top to prick your finger, let a drop of blood fall into the box, and this magic box will provide over two hundred professional test results. With this device, not only would you be able to track your physical condition instantaneously, the data from the blood test would be transmitted online to your doctor. They can then send over more comprehensive consultation notes and advise on your medication going forward. With such a magic box, you would be able to accomplish the entire process of a doctor's consultation without stepping out of your door. Is this a product you would hope to own? This is not a fantasy. Once upon a time, someone from Silicon Valley created such a product. The entrepreneur was a passionate follower of Steve Jobs. Like Jobs, had believed that “the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do.” For this revolutionary dream, this individual dropped out of Stanford University, gathered a group of like-minded talents, and created a company that sold medical apparatus. Soon it was estimated to be worth $9 billion USD. This person, who founded a company they called Theranos, was none other than Elizabeth Holmes. It was she who came up with this captivating idea and proceeded to use an irresistibly charming manner to rake in investment. She attracted business world legends, such as the Oracle founder Larry Ellison, to be her shareholders. She was even successful in persuading military and political leaders, like former U.S. Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, and former Defense Minister William Perry, to join the Board of Directors. These significant figures provided a shield for the company. Their credibility helped her company's value ascend in the market, such that, at one point, it was the most successful Silicon Valley start-up. At the helm of Theranos, Holmes dreamt of becoming a hero destined to save humanity. Yet ultimately, the dream melted as everyone found out that the magic product was just an illusion Holmes had created. The bubble was burst when everyone shockingly realized that the Theranos company Holmes' had created was the biggest medical fraud in history.

Philip Taubman, lecturer at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation and author of In The Nation's Service: The Life and Times of George P. Shultz, joins the show to discuss the legacy of American statesmen George P. Shultz. ▪️ Times  • 01:52 Introduction • 02:14 First encounters with Schultz • 06:44 An old-fashioned patriot  • 10:10 Secretary of State  • 15:38 Different approaches to defeating Communism  • 20:00 Two sides to Reagan  • 26:44 Hawks • 31:05 Schultz, Clark, and Dobrynin • 33:35 Arms control  • 38:24 The end of the Cold War • 41:55 Tension as a tool

He had been secretary of Labor, budget director and Treasury secretary, but is most famous as the nation's secretary of State at a time when the world was reeling from the Cold War: George Shultz's legacy of public service is notable not only for being only one of two to have held that many Cabinet posts, but also for his pivotal role in crafting President Reagan's foreign policy. Phil Taubman, author of "In the Nation's Service: The Life and Times of George P. Shultz," paints the portrait of one of America's most consequential statesmen.

This is the finale of our look at Richard Nixon, and our 145 episode look back at the most divisive era in American history other than the American Civil War,  the Vietnam War and Watergate. It all began with the assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem, the President of South Vietnam , followed three weeks later by the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (episode 29) and ends with this look back at the passing of President Richard Nixon. It encompasses three of the biggest traumas ever experienced by our nation, the assassination of a President, the war in Vietnam, and the removal of a President in a scandal. A scandal whose origins came as an outgrowth of a President trying to figure a way out of a war that was destroying the bonds of affection that held our nation together. Richard Nixon left office in disgrace. His enemies in the Democratic Party and National Media still firmly in place and who have tried to make sure his legacy is held in contempt by the American people. But that failed during President Nixon's lifetime because the American people are a lot smarter than they are given credit, and they are also an understanding and forgiving people. As time marched on, the wisdom of the policies Richard Nixon championed became clearer as did the benefits of his extraordinary accomplishments. Richard Nixon was one of us, a biographer once wrote, he did not come from privilege, or wealth,  he came from the small town of Yorba Linda, California and he brought with him the hard work ethic of a depression era hardscrabble childhood followed up by the agonies of fighting a World War. He championed the values of America's common people, generous in spirit, but tempering their generosity with common sense. They understood Richard Nixon and when he fell they were still there to catch him and open the door back. When he passed away in April of 1994, they came by the the tens of thousands to pay their respects, as Bob Dole said "No longer silent in their grief" This is that story. As we close the door to our epic look at Richard Nixon it is important for those among us who have only faint memories of this giant in the history of the World. That they see him as his contemporaries did and not as his enemies have tried to portray him .  He was simply the largest figure of his age, the Age of Nixon.  Questions or comments at , Randalrgw1@aol.com , https://twitter.com/randal_wallace , and http://www.randalwallace.com/Please Leave us a review at wherever you get your podcastsThanks for listening!!

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/russian-studies

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

With decades of hindsight, the peaceful end of the Cold War seems a foregone conclusion. But in the early 1980s, most experts believed the Soviet Union was strong, stable, and would last into the next century. Ronald Reagan entered the White House with no certainty of what would happen next, only an overriding faith in democracy and an abiding belief that Soviet communism—and the threat of nuclear war—must end. William Inboden's The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War, and the World on the Brink (Dutton, 2022) reveals how Reagan's White House waged the Cold War while managing multiple crises around the globe. From the emergence of global terrorism, wars in the Middle East, the rise of Japan, and the awakening of China to proxy conflicts in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Reagan's team oversaw the worldwide expansion of democracy, globalization, free trade, and the information revolution. Yet no issue was greater than the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As president, Reagan remade the four-decades-old policy of containment and challenged the Soviets in an arms race and ideological contest that pushed them toward economic and political collapse, all while extending an olive branch of diplomacy as he sought a peaceful end to the conflict. Reagan's revolving team included Secretaries of State Al Haig and George Shultz; Secretaries of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Frank Carlucci; National Security Advisors Bill Clark, John Poindexter, and Bud McFarlane; Chief of Staff James Baker; CIA Director Bill Casey; and United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. Talented and devoted to their president, they were often at odds with one another as rivalries and backstabbing led to missteps and crises. But over the course of the presidency, Reagan and his team still developed the strategies that brought about the Cold War's peaceful conclusion and remade the world. Based on thousands of pages of newly-declassified documents and interviews with senior Reagan officials, The Peacemaker brims with fresh insights into one of America's most consequential presidents. Along the way, it shows how the pivotal decade of the 1980s shaped the world today. Grant Golub is an Ernest May Fellow in History and Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and a PhD candidate in the Department of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His research focuses on the politics of American grand strategy during World War II. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Eric and Eliot welcome William Inboden to discuss his new book, The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War and the World on the Brink. They discuss the existing historical literature on Reagan's Presidency and foreign policy, this new book's contribution to the literature, the complexity of the world that Reagan and his colleagues faced in the 1980's, the role of individuals like Secretaries of State Alexander Haig and George Shultz, as well as National Security Advisor Judge William Clark in advancing the Reagan agenda, and the role of ideas—especially democracy promotion in Reagan's approach to national security as well as his nuclear abolitionism. All three reflect on the nature of the relationship between policy process and policy outcomes. Shield of the Republic is a Bulwark podcast co-sponsored by the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia. Email us with your feedback at shieldoftherepublic@gmail.com. Eric's tribute to George Shultz (https://thedispatch.com/article/secretary-of-the-american-century/) Collapse: The Fall of the Soviet Union by Vladislav M. Zubok - (https://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Soviet-Vladislav-M-Zubok/dp/0300257309) Reagan at Reykjavik: Forty-Eight Hours That Ended the Cold War by Ken Adel (https://www.amazon.com/Reagan-Reykjavik-Forty-Eight-Hours-Ended/dp/0062310194) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Eric and Eliot welcome William Inboden to discuss his new book, The Peacemaker: Ronald Reagan, the Cold War and the World on the Brink. They discuss the existing historical literature on Reagan's Presidency and foreign policy, this new book's contribution to the literature, the complexity of the world that Reagan and his colleagues faced in the 1980's, the role of individuals like Secretaries of State Alexander Haig and George Shultz, as well as National Security Advisor Judge William Clark in advancing the Reagan agenda, and the role of ideas—especially democracy promotion in Reagan's approach to national security as well as his nuclear abolitionism. All three reflect on the nature of the relationship between policy process and policy outcomes. Shield of the Republic is a Bulwark podcast co-sponsored by the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia. Email us with your feedback at shieldoftherepublic@gmail.com. Eric's tribute to George Shultz (https://thedispatch.com/article/secretary-of-the-american-century/) Collapse: The Fall of the Soviet Union by Vladislav M. Zubok - (https://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Soviet-Vladislav-M-Zubok/dp/0300257309) Reagan at Reykjavik: Forty-Eight Hours That Ended the Cold War by Ken Adel (https://www.amazon.com/Reagan-Reykjavik-Forty-Eight-Hours-Ended/dp/0062310194) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The recent sale of Russian Hill luxury penthouses owned by George Shultz broke San Francisco records.Mark Thompson shares details in his segment "That's Rich".See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The recent sale of Russian Hill luxury penthouses owned by George Shultz broke San Francisco records.Mark Thompson shares details in his segment "That's Rich".See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What you'll learn in this episode: What characteristics make a gemstone special Why collectors usually have a few pieces that don't fit into the parameters of their collection Why old stones often have more charm than modern ones How to make trendy jewelry more timeless Which jewels have been the most memorable from Caroline's auction career About Caroline Morrissey Caroline Morrissey is Director and Head of Jewelry at Bonhams in New York. Her areas of expertise span diamonds and colored gemstones to 20th century jewelry. She has a particular interest in large white and colored diamonds. Since joining Bonhams in 2014, Caroline's exceptional sales include a diamond riviere necklace, which sold for $1,205,000 in June 2015; a diamond solitaire ring which sold for $1,807,500 in September 2017; and an unmounted Kashmir sapphire which sold for $1,244,075 in July 2020. Caroline discovered her passion for the jewelry business more than two decades ago, in a charming jewelry store in Edinburgh, Scotland, where she worked on weekends during high school. Her career started in the diamond industry in Antwerp, Belgium, and she has also held positions at the prominent luxury retailers Cartier and Leviev. Caroline studied a double major in Economics and Politics from the University of York, England. Photos: New York–Bonhams will present more than 200 jewels from the Estate of George and Charlotte Shultzon May 23, 2022, including more than 70 pieces from Tiffany & Co. Charlotte wore her jewels to receive Queen Elizabeth II, Pope John Paul II, and countless world leaders as San Francisco's chief of protocol for more than fifty years, serving ten mayors. She found her perfect match in George Shultz, a great American statesman who served as secretary of state under President Ronald Reagan and held four different cabinet positions under three presidents. Their personal collection will be featured in a dedicated sale at Bonhams New York that will celebrate their life of philanthropy and elegance. Below are a few photos of auction items.   Additional Resources: Bonhams Website Bonhams Instagram   Transcript: What makes a gemstone stand out from the rest? You can talk about color, shape and cut, but sometimes a stone inexplicably draws you in. That's the experience Caroline Morrissey has had many times as Director of the Jewelry Department for Bonhams in New York. She joined the Jewelry Journey Podcast to talk about the most memorable jewelry she's sold; why collectors shouldn't be too rigid about maintaining a specific theme for their collection; and what qualities make a gemstone special. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Hello, everyone. Welcome to the Jewelry Journey Podcast. This is the second part of a two-part episode. If you haven't heard part one, please go to TheJewelryJourney.com. Today, my Guest is Caroline Morrissey, Director of the Jewelry Department for Bonhams. Welcome back. What are you normally attracted to? Why would it surprise you? Caroline: Well, I'm very boring. I like my jewelry to be simple. I have no problem with it being bold, but I don't want it to be complicated and bold. I find myself in a situation where I have a great appreciation for many gemstones, but that does not mean I would wear them myself—but doesn't mean I don't like them. There are all sorts of 1935-40's jewels that are slightly out of character, but at the same time I'm completely embracing them. This is, by the way, mostly in most dreams. I unfortunately do not have a fabulous jewelry box at home full of these jewels. But I mostly lean towards simple designs. If it can be a hundred years old, all the better. Sharon: Do you think they select jewelry because—what's the word they use? It is classic, like you're talking about, but 40, 50 years from now they'll still love it as much. Do you think people look at that, or do they go more with trends? Caroline: I think a lot of people go with trends and then they regret it. When I work with clients—I mean, it depends what the piece of jewelry is for. If they're adding to a collection and they're looking for a specific period, that's completely different. But if you've got somebody who's looking for an engagement ring or bridal or that type of jewelry, I do believe a lot of people fall into whatever is in vogue right now, and they don't realize, “O.K., everyone's different.” Like you say, in 40, 50 years' time, it will just be a style from the period. I always try and advise that there are very, very small changes you can make to many styles that will transform that piece of jewelry into a timeless and elegant piece. It can be a combination of modern yet traditional. You look at some of the pieces from a long time ago and transplant them to today, and many of them are still in fashion. They're timeless; they will never cease to be so. I think as soon as you point that out to somebody, it becomes so obvious, but I don't think that's necessarily what people always want going into it. It's hard not to want what is in style now. Sharon: Yes. It sounds like you have a secondary career with restyling jewelry, though. Caroline: Well, the design element of it is really fun. I don't think I'm that great at it, but I'm definitely going to offer you my ideas, just in case. Sharon: You've used the words collectors, collections. When you say a collector comes to you, is a collector like me, somebody who has a box full of jewelry? Or is it something where they have an emerald; they have a ruby; they have sapphires? What's a collection to you? Caroline: A collection, to me, is a group of jewelry. I feel that a collection has a different meaning to each individual. It could be a combination of pieces that you have inherited and pieces that have been given to you, perhaps pieces you've bought yourself. Then you could have a collector who has a collection within a specific genre. I will say that as hard as it may be, most people who collect for specific collections, whatever the time period, color, style might be, usually have a few pieces or more that fall out of the parameters for that collection, because usually they are drawn to something they can't say no to. So, a collection to me is literally whatever is in that jewelry box, and it doesn't need to match. Some pieces could be broken. There could be elements of one piece and a complete matching set of another piece, but what we can do? I very much enjoy going through that collection and sorting out what needs to be done, how it should be sold, what will work for the owner, because everyone has different needs. On top of that, everyone's jewelry, if you're on the selling side, is different, and it usually requires a little bit of work to be done. We've got to do some sleuthing, finding out what particular pieces are, if they started off life together, if they were married together at a later stage in their jewelry life. That's a really fun thing to do, and it can also help people find out more about where their jewelry has come from. It can be a really interesting road to go down. Sharon: That sounds very interesting. Tell us about some of your most memorable sales. Caroline: How about some memorable auction pieces within the sale? Sharon: O.K., great. Caroline: I've got some great stories for you. Sharon: Please, O.K. Caroline: I'm going to start off with the first one. It was a sapphire and diamond ring. This lady had bought the ring from an antique store, and she had been told the sapphire was synthetic but the mounting was a Tiffany mounting. It was a Deco, very beautiful yet simple Tiffany mounting. She bought it for $800, which was basically the cost of the mounting and the synthetic stone. She enjoyed it. Things happened with her life, and at some point, she had been told by someone that it might not be synthetic, this sapphire. That prompted her to call us. Long story short, we managed to lay eyes on the piece. We sent it to a lab, and it came back as an 8-carat Burma origin, no heat, no enhancements. Long story short, it went into a sale. They flew here and sat in the front row of the auction. It hammered for $200,000. Afterwards she came up—she was with a friend and was in tears—and thanked us so much, because her husband had medical problems, and this was going to make everything O.K. for them so that she didn't have to sell her house. That's a really special moment to be a part of, and she was so thankful. We didn't actually know the full story of how much all of this meant until the very end, but these things really do happen. Sharon: Wow! Caroline: I have another story for you. We had this brooch that was sent in to us. I'm going to try to be diplomatic here, but I don't think it had been cleaned in a very, very long time. It had been bought from a garage sale for $8. Anyway, long story short, it had a diamond, an emerald and a ruby under a carat, but it was really fine quality once it was all cleaned up. We had the diamond certified, and it came back as a VS1, so the highest color, completely clean, and an old stone. The emeralds came back Colombian with minor or insignificant inclusions. Again, very, very high quality. The ruby came back Burma, no heat. This tiny, little brooch sold for $35,000. Sharon: Wow! Caroline: It does not happen often, but it does happen, these stories. I suppose that's one of the amazing parts of being at auction, that you can be part of somebody's journey, whether it's from a garage sale and is a big surprise, or something that comes in and is an angel at a time of need. Sharon: Wow! The stories you're telling are the reason I like antiques, I suppose. Caroline: Oh, absolutely. I have more. It really does happen, and it's amazing. Sharon: It is amazing, and it makes you want to go out to every flea market and garage sale. I just don't have any kind of patience for that. Do you have people who say, “Only call me if you have an unset stone that you think is worth me looking at”? Or do they say, “I don't care what the stone is set in, give me a call”? Do you have collectors who just want the stone? Caroline: The thing is, in most cases, people need a stone to be set in a piece of jewelry to visualize it. Even if they don't expect to wear it or it's not their intention to wear it, just to view it as a piece of jewelry, it needs to be in some type of setting. It doesn't even need to be a nice setting. It just needs to be a vehicle to make that stone or stones into a piece of jewelry. I have clients who say to me, “If you have important colored stones, please call me,” and they will not care what those colored stones are set in. In many cases, they probably won't care how old the stone is. They are just looking for beautiful colored stones. I suppose based on what I have, they'll work out whether it's interesting to them, but in most cases in that scenario, the mounting is neither here nor there. They're looking at the stone. They don't care if it's in a ring or a piece of jewelry. Sharon: Do think they want to have the stone set themselves? Do you think they take it and have it put in a piece of jewelry themselves, or do they take the stone and put it in their safe and say, “That's nice.” What do they do? Caroline: Some people definitely do that. If they're going to put it in a safe, they're probably just going to leave it in the mounting it came in and put it in the safe and close the door. I suppose it depends on what the purchase is for, but auction is a secondary market, so you're not necessarily going to walk in and find your perfect stone in the perfect mounting, especially with diamonds. Most of our clients will first and foremost, if they're looking for stones, look for that stone. If they need to make any changes to the mounting or style, they will do that afterwards. Those people looking for jewelry, they're in a completely different category. The stones become insignificant to them because they're looking for a piece of jewelry, and they will oftentimes have a time period or a designer or a style in mind. If it does have stones in it, those stones will enhance the piece of jewelry, but the purchase will be about the jewelry versus the stones, if that makes sense. Sharon: Yes, it makes a lot of sense. What do you see as the market for stones for jewelry, or stones in general? You hear so much about changes with younger buyers. What's the market? Is it the same as always? Caroline: The market is strong at the moment; that's for sure. I will tell you the number of very, very fine quality, unenhanced, colored gemstones, there are not so many around, and those that are around are incredibly expensive. You can see that, in many cases, the younger generation can very easily be priced out. They want a Burmese ruby, but to get a nice one, they have to have incredibly deep pockets. So, what we're seeing now is—and I'll carry on with rubies as an example—they're going to make concessions. They might say they want a Burmese ruby, but in order to afford one, they're going to take a heated Burmese ruby. So, they're getting a few of the things they want, but not everything. On the flip side of that, there's this wonderful source of rubies in Mozambique. People are now saying, “O.K., I can still have a beautiful ruby, but instead of it being from Burma, I'm going to get an equally beautiful one from Mozambique and it's going to cost me less.” It might not have the cachet of a Burmese ruby, but that's the direction they want to go in. We're seeing people look for alternatives in quite a saturated market. We're seeing that spinels are coming up now, and more people are really interested in spinels. They're realizing what fabulous colors they come in and what bright stones they are. I see that really taking off in the next five to 10 years. Already in the last five years, spinels have made big tracks into the market, and I see that continuing. I think the new generation of buyers is a little more open to different sources and different gemstones than perhaps the previous generation was. Sharon: I think open is a good word. I think it's broadened. It's not just emerald, sapphire, ruby, but spinels and padparadscha seem like the big ones. Caroline: Padparadschas are sapphires. They are stones that have a very specific combination of pink and yellow for a padparadscha. A beautifully colored padparadscha that is clean and unheated with an ideal origin is very desirable, as we say, very, very desirable. Sharon: Yes, so I hear. That's one I happen to hear about. The spinels have broadened the market. It seems that now people are more open. Caroline: I think they're much more open now. They're willing to look at different styles and different colors and different minerals and realizing it can be fun. It's a good alternative; it's not a bad alternative. Sharon: Right, and it may be the only viable alternative, in a sense. Caroline: I think many people are realizing that. Because, like I said, to get a high-quality, Burma, no-heat ruby, first you've got to find it and then you've got to acquire it. I would say that the vast majority of people—and this is a very small stone—they're going to find that to be difficult. Sharon: Yes, you're the one who would know. Thank you so much for talking with us today. It's very, very interesting. I appreciate it, and I hope you have everything you want come across your desk. Caroline: Thank you very much. It's been an absolute pleasure. Yes, I can't wait to do it again. Sharon: Thanks a lot, Caroline. Thank you again for listening. Please leave us a rating and review so we can help others start their own jewelry journey.

What you'll learn in this episode: What characteristics make a gemstone special Why collectors usually have a few pieces that don't fit into the parameters of their collection Why old stones often have more charm than modern ones How to make trendy jewelry more timeless Which jewels have been the most memorable from Caroline's auction career About Caroline Morrissey Caroline Morrissey is Director and Head of Jewelry at Bonhams in New York. Her areas of expertise span diamonds and colored gemstones to 20th century jewelry. She has a particular interest in large white and colored diamonds. Since joining Bonhams in 2014, Caroline's exceptional sales include a diamond riviere necklace, which sold for $1,205,000 in June 2015; a diamond solitaire ring which sold for $1,807,500 in September 2017; and an unmounted Kashmir sapphire which sold for $1,244,075 in July 2020. Caroline discovered her passion for the jewelry business more than two decades ago, in a charming jewelry store in Edinburgh, Scotland, where she worked on weekends during high school. Her career started in the diamond industry in Antwerp, Belgium, and she has also held positions at the prominent luxury retailers Cartier and Leviev. Caroline studied a double major in Economics and Politics from the University of York, England. Photos: New York–Bonhams will present more than 200 jewels from the Estate of George and Charlotte Shultzon May 23, 2022, including more than 70 pieces from Tiffany & Co. Charlotte wore her jewels to receive Queen Elizabeth II, Pope John Paul II, and countless world leaders as San Francisco's chief of protocol for more than fifty years, serving ten mayors. She found her perfect match in George Shultz, a great American statesman who served as secretary of state under President Ronald Reagan and held four different cabinet positions under three presidents. Their personal collection will be featured in a dedicated sale at Bonhams New York that will celebrate their life of philanthropy and elegance. Below are a few photos of auction items.   Additional Resources: Bonhams Website Bonhams Instagram   Transcript: What makes a gemstone stand out from the rest? You can talk about color, shape and cut, but sometimes a stone inexplicably draws you in. That's the experience Caroline Morrissey has had many times as Director of the Jewelry Department for Bonhams in New York. She joined the Jewelry Journey Podcast to talk about the most memorable jewelry she's sold; why collectors shouldn't be too rigid about maintaining a specific theme for their collection; and what qualities make a gemstone special. Read the episode transcript here. Sharon: Hello, everyone. Welcome to the Jewelry Journey Podcast. This is a two-part Jewelry Journey Podcast. Please make sure you subscribe so you can hear part two as soon as it comes out later this week. Today, my guest is Caroline Morrissey, Director of the Jewelry Department for Bonhams, located in New York and around the world. Caroline's area of expertise spans diamonds and colored gemstones through 20th century jewelry, but her passion is large, white diamonds—she has a lot of company there—and colored diamonds. She's had a wide and varied jewelry career, which we'll hear about today. Caroline, welcome to the program. Caroline: Thank you so much. I'm so happy to be here. Sharon: So glad to have you. Tell us about your jewelry journey. Were you attracted to diamonds and gems when you were young—well, you're still young, but when you were a youth? Caroline: Yes, I was. I always enjoyed, probably more than the average child, my grandmother's jewelry. I was interested in it, but the big change for me came when a friend of mine—I grew up in Edinburgh in Scotland—his parents had a couple of jewelry stores. When I was 16, they asked if I would be able to help over the holiday period in December, just with small bits of jewelry and to run any errands and so on. I did, and I loved it. I wanted to learn more, so I ended up staying as a Saturday girl and working through my summers until I graduated high school. It was during this that I realized there was more to a diamond engagement ring; there was more to a piece of jewelry. It meant something to the buyers. There was more than the just the stone behind it. Where did it come from? What was its journey? What was its quality compared to others? That never left me, and that experience put me on my journey to where I am now. It was wonderful. Sharon: When you were talking about the story behind the stone, were you starting to differentiate the stone from the entire piece of jewelry? Caroline: At that age, I realized that not all old diamonds were the same. To sell an engagement ring was a learning curve. It was about the piece of jewelry, but it was also about the clients. In many cases, it was actually about the client's person who they loved. You didn't necessarily meet that person, but it was going to be a specific piece of jewelry that was bought for this person. It really brought to light how personal it was. Pieces of art that are not jewelry, they might sit above your mantlepiece, but you don't wear them. I think that is the difference for me with jewelry. It's so very, very personal. Sharon: Would you say the personal aspect applies to jewelry in general as opposed to anything else? Caroline: I would, because people acquire jewelry in different ways. Any jewelry that has been passed down from a member of their family is personal for reasons that are different. But that piece of jewelry that you've bought for yourself, there's a reason why you've bought it. The same again if somebody close, whether it's a partner or a child or a friend, gives you a piece of jewelry. All of these different ways of acquiring jewelry are very personal. It goes to other people, but the journey is like a charm bracelet. The charms can be very personal to one person, but the next person might still be interested in that charm bracelet for different reasons. That continuing, varying personal connection with jewelry, for me, is quite unique in the collecting field. Unlike other pieces of art, you actually wear it, and you have to like it to wear it. It sometimes needs to mean something to you to wear it as well. Sharon: You must find a lot of that personal aspect at Bonhams, being able to tie one piece to a person to sell it. I mean that in a nice way, in terms of how to draw out what their story is and then be able to connect it. Caroline: Absolutely. Everyone has their own story, whether it's from a selling point of view or a buying point of view. It's an amazing opportunity to be able to connect with those people and understand what is behind them wanting to do a certain thing, whether it's to sell or to buy, and to understand what is important to them. We can say, “You should be interested in this piece of jewelry or this stone for this particular reason,” and that may well be true in the grand scheme of things, but people personally can have different reasons. There's nothing wrong with that. We are all attracted to different colors, different textures, for our own reasons. I think jewelry really shows different personalities and different trends, and it can also change. I'm always surprised by bits of jewelry that I like that might not necessarily be a standard for me, but it's O.K. to deviate from that. Something is appearing that's not necessarily something I can explain, if that makes sense. Sharon: Yes. How does all this tie to Bonhams? How does it tie to the auction market? As pieces come across your desk, do they talk to you? Caroline: Some talk really loudly in negative ways and positive ways, but mostly positive. I think one of the reasons I enjoy auction is that it's a real opportunity to see the best of the best. I say that with honesty because I don't think one can really appreciate the most spectacular pieces of jewelry and gemstones without fully comprehending that not every piece is of that same caliber, and that there are ones that really stand out. It affords me the ability to see pieces made yesterday and pieces made 150-200 years ago. You can see what was in vogue 70 years ago versus what is now, what colors, what gemstones, what shapes, what styles. Together with the variety in jewelry comes the huge variety in people that have owned them or bough the jewelry. I'm a people person, and it's amazing to hear people's stories, people's situations, people's needs, and tie that all together with jewelry. You get a greater level of understanding of what will make them happy and what jewelry is doing in their lives right now. Sharon: As a professional, how does Bonhams fit into all this? How does it fit into the whole auction market, as opposed a Doyle, a Christie's, a Sotheby's, that sort of thing? Where does Bonhams fit into all that? Caroline: First of all, at Bonhams we have more than 50 jewelry auctions a year throughout the world, which is a lot. One of the great things is that we offer pieces at almost every single price point, so there are no barriers to buy jewelry at Bonhams. There's going to be something for everybody. For somebody who's looking to sell, we have the ability to take an entire estate or an entire collection. We're not going to come in and just take the top lots; it's going to be a one-source solution for the entire collection, and that can be really helpful. On the other side of that, it affords the buyer a huge variety within a collection to browse through and see what works for them at Bonhams. I like to view Bonhams as being a boutique auction house. We have the ability to work with clients from the beginning to the end of their journey and put together something for them that is unique and custom and will work with their situation. It's not cookie cutter. In some ways that could create a little more work, but it's the end result that matters. There's something wonderfully satisfying to meet clients on the first day of their inquiry and to shake their hands at the end of a successful sale. Being there to answer all of the questions and travel down the road together is very, very satisfying, and it's a privilege. Sharon: Is that your role there? Are you called in when somebody says, “I need the big guns on this”? How does that work? Caroline: Yes, sometimes. It's very collaborative here, so we work together. But, sure, I have a level of expertise where sometimes I can come in and give my opinion with other members of staff. It depends on the situation. There are some people where their situation is very straightforward and other people where it's not straightforward at all. Some people can make decisions quickly; some people need extra time. There's no right or wrong. I can't say I do it with everybody, but I have a lot of clients that I deal with directly myself, and it is a true pleasure to go from the beginning to the end. Most people who deal with jewelry in New York at Bonhams will come across my place at some point in their journey here. Sharon: It must be satisfying to have pieces of jewelry come across your desk and then call a client you've worked with in the past and say, “You have got to see this piece.” Caroline: Absolutely. Sharon: Do you find that's something you end up doing quite a bit? How does that work? Caroline: We've got a sale coming up next week, and we have some very interesting pieces in it. This doesn't happen every day with every sale, but certainly with the pieces in this particular one. We have a beautiful emerald bracelet. It's an amazing opportunity for me to call some of my clients and say, “You have to see this. I know you're going to be interested in it. Whether or not you end up as the final buyer, even if you don't bid, it is fabulous enough for you to make the effort to come see it with your own eyes. If you're interested in jewelry, this is something you have to see.” I don't always have that opportunity, but that's what I've been doing this week and last week with this particular piece. It's nice to see everybody come together and to hear their opinions. At the end of the day, everyone has their own opinions, but in most cases we agree. It's nice to get people to come out of the woodwork for something special. Sharon: Coming out of the woodwork, that must be very satisfying. In reading about you and from what I've been told about your background, it sounds like your expertise is jewelry, but especially gems themselves, the colored diamonds, the diamonds. Is that the case? Caroline: Yes, I have to just admit to it and say yes. I started off my career proper in Antwerp, Belgium in the diamond business. I looked at so many diamonds in my training there that I think there would have been something wrong if I hadn't fallen head over heels in love with diamonds. There's something to me that's special about stones, and not just diamonds, but colored stones. To me, they all have a personality; they all have a charm. I love how the different facets, the different colors, the different shapes all can combine to produce something absolutely wonderful. In many cases, it combines to make something not so wonderful, or they're close to being perfect but not quite. Then it requires you to think, “Who can help get this stone to the next level?” because there might be a buyer out there who could make something a bit more perfect or a bit more desirable. That's not to say I don't love jewelry. I truly do, but if I had to choose, holding a really special gemstone in my hands without a mounting is always going to be a thrill for me. Sharon: When you say a really special gemstone, what's making it special? The cut, the color, everything? Caroline: Where do I begin? It's going to be a little bit of everything. Obviously, it depends on exactly what gemstone we're talking about, but to keep things relatively simple, the shape and the cut of the stone is one of the most important things because that is what your eye sees the moment it lays eyes on the stone. The next thing is going to be color. If you think of a ruby, you think of red. So, you want the overall appearance of any ruby you see to be red. That sounds like a very simple request, for lack of a better word, but not all rubies are as red as you want them to be. That doesn't make them inferior in the grand scheme of things, but it does alter how your brain processes that. Then within that color, how soft is the color, how clean is the stone when you're taking a closer look, how old is the stone? In many cases, some of the most charming stones were cut 100 or 150 years ago. I have this joke in my head that the lack of technology when it comes to cutting stones can sometimes result in a superior stone. I think today we have all these wonderful techniques and technology to make everything perfect, but sometimes what they did with their bare hands and their eyes a hundred years ago can make a stone even more perfect than you can make today. Maybe perfect is the wrong word; maybe charming. But so many old stones are full of character that is rare to see today. Sharon: It takes somebody who really appreciates the stone to see what you're saying. I look at a stone and I see a stone, unless it's really—for example, this weekend somebody showed me a ring from the 40s with citrine. It was not a good citrine; it was too light. I knew it was way too light, but I'm looking at something from a real simplistic perspective. If it was an emerald, I'd say, “Oh, it's green to me.” Do you see green in a ruby? Is that what you were saying? Caroline: Oh no, I'm just saying that a ruby is technically red, but there's pinkish red; there's purplish red. I have to say that even for somebody whose profession isn't looking at gemstones in the way I do, I do think that somebody who is interested in gemstones and jewelry—for example, my father is an architect, so he's got an eye for design and details. You would be surprised at how much the naked eye just looking at something will tell you. I reckon that if I lined up some stones, probably a lot of laymen could look at them and point out the best stone because in many ways, you're just drawn to it. You might not be able to articulate exactly why you're drawn to it, but you will just be drawn to it. That's another reason why I love these stones. You can't always get to the nuts and bolts of exactly why. There's just something that is appealing to you. Sharon: You used the word charming a couple of times. What makes a stone charming? Caroline: Oh, wow! What makes a stone charming to me? Well, the old style of cutting, which is—and I don't want to get too technical—but big facets, a big, open stone. Usually, they have soft edges versus straight edges, soft corners. If it's in a piece of jewelry, the mounting is most likely going to be something simple which brings your eyes to the center of the stone, versus so much detail or clunkiness that you sometimes see in today's mountings. Also, a lot of modern mountings try very hard. Old mountings don't try as hard. They let the stone sing for itself, and I think it's that perfect balance that can make a stone on a piece of jewelry charming. Sharon: Do you have collectors who collect jewelry because of the stone? Do you have stone collectors? Caroline: Sure, I suppose people who buy at auction appear in all shapes and forms. You never know exactly why they're buying something, but I think you have your jewelry collectors, and you have your stone people. Those guys are fairly easy to differentiate between, but then you have a pool of collectors for whom the stones and the jewelry belong together. Both of them need to be correct, if that makes sense. You could have this fabulous old diamond, but it's only fabulous if it's in the original mounting. Even if it's not a particularly exquisite mounting, it is in its original mounting, so the two work together as a piece. For those people, it might be a big collection they're working towards, or it might not be. It might be something they're going to wear occasionally, and they have statement pieces of jewelry that appeal to them. I always like to try and work out why people are buying certain things and what their end goal is, but as long as they're enthusiastic about the piece and it talks to them, then I'm not sure anything else matters. Sharon: Don't you at least have to have a sense of why it's talking to them so you can identify other things? So you can talk to them about what's talking to them, basically? Caroline: Sure, but I don't know if it's necessarily always specific. If somebody is interested in important colored stones, I will make sure to keep them on my radar for important pieces that come in. But they might turn around and say, “I'm not really interested in emeralds unless they are such and such.” I think you can get a lot of information from people to help them with furthering their collection or help them with what they want to do with an existing collection, but with the jewelry world certainly—and I can't speak to any other field—I do like to think that if something special comes along, be it a piece of jewelry or a gemstone or a combination of both, it doesn't necessarily need to fit into what they have or what they think they want. It's like a wild card or a curve ball. It might just be the right thing at the right time, and they might have been in the industry long enough to know that some things are really rare, and this is an opportunity. I guess it is my role to keep those doors open. I don't necessarily need to know too specifically what somebody is interested in because I don't not want to contact them about something just because it falls slightly outside those parameters. If somebody has a level of understanding and a passion, they might be open to all sorts of options, and some jewelry items don't come around that often. Like I said before, even if it's just, “Come and look and touch and handle and see that color with your own eyes,” it can be worth it. That can allow somebody to follow their own jewelry journey, even if they're not adding it specifically to their own personal collection. Sharon: That's a really good point. As long as I've been doing this, I've never ascertained what I collect. I just collect things I like. Caroline: Absolutely, and it's hard to articulate that. Also, just like styles and fashions, things come in sets. You might like something in one period of your life and change to something else. I currently have a little bit of a love affair with the late Deco, early retro jewelry period. This took me by storm a couple of years ago. It was a couple of pieces of jewelry that came in and landed on my desk, and I couldn't take my eyes off of them. It was very out of character from what I normally like. I don't know if it will last, but that's why I never want to impose too many parameters because you never know what might take your fancy.

Today's podcast is “Swords into Plowshares,” episode three of the three-part public television documentary Turmoil & Triumph: The George Shultz Years. In this final episode, Shultz and Reagan meet with Gorbachev again in Iceland to determine the future of a nuclear world. In 1989, Shultz leaves the State Department and returns to the world of ideas as a Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He continues his search for peace and security as a passionate advocate for nuclear disarmament. Listen now.

Today's podcast is “To Start the World Again,” episode two of the three-part public television documentary Turmoil & Triumph: The George Shultz Years. In episode two, George Shultz accompanies Reagan on a trip to Japan, but as they arrive back Philippine dissident Ninoy Aquino is assassinated and things are thrown into turmoil. Reagan is taken with the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. And George Shultz seeks an end to the Cold War. Listen now.

”Först säger de att du är galen, sedan slåss de mot dig och sedan förändrar du plötsligt världen". Så lyder Elizabeth Holmes mest kända citat. Det anspelar på Steve Jobs – och alla andra visionärer i Silicon Valley – som trotsat sina belackare och visat att de går att att tänka nytt och annorlunda. Devisen är i många fall avgörande, men kan även vara försåtlig. Storyn om Theranos visar ju faran med den tystnadskultur som ofta råder inom techbolag som bränner högoktanigt riskkapital i jakten på en vision som ska nås till varje pris. Granskningar av fiaskon som Wework, men även framgångar som Uber och Facebook FB -0,59% , rymmer liknande, varnande exempel om riskerna med detta sätt att bygga bolag. Elizabeth Holmes egen vision kretsade som bekant kring ett ”mikrolab” som skulle ge mängder med träffsäkra diagnoser med bara några droppar av patientens blod. I en värld där flera provrör blod behövs för motsvarande resultat lät det till en början för bra för att vara sant. Men storyn var för bra för att synas på vetenskapliga grunder. Holmes var ju en ung, ambitiös och idealistisk entreprenör som hade hoppat av Stanford University i Kalifornien för att följa sin dröm. ”Storyn visar hur viktigt det är med källskydd – och farligt det kan bli när visionen plötsligt trumfar verkligheten.” Med tiden lyckades hon locka investerare som Rupert Murdoch, Betsy DeVos och Carlos Slim att satsa över en miljard dollar på Theranos. Värderingen pumpades upp till hela 9 miljarder dollar och två av USA:s tidigare utrikesministrar, George Shultz och Henry Kissinger, satte sig i bolagets styrelse. Idag är Elizabeth Holmes skapelse värd noll kronor och hennes dröm ses återigen som en fysisk omöjlighet. Under måndagen dömdes hon för bedrägeri och riskerar nu 20 års fängelse. Den utdragna, hårt bevakade rättegången är en seger för Silicon Valleys investerare eftersom den förtydligar gränsen mellan förhoppningar och lögner. Detta bör underlätta när affärsänglar och riskkapitalbolag kräver transparens – och ha en avskräckande effekt för bolag som letar genvägar i jakten på sitt mål. Men rättegången är även en seger för journalistiken. Alla som läst John Carreyrous bok Bad Blood (Ont Blod på svenska) vet vilket enormt arbete som krävts för att kartlägga denna svindlande bluff. Hans arbete började redan 2015 med en serie grävande artiklar i The Wall Street Journal, och vilar till stor del på vittnesmål från anonyma källor från insidan. Dessa har i många fall skrivit på sekretessavtal och tvingats ta stora risker för att berätta sanningen med Theranos advokater hack i häl. Ett exempel är visselblåsaren Tyler Shultz, barnbarn till styrelseledamoten George Shultz, som under sin korta tid på Theranos upptäckte förfalskad forskning och bristande kvalitetskontroller. När han uppmärksammade ledningen på detta i ett mejl röt de tillbaka, vilket fick honom att säga upp sig. Sedan följde ett Kafkamässigt händelseförlopp som visar hur långt Elizabeth Holmes och hennes partner Sunny Balwani var redo att gå för att tysta kritiken som kom inifrån bolaget. Ett annat exempel är Erika Cheung, en före detta Theranos-medarbetare som varnade ledningen att företagets egenutvecklade teknologi inte var tillförlitlig nog att använda på patienter. Hon var ett nyckelvittne i rättegången. Alla journalister som granskat stora techbolag vet hur frustrerande det kan vara att försöka hitta källor som kan berätta om livet på insidan. Sekretessavtal är vanliga. Medarbetare är i regel mycket lojala, även efter de lämnat bolaget. Många har dessutom blivit miljonärer på sina aktieoptioner. Bakom dem står grundare som motverkar snokande murvlar – och istället jobbar för att sätta agendan själva i välregisserade intervjuer och egna kanaler i sociala medier. Att framgångsrika techgrundare är övertygade om sin egen förträfflighet är kanske inget man kan hålla emot dem. De måste ju våga riskera allt – och orka driva igenom visioner som ingen annan lyckats genomföra. Men som granskningen av bolag som Theranos och Wework visar är det sällan bra att vara oemotsagd. Det gäller för övrigt även framgångssagor som Facebook och Uber. (Tips: läs Mike Isaacs bok Super Pumped om Uber. Det är en av de roligaste, mest träffsäkra skildringar av Silicon Valley-kulturen jag läst!) Techbolagen är ju vår tids industrikoncerner. De präglar vårt arbetsliv, vår sjukvård, vad våra barn gör på fritiden och hur vi tar till oss information, falsk som äkta. De måste gå att gräva runt och ifrågasätta. Vi har journalister att tacka för att Theranos-bluffen avslöjades i tid, innan riktigt många patienter far illa. Storyn visar hur viktigt det är med källskydd – och farligt det kan bli när visionen plötsligt trumfar verkligheten." De Fria är en folkrörelse som jobbar för demokrati genom en upplyst och medveten befolkning! Stöd oss: SWISH: 070 - 621 19 92 (mottagare Sofia S) PATREON: https://patreon.com/defria_se HEMSIDA: https://defria.se FACEBOOK: https://facebook.com/defria.se

People don't seem to realize that Richard Nixon was actually one of our five great Civil Rights Presidents.  Brown vs the Board of Education was decided in 1954 but it was left up to Richard Nixon to make the decision to desegregate the public school systems a reality. He did it and he did it with no violence. He did it by sitting down with state and community leaders, treating them like he respected them, and having them have a hand in making it happen. It is a truly remarkable story and it was guided to reality by George Shultz, one of only two men to hold four different Cabinet positions under Richard Nixon and later Ronald Reagan. Again,  as the year wore on, Richard Nixon would comeback to try and find a solution to the war that was dividing our country. He would return with a new set of initiatives to try and bring the recalcitrant North Vietnamese back to the table to try and find peace. Then as 1970 drew to a close, Richard Nixon would have the most unusual of summit meetings. Now the White House is no stranger to Presidents, Prime Ministers, General Secretaries, and various other foreign heads of State, it has even played host to Kings and Queens in its proud over 200 year history.  But on December 20, 1970, the White House got some royal treatment like no other in its history. That was the day a very special King rolled up , unannounced, with a handwritten letter , an an antique revolver in hand as a gift for the President. And, as with all things Elvis, they let the King of Rock and Roll in the building. Lord A Mighty, feel my temperature rising, Higher , higherIt's burning through to my soulGirl, girl , girl , girlYou gonna set me on fireMy brain is flamingI don't know which way to go....

Other than those who've been elected President, I'm not sure anyone in his generation has had a more remarkable political career than Haley Barbour. Running Mississippi for Nixon while he was still in college...ED of the MS GOP at a critical building phase in the 70s...battling a Senate Giant in his unsuccessful first race in '82...running the Reagan White House's political operation...chairing the RNC during the '94 GOP wave...2-term Governor...and starting what has become one of the most successful lobbying government affairs firms in the country. Great conversation hearing about Haley Barbour's rise from small town Mississippi to the highest corridors of political power. IN THIS EPISODEHow Haley Barbour got into politics “totally by fluke”…Running Mississippi for Nixon in '68…What made a young Haley Barbour gravitate to the Republican Party…The rise of Thad Cochran and Trent Lott…Haley Barbour's time in the early 70s as executive director of the Mississippi Republican Party…The story of Haley Barbour's lone political loss in the 1982 Senate race against longtime Dem incumbent John Stennis…Haley Barbour's rules for candidates and campaign managers…Haley Barbour's time running the political operation in the Reagan White House…Haley Barbour tells his favorite Jim Baker story…The connection between Haley Barbour and serial killer John Wayne Gacy…Why was Barbara Bush so angry at Haley Barbour in the '88 campaign?Why Haley Barbour turned down working out of the White House?The one time Ronald Reagan overruled Haley Barbour?The early days of the rise of Newt Gingrich…Haley Barbour beats two future US Senators to take over the Republican National Committee in 1993…Haley Barbour talks the GOP wave of 1994…Haley Barbour talks his 2003 Governor's campaign ousting a Democratic incumbent…How he overcame the “lobbyist” label in the Governor's race…Getting close to jumping in the 2012 presidential race…How Haley Barbour started one of DC's premier lobbying firms…Haley Barbour rules for being an effective lobbyist…AND…Spencer Abraham, John Ashcroft, Lee Atwater, James Baker, Lloyd Bentsen, Kirk Blalock, Remy Brim, Barbara Bush, Bob Calloway, Gil Carmichael, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton Mitch Daniels, Democrats for Eisenhower, Walt Disney, Bob Dole, James Eastland, Frank Fahrenkopf, Don Fierce, Gerald Ford, Kirk Fordice, Jim Free, Lanny Griffith, Mike Huckabee, Paul Johnson, Paul Laxalt, Ron Lewis, Zell Miller, Ronnie Musgrove, Lyn Nofziger, the OEB, Mike Parker, Heather Podesta, Tony Podesta, Scott Reed, Ed Rogers, Ed Rollins, Mitt Romney, George Shultz, Sam Skinner, Stu Spencer, John Sununu, Jim Thompson, George Wallace, Wendell Willkie, and MORE!

In Part 3 of the celebration of the life of George Shultz, we look back at one of the singular, major events of the Cold War in which George Shultz was a major participant.  For a couple of days in October of 1986, four men met and changed the direction of the world. The two leaders President Ronald Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev and their two chief diplomatic aids Eduard Shevardnadze and George Shultz met to have discussion about Arms Control. It was hastily called and had no real big agenda in place. It turned out to have a really big agenda.It saw the two leaders of the two Nuclear Super Powers start negotiating way out in front of where the career diplomats actually were and it was then and there that Gorbachev offered up the biggest most sweeping arms control proposal ever offered up in the history of negotiations. But Ronald Reagan turned it down to protect his Strategic Defense Initiative, basically a missile defense shield from outer space, often derided as a "Star Wars" pipe dream. Reykjavik was widely criticized and seen as a failure at the time, but it was where the groundwork was laid for the end of the Cold War and all the breakthroughs to come. Eventually the Soviet Union would be dissolved, the Berlin Wall would fall and the last act of Mikhail Gorbachev as the Premier of the Soviet Union, on Christmas Eve 1991, would be to call President Ronald Reagan's successor George H.W. Bush to tell him of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. And it all began at the Höfôi House in Reykjavik , Iceland. We relive that summit here in Part 3 of the look back at the remarkable life of George Shultz. 

In this second part in our celebration of the life of George Shultz,  we look at his many wise thoughts on the problems our country and world face today, and how he felt they needed to be addressed. He tells stories from his time in public office as both a cabinet member,  an education leader, and his career in the private sector. There is a lot to learn and a lot we can all be thankful he shared with us through his writings and interviews.  This is George Shultz unfiltered, with little commentary, in his own words. It was a remarkable , long  life, extraordinarily well lived. 

"He was a gentleman of honor and ideas, dedicated to public service and respectful debate, even into his 100th year on Earth. That's why multiple presidents, of both political parties, sought his counsel. I regret that, as president, I will not be able to benefit from his wisdom, as have so many of my predecessors." - President Joe BidenGeorge Shultz died on February 6, 2021 at the age of 100. He lived an extraordinary life, advising many Presidents and political figures and serving in four cabinet positions, something only one other person in history has done. Over the next 3 episodes, we look at this remarkable man who is one of my  political heroes. Here in part one, we look at his service to two of America's greatest chief executives ; Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.  As Nixon's Secretary of Labor, Office of Management and Budget and Treasury, He helped guide Nixon's work dealing with labor  and civil rights issues. He played a strong hand in developing the Philadelphia Plan and in desegregating the southern Public School System, a challenge Nixon undertook two decades after the Brown vs the Board of Education Supreme Court Decision had actually been made. It was Richard Nixon not Dwight Eisenhower, nor John F. Kennedy, nor Lyndon B. Johnson who actually made sure it became a reality, and it was George Shultz who made it happen. He tells that story here. This episode also goes through many of the major events of the Reagan years where as Reagan's chief diplomat, George Shultz helped shepherd the end of the Cold War. We have two more parts to the George Shultz remembrance scheduled they are :Part 2 "The Wisdom of the man"&Part 3 " Reagan at Reykjavik" 

An excerpt from the 2/8 SIEPR event featuring Vivian Lee, author of "The Long Fix: Solving America's Health Care Crisis with Strategies that Work for Everyone." Also, SIEPR's Mark Duggan remembers George Shultz. Details at https://siepr.stanford.edu/events/associates-meeting-dr-vivian-s-lee-long-fix-rethinking-business-model-health-care

On my first show for MSNBC last June, I sat down with CIA Director Mike Pompeo, now President Trump's nominee for secretary of state. A quick read of the transcript will reassure any fair-minded person that a much-needed infusion of talent and presidential trust is on the way. First in his class at West Point and an editor of the Harvard Law Review, Pompeo got key experience in the ways of the Washington swamp at the law firm Williams & Connolly before going as far as possible from it to Wichita to launch a successful career in business and then Congress. Most importantly, Pompeo agrees with Trump's priorities and understands that his job is to serve Trump's agenda, not create one of his own. Like George Shultz with President Reagan and Henry Kissinger with President Nixon, the boss needs a trusted right arm, not a distant figure of uncertain commitment to core presidential goals. Good news Pompeo at State!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Former United States Secretary of State George Shultz shares the importance President Reagan felt with telling stories in this episode of Reagan Retrospective.