Podcasts about imperial germany

Robert walks Blake Wexler through the life and times of Carl Schmitt, a legal scholar born in Imperial Germany who would come to create the blueprint for how fascist movements could destroy liberal democracy from within. (2 Part Series)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Bolsheviks had made their revolution promising Peace, Land, and Bread. But peace meant a deal with Germany, which could bring British and French subversion of their nascent revolution. How could Lenin get out of this impossible dilemma? By sending Trotsky to lead the negotiations with Imperial Germany. Did Trotsky go rogue? Was he following … Continue reading "World War Civ 45: Russia and Germany make peace at Brest-Litovsk"

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler's Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. 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

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler's Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler's Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/military-history

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler's Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler's Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. 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

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler's Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix.

On the evening of April 2, 1917, President Woodrow Wilson stood before an excited Congress and Gallery, and asked that the nation declare war on Imperial Germany. In a strange way, this was the penultimate Wilson moment. He would ask – already knowing the answer – the nation to follow his leadership into a war to make the world safe for democracy. We are told that he had spent the night before in a small office of the east Wing, pouring out his soul to a friend who also happened to be a newspaper reporter. He was terrified for the nation, that he believed that he war would destroy the United States as a free nation. That the Constitution would be shredded to pieces and the very freedoms on which it had been founded and stood would be erased. Standing before Congress, and the nation, he showed no signs of such concerns or fears. To thunderous applause and joyous acclaim, he would tell the Congress that “We are the champions of the rights of mankind.” The nation would rally behind his words and go “over there.” There would be some resistance, but in the end, it was his vision and his call for action that sent things forward. Or… was it his vision?  In any case, almost half a million American would never come home. LINKS What Price Glory (1926 – Full Film) What Price Glory (1957 Full Film) Phillip Dru: Administrator (Full book) --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/plausibly-live/message

Interview with ‘Agent of the Iron Cross' author, Historian - Bill Mills The Black Spy Podcast, Season 13, Episode 0006   This week's Black Spy Podcast looks at a little known part of secret intelligence history of WW1, where Imperial Germany covertly attacked the USA to prevent it supporting The British, French and Russian Empires in the WW1; even prior to the USA's entry into WW1 on the side of the British et'al in 1917. In listening to my exclusive podcast with Bill Mills, listeners will get to hear the astounding story of this German WW1 and indeed pre WW1 activity and the world wide scope of such intelligence operations. Listeners will also hear how multifaceted intelligence operations are and Carlton lets listeners note that the overarching and wide ranging spread of espionage, subversive and sabotage operations are no less wide ranging in today's modern world. Finally, one can also learn from this fantastic episode, how susceptible even the most supposedly stable countries are, to fractures and fissures being sown in their societies when grievances are highlighted by bad or even righteous actors. So once again the Black Spy Podcast aims to attempt to answer the direction we are travelling in as a nation, culture and indeed species to assess the dangers we might all inherit. This is another Black Spy Podcast episode that goes where other media outlets tend not to tread or don't even consider assessing. Please don't forget to subscribe, to never to miss a Black Spy Podcast episode. To contact Firgas Esack of the DAPS Agency go to Linked In To contact Carlton King by utilising any of the following: To donate - Patreon.com/TheBlackSpyPodcast Email: carltonking2003@gmail.com Facebook: The Black Spy Podcast Facebook: Carlton King Author Twitter@Carlton_King Instagram@carltonkingauthor   To read Carlton's Autobiography: “Black Ops – The incredible true story of a (Black) British secret agent” Click the link below: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/BO1MTV2GDF/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_WNZ5MT89T9C14CB53651 Carlton is available for speaking events. For this purpose use the contact details above.

Dimitri and Khalid continue their multi-episode journey into the actually existing history of the geographic region known for millennia as Palestine, and the actually existing people who inhabited it under (mostly) uninterrupted Ottoman rule from 1516 to 1918. Part 6: Ottoman Palestine Before The Deluge, 1900-1913 Herzl's roundabout assimilationism and building a new Europe for Jews in the middle east, parallels to the Young Turk quest towards Europeanization, lighting your torch with someone else's flame… Swirling precursors to World War 1, the expanding economic and military relationship between Imperial Germany and the Ottomans, the Damascus-Medina-Hejaz Railway line, British fears about German-Ottoman friendship, the German military mission to Istanbul, grooming the future Young Turks, simmering Arab-Ottoman tensions, government surveys of the Palestinian population, and dracular parallels between Herzl and the 17th c. Ottoman Jewish false messiah Shabbatai Zevi. For access to premium episodes, the full SJ back catalog, show notes, and the Grotto of Truth Discord, subscribe to the Al-Wara' Frequency at patreon.com/subliminaljihad.

Last time we spoke about the Red Bearded Honghuzi Bandits. Yes Manchuria and many parts of China proper have had a bandit problem going back to ancient times. The borderlands between the Russian Empire and Qing Dynasty proved to be the perfect grounds for bandits to evolve. The Honghuzi were getting larger, more organized and certain leaders amongst them would have long lasting impacts on the history of China. Such names that come to mind are Zhang Zuolin and the Dogmeat General Zhang Zongchang. Such forces were incorporated officially into the Qing military to thwart other bandit groups and eventually to harass the Russians or Japanese in conflict looming on the horizon. Everything seems to be hot in Manchuria, Russian has full on invaded her and is reluctant to drag her troops out. There are those unhappy with this circumstance and they will soon make themselves heard loud and clear.    #73 The Yellow Peril and a War in the East   Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. The Boxer Rebellion is over. The Russo-Chinese War in Manchuria is over. Order had been restored to Beijing and in Manchuria things were significantly quieted down. Now the other nations of the 8 nation alliance had their hands full dealing with the expedition against Beijing and they sort of turned a blind eye to what was a side conflict in Manchuria. But when things were settling down and 177,000 Russian forces had more or less invaded and were occupying Manchuria, well a lot of eyeballs bulged. Britain and Japan sought common cause, both had significant investments in the Asia-Pacific. For example Britain had Weihaiwei and was literally staring down at the Russians over in Port Arthur and Dalien. Japan had been slighted by the triple intervention by Russia, Germany and France, losing her acquisitions of Port Arthur and Dalien to the Russians. Manchuria was always seen as a buffer zone to the Japanese, she now hand a toehold in Korea and such large Russian activity in Manchuria was very threatening. Let us not forget the entire war between the Qing dynasty and Japan over Korea, to a lesser extent also had Russian as a 4th party. Russia did meddle in Korea and continuously antagonized Japan. Thus with common cause Japan and Britain formed an alliance on January 30th of 1902. In response Russia and France formed their own on March 16th of 1902. The alliances basically worked to thwart any other great powers from getting involved in a potential war between Japan and Russia.  Now Russia also agreed to the rest of the great powers that she would gradually withdraw her forces from Manchuria. It was to be rolled out in 3 periods of 6 months. The first phase saw southwest Manchuria evacuated and returned to China, but when it came to the second phase, suddenly Russia was making demands for concessions to the Qing dynasty.  Britain, Japan and the US protested the demands and this bolstered China to reject them. Now turned back the clock a bit there was another sticky situation. When chaos was erupting in Korea, King Gojong ran to the Russians for protection for over two years. This turned the nations favor towards the Russians over the Chinese and Japanese. Russia seized this opportunity to strengthen her forces in defense of her legation in Korea, and this action was met with actions taken up by Japan. Japanese and Russian officials met and this was the result verbatim: A further agreement between Russia and Japan had been signed in Tokyo on 25 April 1898. The agreement contained three understandings: The independence of Korea was assured; neither country would interfere in Korea's domestic affairs. There would be no appointment of military or civil advisers without discussion with the interested parties. Russia agreed not to hinder Japan's development of trade with Korea.  Aside from this the Russians of course wanted to seize as much as they could. A Russian-Korean bank was formed in 1897, and a timber cutting contract was given to Russian industrialists in the Yalu river area. In 1901, Tsar Nicholas II told Prince Henry of Prussia, "I do not want to seize Korea but under no circumstances can I allow Japan to become firmly established there. That will be a “casus belli." The contract only came into effect when the Manchurian railway projects were kicking off and when able bodies were around, which came about during the occupation of Manchuria. In april of 1903 Russians acquired some land and established a fort at Yongampo near the mouth of the Yalu river. America and Japan received similar concessions in the region. The Japanese began receiving reports, indicating Port Arthur was being heavily stocked with supplies and a large body of Russian troops were advancing across the Liaodong Peninsula towards Korea. Thus from the Japanese point of view it looked clear Russia was not honoring her agreements. On July 28th of 1903, the Japanese ambassador at St Petersburg was instructed to make it known to the Russians, the 7 demands they made to China was not seen as a “relaxation of her hold on Manchuria but rather a consolidation” Two days later, Russian Admiral Alexeiev was appointed Viceroy of the Far East. Alexeiev would hold supreme power to exercises diplomacy between Russian East Asia and her neighbors as well as command the Russian military and naval forces in the east. From the Japanese point of view, a permanent Russian occupation of Manchuria would be prejudicial over her own security and interests. It would also threaten Korea, which was her sphere of interest, one she was not looking to share. Russia agreed to consider drawing up a new treaty. On August 12th of 1903 a draft was presented at St Petersburg, but in the meantime Russia was strengthening her position in the far east. This tense situation kept going, until January 13th of 1904 when Japan offered to recognize Manchuria as being outside her sphere of interest, if Russia would agree Korea was Japan's sphere of interest. It was to be blunt a very fair deal. Japan requested an early reply to the proposal, but by February 4th of 1904 no reply was forthcoming. Two days later the Japanese ambassador, Mr. Kurino called upon the Russian foreign minister, Count Lamsdorf to take his leave. Kurino explained to Lamsdorf that the Japanese government had decided to adopt some “independent action” deeming it necessary to defend its established rights and legitimate interests. Basically Japan's patience had come to an end. The Russian ambassador to Tokyo, Baron Rosen, had continuously sent warnings to his superiors in St Petersburg that if they continued to corner Japan, she would most certainly fight them. Such sentiment was shared by War Minister General Kuroptkin who resigned in a state of exasperation some months earlier. Tsar Nicholas II did not want a war, but he was continuously assured by his advisers, Japan was not strong enough to fight them. When Mr. Kurino took his leave, the immediate signal was made to Admiral Alexeiev, who was in Tokyo at the time. The new viceroy saw with his own eyes evidence of Japanese mobilization and he advised St Petersburg accordingly. The Japanese foreign ministry confirmed their government had run out of patience. However all of this was taken to be a bluff. It has been theorized Alexeiev was simply not averse to a war with a country he certainly deemed inferior to his own. It is also theorized Tsar Nicholas II probably believed if a war would to break out it would be a short and victorious one, and perhaps such an event could distract the tide of revolution hitting his nation, the people of Russia were not happy anymore about the Romanov rule. Funny enough, all of these talks, deceptions and plans were to take shape in China. The Chinese were literally never even thought of or spoken to, and soon a war would literally occur within their borders against their will. How did this all come about? It might sound a bit funny, but a large reason the Russo-Japanese War would occur would simply be a result of, pardon my french, shit talking by one Kaiser Wilhelm II. When Kaiser Wilhelm I died on March 9th of 1888, Germany fell to Frederick III who died of throat cancer only 99 days after taking the reins. On June 15th, a 29 year old Kaiser Wilhelm II took the throne. Now for those of you who don't know, Otto von Bismarck, the man who unified Germany was during the late 19th century one of the greatest political players in the world. Bismarck had an incredible understanding of the balance of power theory and studied all the most powerful nations national interests. He brokered international deals using his knowledge to increase Germany's standing in global politics and he also in many ways designed a system of international alliances to thwart a global war….which ironically would in many ways cause ww1. If you want to know more specifically about this by the way, check out Kings and Generals alliances that caused WW1, I wrote that script and its a fascinating story. Dan Carlin famously referred to Bismarcks work as creating a giant hand grenade, that if the pin got pulled out, only Bismarck understood how to put it back in. While Bismarck was in power things were pretty good, but he was such a colossal figure, that when the young Kaiser came into power, many of his advisers suggested he was being overshadowed by Bismarck. Kaiser Wilhelm II listening to his advisers, sought to stop Bismarck from taking the quote en quote “day to day” administration. Conflicts began to arise between the two men. Wilhelm did not understand the complexities of Bismarcks international relations and saw him as far too peaceful. Wilhelm gradually fell under the influence of his military leaders to the dismay of Bismarck who thought the Kaiser would lead them swiftly into a war with a nation like Russia. In 1890 Bismarck resigned under pressure from Wilhelm II and other German leaders, and as Dan Carlin would say, now the grenade he created was set to go off. Now when the new Kaiser venturing into international relations, he was deeply influenced by a ideological concept that he would use as a tool to coerce international players to act out. The concept is known as the “yellow peril” “le Peril Jaune” as coined by Russian sociologist Jacques Novikow in the late 19th century. In essence the yellow peril was a racist ideology that held asians to be subhuman, like apes and monkeys, but also that as a racial group should they unite, they would threaten what was thought to be the superior race of the day, whites. Basically the idea was that if all the nations of asia were to unite, they could retaliate against the White nations who were at the time colonizing or forcing unequal treaties upon them. There was also a religious element to it, that Christianity was under threat from the hoards of the east.  Now back to Wilhelm II, one of his advisers was the diplomat Max von Brandt who advised him that Imperial Germany had major colonial interests in China. The Triple Intervention that Germany endorsed was justified by the Kaiser under the guise it was to thwart what he began calling “die Gelbe Gefahr / the yellow peril”. The Kaiser began a propaganda campaign using the famous allegorical lithograph “Peoples of Europe, Guard your Most Sacred Possessions” created in 1895 by Hermann Knackfuss. You can google the image. The lithograph portrays the European monarchs with Germany as the leader of Europe personified by a “prehistoric warrior-goddesses being led by the Archangel Michael against the yellow peril from the east. The east is seen as a dark cloud of smoke which rests eerily upon a calm Buddha, wreathed in flame”. The imagery is very apparent, white and christianity is under threat from asian and their eastern religions. This type of ideology goes all the way back to Ancient Greece and Persia, its the age old west vs east stuff. Today you would call this sort of talk, a race war. Now you are probably asking, ok this leader of Germany is just a racist dude, how does this cause a war between Russia and Japan? This story is rather hilarious and hard to believe, but in summary, the Kaiser used the ideology to trick his cousin into war.  For those unaware, Kaiser Wilhelm II was first cousins with King Geoerge V of Britain,  to Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, to Queens Marie of Romania, Maud of Norway, Victoria Eugene of Spain, and even the woman he would eventually marry, the Empress of Russia. Now the Germany presented to Wilhelm was involved in some alliances. I mentioned Britain and Japan had an alliance and France and Russian had an alliance. Wilhelm and his advisers sought to increase Germany's stature. Wilhelm believed that if Russia went to war with Japan, it would break up the Franco-Russian alliance and with no one else to turn to, Russia would seek an alliance with Germany. Wilhelms reasoning was that France was not supporting of Russians expansion into asia and such aggressive actions like going to war with Japan would be highly disapproved by France. The French Premier Maurice Rouvier publicly declared that the Franco-Russian alliance applied only in Europe and not Asia and that if Japan and Russia went to war, France would remain neutral. Such rhetoric seemed to prove Wilhelms beliefs. Germany meanwhile felt threatened by Britain and had embarked on what was known as the Tirpitz Plan in the late 1890s. The Tirpitz plan was Germany's plan to achieve world power status through naval power, but the world's greatest navy of course was Britain at the time. What essentially happened was Germany challenging Britain to an arms race in the form of naval warship building programs. Everything the Kaiser pursued during the late 19th century was what was called “Weltpolitik / world politics” which essentially was just Germany's imperialistic foreign policy to become a global power. Wilhelm and his advisers were playing world politics to weaken rivals and strengthen Germany plain and simple.  So Wilhelm believes he can break the French-Russian alliance and squeeze himself in Frances place if he can get the Russians to go to war with Japan who just happened to be allied to Germany's main rival, Britain. Some real game of thrones stuff here. Wilhelm also believed if Germany could pull this off, France would be compelled to join them, forming a triple alliance against Britain and Japan so they could all pursue their expansionist policies in places like Asia. There was also the belief pulling this off would pull Russia away from the Balkans which was a huge source of tension with Germany's main ally Austro-Hungary. Thats all fine and dandy, but how does Wilhelm get his cousin Tsar Nicholas to go to war with the Japanese, here comes the yellow peril.  Starting in 1895, Kaiser Wilhelm began using the Yellow Peril ideology to portray Germany as the great defender of the west against the barbarism of the east. But then all of a sudden Wilhelm began sending personal letters to his cousin Nicholas praising him as the quote “savior of the white races” and began urging him to take a more hardened approach to Asia. The letters between the two have been referred to as the “willy-nicky” letters, consisting of 75 messages sent back and forth between 1895-1914. I wont list them all of course but lets take a peak at how Wilhelm wrote to his cousin. In 1895 Wilhelm wrote this from Kaltenbronn Schwarzwald. I will paraphrase of course there's a ton of fluff. Dearest Nicky, I thank you sincerely for the excellent way in which you initiated the combined action of Europe[27] for the sake of its interests against Japan. It was high time that energetic steps were taken, and will make an excellent impression in Japan as elsewhere. It shows to evidence how necessary it is that we should hold together, and also that there is existent a base of common interests upon which all European nations may work in joint action for the welfare of all as is shown by the adherence of France to us two. May the conviction that this can be done without touching a nations honour, take root more and more firmly, then no doubt the fear of war in Europe will dissipate more and more. The kind and most valuable messages which you sent me through Osten Sacken[28] by Count Eulenburgs transmission in Vienna have given me a signal proof of your loyalty and openness towards me. I shall certainly do all in my power to keep Europe quiet and also guard the rear or Russia so that nobody shall hamper your action towards the Far East! For that is clearly the great task of the future for Russia to cultivate the Asian Continent and to defend Europe from the inroads of the Great Yellow race. In this you will always find me on your side ready to help you as best I can. You have well understood that call of Providence and have quickly grasped the moment; it is of immense political and historical value and much good will come of it. I shall with interest await the further development of our action and hope that, just as I will gladly help you to settle the question of eventual annexations[29] of portions of territory for Russia, you will kindly see that Germany may also be able to acquire a Port somewhere were it does not "gêne" you. You can see how Wilhelm is egging on his cousin about how Germany will have his back if he were to be bolder in Asia. Also the cute end bit about Germany acquiring some ports.  In 1898 for a New Years letter Wilhelm sent this Dearest Niky May this New Year be a happy one for you dear Allx and the whole of your house and country. May the plans, which you mature be fullfilled for the wellfare of your people. Henry's mission^ is one of the steps I have taken for the help and countenance of your lofty Ideals—without which no sovereign can exist—in promoting civilisation I. e. Christianity in [41] the Far East! Will you kindly accept a drawing I have sketched for you, showing the Symbolising figures of Russia and Germany as sentinels at the Yellow Sea for the proclaiming of the Gospel of Truth and Light in the East. I drew the sketch in the Xmas week under the blaze of the lights of theXmas trees!  Here Wilhelm is pressing upon the religious aspect and is basically flattering Nicholas. Again in 1898 Wilhelm wrote Dearest Nicky I must congratulate you most heartily at the successful issue of your action at Port Arthur ; we two will make a good pair of sentinels at the entrance of the gulf of Petchili, who will be duly respected especially by the Yellow Ones ! I think the way you managed to soothe the feelings of the "fretful Japs"by the masterly arrangement at Korea a remarkably fine piece of diplomacy and a great show of foresight; which Is apt to show what a boon it was that by your great journey,^ you were able to study the Question of the Far East locally and are now morally speaking the Master of Peking! Fretful Japs indeed In 1902 we get probably the most important letter involving the yellow peril Dear Nicky This is the more necessary as/certain symptoms in the East seems to show that Japan is becoming a rather restless customer and that the situation necessitates all coolness and decision of the Peace Powers. The news of the attachment of the Japanese General Yamai^—former leader of the Jap. troops in China—to the Legation at Peking in order to take in hand the reorganisation of the Chinese Army—i.e. for the unavowed object of driving every other foreigner out of China—is very serious. 20 to 30 Million of trained Chinese helped by half a dozen Jap. Divisions and led by fine, undaunted Christian hating Jap. Officers, is a future to be con- templated not without anxiety; and not impossible. In fact it is the coming into reality of the *'Yellow Peril" which I depicted some years ago, and for which engraving I was laughed at by the greater mass of the People for my graphic depiction of it ... Your devoted friend and cousin, Willy, Admiral of the Atlantic".  And there it is, an army of millions of Chinese led by Japanese officers, the yellow peril. So for years Wilhelm egged on his cousin, making him believe he was this savior of the white race, holding the yellow hoard back from sweeping over Europe. Wilhelm also made sure to leave ambiguous ideas that Germany had Russians back, that if war came and let's say a nation like Britain jumped into the mix, Germany would jump in too. Arguable if there was any reality behind these claims. Now back to the situation in the far east, King Gojong found his nation stuck between two tigers again, this time it was Japan and Russia. He believed the key to the issue was Manchuria and sought for Korea to remain as neutral as possible so she could hope to preserve her independence, I would saw independence with finger quotes. Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to St Petersburg, Hu Weide was receiving reports from Beijing on whether Russia or Japan were likely to win such a war and how it would favor China. It was argued it was in China's interest for Japan to win, because a Japanese victory would likely breakdown Russians stronghold on Manchuria and perhaps China could wrestle it all back in. China decided in December of 1903 to remain neutral if war came, because while she knew Japan was the only one in the far east capable of pushing Russia out, she also did not know what Japan's ambitions might be in Manchuria.  In early 1904 negotiations continued between Russia and Japan, but like I mentioned earlier Japan gradually figured out Russia was not being serious. This was more than likely due to an infamous message sent by Wilhelm to Nicholas in December of 1903.  Since 97—Kiaochow—we have never left Russia in any doubt that we would cover her back in Europe, in case she decided to pursue a bigger policy in the Far East that might lead to military complications (with the aim of relieving our eastern border from the fearful pressure and threat of the massive Russian army!). Whereupon, Russia took Port Arthur and trusting us, took her fleet out of the Baltic, thereby making herself vulnerable to us by sea. In Danzig 01 and Reval 02, the same assurance was given again, with result that entire Russian divisions from Poland and European Russia were and are being sent to the Far East. This would not had happened if our governments had not been in agreement! Nicholas for his part was prepared to compromise with Japan, but the incessant letters from Wilhelm egging him on as a coward for thinking about compromising gradually broke the Tsar. The Kaiser wrote this: undertaking the protection and defence of the White Race, and with it, Christian civilization, against the Yellow Race. And whatever the Japs are determined to ensure the domination of the Yellow Race in East Asia, to put themselves at its head and organise and lead it into battle against the White Race. That is the kernel of the situation, and therefore there can be very little doubt about where the sympathies of all half-way intelligent Europeans should lie. England betrayed Europe's interests to America in a cowardly and shameful way over the Panama Canal question, so as to be left in 'peace' by the Yankees. Will the 'Tsar' likewise betray the interests of the White Race to the Yellow as to be 'left in peace' and not embarrass the Hague tribunal too much?. Nicholas replied he still sought peace, and Wilhelm replied in telegram “oh you innocent angel, this is the language of an innocent angel. But not that of a White Tsar!” Regardless of the Tsar's feelings, Japan was firmly under the belief Russia was not serious about seeking a peaceful solution to their dispute over Manchuria and Korea. When Japan proposed recognizing Manchuria was Russia's sphere of influence if Russia would respect their sphere of influence over Korea, the Russia counter proposal was basically, no, Russia would retain Manchuria and Korea would be open game.  Potential diplomatic resolutions between the two nations had thus failed. Historians generally argue it was the fault of Nicholas II who pushed his administration to give no ground. Why he acted this way though has two major arguments, one I have highlighted, the egging on by the Kaiser, but there was another element at play. The Russian people were frankly fed up with the royal family, the people were looking for change. To start a war and rile up patriotism could have been an attempt to quell the Russian people from revolutionary actions and in retrospect it certainly seems the case. The Tsar's advisers despite being hawkish did not seek a war with Japan, they simply wanted to bully what they thought was a weaker nation into submission. Because the reality was, Manchuria was far, the trans siberian railway was not complete, moving troops and provisions such a distance was a colossal task.  Japan performed a large scale study of the Russian power in Manchuria. The Japanese had been secretly surveying and mapping as far as east of Lake Baikal. In 1904 the Japanese had 380,000 active and reserve army forces, 200,000 in the 2nd reserve, another 50,000 in conscription reserve and 220,000 trained men of the national army, thus they could in theory toss 850,000 men into a conflict and by conscripting perhaps 4,250,000 who would all have to be trained taking time and money. Japan's effective strength was 257,000 infantry, 11,000 cavalry and 894 artillery pieces. They held 12 infantry divisions each containing 11,400 infantry, 430 cavalry and 36 guns a piece. Their troops received 12 months training, once the war started this would be cut to 6 months. Their artillery battalions held 3 batteries with both field and mountain guns ranging in caliber of 2.95 inches to 4.72 inches. Their infantry were equipped with a modern 1900 .256 inch magazine rifle that could fire 2000 yards but was effective at 300. Each soldier carried a knapsack, greatcoat and shelter tent. In their sacks were two days rations and entrenching tools. For machine guns they would receive Hotchkiss guns. The logistical system for the Japanese would be much better than the Russians. They had a series of lines of support. The soldiers carried two days rations, with echelons of transports that carried provisions behind them. Each division had its own transport battalion, including an ambulance train to deal with casualties. Chinese carts, Chinese and Korean coolies would all be paid premium prices for logistical aid. The Japanese would buy local foodstuff from the Koreans and Chinese at premium prices to earn the local populaces support over the Russians. For the Russians their army stood roughly at 4.5 million, but only 6 of the 25 European army corps would play an active role in the far east. By February of 1904 the Russians had roughly 60,000 troops, 3000 cavalry and 164 guns posted at Vladivostok, Harbin and Port Arthur. By Mid february this would be increased to 95,000; with 45,000 at Vladivostok, 8000 at Harbin, 9000 in Haicheng; 11,000 near the Yalu and 22,000 around Port Arthur. The Russian had the European 1st, 4th, 8th, 10th, 16th and 17th army corps each numbering 28,000 rifles and 112 guns. Alongside these were 7 Siberian corps. While the Russians held the advantage in numbers, the trans siberian was not complete and the route going around Lake Baikal formed a massive delay. Lake Baikal is basically the size of Switzerland, around 386 miles long. Thus the forces in Manchuria would be at the mercy of local foodstuffs for provisions, which meant they were competing with the Japanese to purchase them, while the Japanese had their own nations foodstuffs coming via sea transport, from Korea and of course within China. The Russian troops were armed with a .299 caliber rifles, but their training was lackluster and required all men to fire at short range on orders from superior officers. The upcoming war would catch the Russian gunners in the midst of a  re-equipment programme. A third of their guns were a new 3 inch quick firing gun with a range of 6000 yards, capable of battering the Japanese artillery. However the gunners training period was quite literally on the job. Thus many of the gunners were coming into the conflict with a new technology they had not even fired yet. Japan's population was then 46.5 million, Russia's 130 million. The Russian military opinion saw the Japanese “as little people who lived in paper houses…and wasted hours on flower arrangement and tea ceremonies”. However, Minister of War Kuropatkin visited Japan in 1903 and was impressed by their infantry and artillery, stating that they were equal to any European army, and advocated avoiding war with them. Russia's navy was much larger, but divided between the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea and the Pacific, whereas Japan's was concentrated in her home waters. By 1902, Russia began strengthening her Pacific squadron and, by the end of 1903, had 7 battleships, 7 cruisers, 25 destroyers and 27 smaller ships. The IJN (the Japanese Navy) consisted of 6 battleships, 10 cruisers, 40 destroyers and 40 smaller vessels. The Russian ships were a hotchpotch of differing types, armaments and speeds, with a varied amount of armor protection. The Japanese ships were nearly all British built, uniform and faster. Alcohol excess amongst Russian crews was a serious problem. Baltic crews spent the 6 months of winter ashore because the gulf of Finland froze and because of bureaucratic demand for uniformity. So did the crews of the Black Sea fleet. Thus, Russian sailors spent less time at sea and less time training. The Japanese navy under British instruction spent more time at sea, and trained intensively. Japanese sailors were literate, while most Russian sailors were not. These variables would come out to play when dealing with steam-driven warships, the most technologically advanced weapons of the day. At the outbreak of the conflict the Russian Far East fleet would have 7 battleships, 6 cruisers and 13 destroyers at Port Arthur. At Vladivostok were 4 first class cruisers, with a number of torpedo boats. At Chemulpo in Korea were the protected cruisers Varya and gunboat Koreyetz. A crucial component of the conflict would be commanding the sea ways. Both nations recognized this fact all too well. The Russian far east fleet was constrained from year the round training by being icebound in Vladivostok for 3 months of the year. Her fleet was also a ragtag bunch with different armaments, speed, armor and flexibility. Russia was dependent on foreign built ships, though she was fully capable of building her own. Russia had ships built from Britain, Germany, France and the US. The Russian navy was based on conscription at 7 years with 3 years of reserve.  The IJN combined fleet was led by Vice-Admiral Heihachiro Togo. The two divided squadrons of the Russian Pacific Fleet were commanded overall by Admiral Oskar Ludvig Stark. The Main Russian squadron was in Port Arthur and the other cruiser squadron was at Vladivostok under the command of Admiral Nikolai Skrydlov. Port Arthur offered some shore artillery battery defense, though it was underfunded due to divestments for the development of Dalny, and its dry dock capabilities were quite limited compared to that of Sasebo. The Russians were bluffing the Japanese while continuing the strengthen their position in the far east. But the Japanese would not wait for them to do so.   I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Kaiser Wilhelm II had egged his cousin Tsar Nicholas II into facing against the Empire of Japan. Little did the Russian Tsar know, but he was about to send his nation to their doom, for the Japanese had done their homework and were determined to rid Manchuria of the Russian menace

In the early 20th century, a vast tapestry of tensions - national, political, and social - hung heavily over Europe. It was a volatile era of conflicting interests and loyalties, waiting for a spark to ignite it. This spark came with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary, setting off a chain of events that spiraled into the devastating cataclysm of the First World War. At the epicenter of this chaos stood two formidable giants - Imperial Germany and Tsarist Russia, each yearning for control, dominance, and security. In a vast theatre of battles and bloodshed, one encounter would emerge as a cornerstone, a turning point that would change the course of the war and etch itself deeply into the annals of history - the Battle of Tannenberg. In the verdant, sprawling plains of East Prussia, armies prepared for a confrontation that would test their courage, resolve, and strategic genius. The tale of Tannenberg is a compelling story of bold decisions and tactical blunders, of strategic prowess and human frailty. It is a tale of leaders like Paul von Hindenburg, Erich Ludendorff, Alexander Samsonov, and Paul von Rennenkampf, whose destinies became entwined in this critical battle, their actions reverberating across time. In the ensuing chaos, an unexpected and decisive victory would tilt the scales, sending shockwaves throughout the entire theatre of war. The repercussions of Tannenberg were felt far beyond the blood-soaked fields of East Prussia, altering strategies, affecting morale, and setting the stage for political upheavals that would reshape the world. Journey with us as we step back into the tumultuous days of 1914, tracing the events from the bustling streets of Sarajevo, through the tense war offices in Berlin and St. Petersburg, to the misty, eerie quietude of the East Prussian landscape. Together, we'll retrace the paths of soldiers and generals, monarchs and commoners, as we weave our way through the captivating, poignant, and unforgettable narrative of the Battle of Tannenberg.

Link from the show:* On a Knife Edge: How Germany Lost the First World War* Leave a review on iTunesAbout my guest:I was always passionate about history. My elementary school teacher told my parents: "He will study history" - and she was right! I studied Modern and Medieval history, Italian and German literature at the Heinrich Heine Universität Duesseldorf and the Universita degli Studi di Napoli. I wrote my PhD thesis on the Prussian Minister of War and German Chief of Staff, General Erich v. Falkenhayn (1861-1922), one of Imperial Germany's key protagonists during the First World War. The PhD was funded by the Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation and my thesis was supervised by Wolfgang J. Mommsen.  After finishing my PhD and after a year as councellor in the German parliament (Deutscher Bundestag) I got funding for a major research project on international relations before 1914. The project run in close cooperation with Wolfgang Mommsen and was granted by the Fritz Thyssen Foundation, Cologne. The outcome was a large monograph entitled "The Triple Alliance and European Great Power Politics, 1881-1915" and several articles. I finished the project as a Feodor-Lynen scholar (a two years grant by the Alexander-von-Humboldt-Foundation) in Vienna, cooperating with Prof. Helmut Rumpler. I was awarded my "Habilitation" at the Heinrich-Heine-Universität Duesseldorf in 1999 and got there in 2003 a honorary professorship.I taught from 1999 to 2002 at the University of Duesseldorf. At the same time I won another major research grant by the Fritz-Thyssen-Foundation for research on Wilhelm II as Supreme Warlord during the First World War. The result - a 1100 pages edition of new sources - was published in 2005 by the Historical Commission of the Bavarian Academy of Science. I was offered in August 2002 a DAAD Professorship of Modern German History at Emory University in Atlanta which I gladly accepted. Among other things I organised a large international conference in 2004 on the outbreak of the First World War in 1914 which was opened by President Jimmy Carter.I left Atlanta in summer 2006 after accepting my current position at the University of Leeds. I organized several conferences in Leeds and created and am responsible for our Master program in "War and Strategy" which is running since 2016.  Get full access to Dispatches from the War Room at dispatchesfromthewarroom.substack.com/subscribe

‘The final cut – the coup de grace – entered Qian's heart, from which black blood the colour and consistency of melted malt sugar slid down the knife blade'In the eighty fifth episode of the Translated Chinese Fiction Podcast, we are experiencing the lacerating pains of Sandalwood Death, as dealt to us by Nobel literature prizewinner Mo Yan. It's time to rip Shandong Province apart in a rebellion for the songbooks. Weapon in hand, the Sun Wukong to my Yue Fei is translator Stefan Rusinov. We laugh, we brood, we hallucinate, and we shake our fists at the craven villain Yuan Shikai, all the while pondering: is torture an artform?-// NEWS ITEMS //A Record of My Battle with the Virus by Han Song, translated by Michael BerryXi Xi: Can We Say // a special issue on the recently late writerGu Long's Blood Parrot, translated by DeathbladeSCMP takes a look at the new prequel to The Wandering Earth-// WORD OF THE DAY //(喵 – miāo – meow)-// MENTIONED IN THE EPISODE //Gao Xingjian - another Han nobel lit prize winnerMo Yan's Life and Death Are Wearing Me OutJiaozhou, Imperial Germany's Shandong colonyStefan's previous TrChFic appearance, discussing Can Xue-// Handy TrChFic Links //Help Support TrChFic // Episode TranscriptsINSTAGRAM

The merchant vessel, Arc Integrity, is making its way to Europe, carrying a cargo of military supplies for Ukraine. Specifically, it is carrying Bradley Armored Fighting Vehicles. some are speculating that the Russians could legally attack this ship as it is known to be carrying military supplies. The situation is not unlike that which faced Imperial Germany in 1915-1917. Is unrestricted submarine warfare worth the risks? Meanwhile, if you think that the Emperor has no clothes, you are a fool. And you're better off just going along with the scam... --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/plausibly-live/message

Welcome back to another edition of "Serious TENGRIDOME", where Iggy and guests try to explore topics that lay beyond the scope of simple fight breakdowns. This time he's joined by friend of the site Simon Amorim and Haxxorized, the go-to person when you need someone to think real hard for the rest of the crew. The subject of discussion in this episode is the alarming prevalence of misogyny in the world of MMA, the frankly disgusting acceptance of domestic violence, and the seemingly inexhaustible energy with which MMA fans are willing to defend woman-beating pieces of shit. The hosts examine the modern masculinity grift that has so many frustrated young men flocking to it, the lies fed by reactionary weirdos to said young men, and the increasing toxicity of the fandom caused by the proliferation of the warped male ideal. Follow Iggy on Twitter: https://twitter.com/O5_Salamander Follow Haxx on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HaXxorIzed Follow Simon on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Muayjahideen Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FightSitedotcom Support us on Patreon: patreon.com/fightsite If you wish to help us find Iggy a new home, please give these posts a read: https://www.thefight-site.com/home/reader-notice-fight-site-staff-member-needs-help-urgently https://www.thefight-site.com/home/reader-notice-fundraiser-update Support Iggy on Ko-Fi: https://ko-fi.com/iggytfs

Mr. James Perloff joined The Two Mikes for a discussion of his work on the long history of the nefarious Counsel on Foreign Relations (CFR) and its allies. Formed in 1923 -- with the Federal Reserve already in place since 1913 -- the CFR worked with similar organizations in Europe, as well as the U.S. and European governments, to create America's current reality. Mr. Perloff accurately describes that reality by saying that "America is controlled by an oligarchy and its agenda, never by chance." Woodrow Wilson started the ball rolling in 1917 by unnecessarily taking the United States into a European war to save the British and French empires, and then, after the war, gave authoritarian government a domestic try by unleashing the Department of Justice to squash political dissent in the United States under the cover of the so-called "Red Scare". While this was occurring major U.S. bankers were loaning money to Lenin's Bolshevik government so that it could solidify its rule in Russia. This came after Imperial Germany had made sure that Lenin returned to Russia to promote revolution and Russia's withdrawal from the war, and later the British, Canadian, and U.S. governments helped Leon Trotsky get to Russia carrying a substantial sum of money. The next step was assigned to Franklin Roosevelt, who, as president, took the United States off the gold standard and confiscated gold from everyday Americans. Roosevelt next officially recognized the Soviet Union, and then successfully connived the United States into the European and Pacific Wars. Mr. Perloff provides a clear, comprehensive, and well-documented story of the fall of America into the hands of rich authoritarians (fascists?), a story that is still rapidly unfolding before the eyes of all Americans on a daily basis. James Perloff is author of The Shadows of Power, an exposé of the Council on Foreign Relations that has sold over 100,000 copies, and two books about the evidence against Darwin's theory of evolution, including Tornado in a Junkyard. He wrote for The New American magazine for nearly three decades. His 2013 book, Truth Is a Lonely Warrior, is a comprehensive primer on the New World Order, supplemented by his 2019 book, Thirteen Pieces of the Jigsaw. His latest book, published in 2020, is COVID-19 and the Agendas to Come, Red-Pilled. His website is jamesperloff.net and he is on Twitter as James Perloff. Sponsors Our Gold Guy: https://www.ourgoldguy.com EMP Shield: https://www.empshield.com/?coupon=twomikes www.TwoMikes.com

At the turn of the 20th century, Imperial Germany was a dominant force in thinking about military strategy with a focus on land warfare commensurate with its geography. Prussian strategists agreed with most of their French colleagues that war would involve mass armies, and that their strategy had to be offensive. Three Prussian strategists of land warfare were particularly influential in shaping the thinking that guided the Imperial German Army's conduct in the First World War: Colmar von der Goltz, Alfred von Schlieffen and Friedrich von Bernhardi. Controversial in different ways and rivals with one another, they nevertheless exerted a strong influence on the conduct of land warfare, and on thinking about harnessing society in total war in which anything was permitted (the primordial violence and hatred in Clausewitz's terms). In this episode of Talking Strategy, Professor Stig Förster from the University of Bern joins hosts Professor Beatrice Heuser and Paul O'Neill. Professor Förster discusses the controversies surrounding the German strategists, the horrors spawned by the ideas of von der Goltz and Bernhardi, and how war does not work to the timetable envisaged by von Schlieffen in his ‘Schlieffen Plan', which set out how Imperial Germany would fight in the First World War.

Mr. James Perloff joined The Two Mikes for a discussion of his work on the long history of the nefarious Counsel on Foreign Relations (CFR) and its allies. Formed in 1923 -- with the Federal Reserve already in place since 1913 -- the CFR worked with similar organizations in Europe, as well as the U.S. and European governments, to create America's current reality. Mr. Perloff accurately describes that reality by saying that "America is controlled by an oligarchy and its agenda, never by chance." Woodrow Wilson started the ball rolling in 1917 by unnecessarily taking the United States into a European war to save the British and French empires, and then, after the war, gave authoritarian government a domestic try by unleashing the Department of Justice to squash political dissent in the United States under the cover of the so-called "Red Scare". While this was occurring major U.S. bankers were loaning money to Lenin's Bolshevik government so that it could solidify its rule in Russia. This came after Imperial Germany had made sure that Lenin returned to Russia to promote revolution and Russia's withdrawal from the war, and later the British, Canadian, and U.S. governments helped Leon Trotsky get to Russia carrying a substantial sum of money. The next step was assigned to Franklin Roosevelt, who, as president, took the United States off the gold standard and confiscated gold from everyday Americans. Roosevelt next officially recognized the Soviet Union, and then successfully connived the United States into the European and Pacific Wars. Mr. Perloff provides a clear, comprehensive, and well-documented story of the fall of America into the hands of rich authoritarians (fascists?), a story that is still rapidly unfolding before the eyes of all Americans on a daily basis. James Perloff is author of The Shadows of Power, an exposé of the Council on Foreign Relations that has sold over 100,000 copies, and two books about the evidence against Darwin's theory of evolution, including Tornado in a Junkyard.   He wrote for The New American magazine for nearly three decades. His 2013 book, Truth Is a Lonely Warrior, is a comprehensive primer on the New World Order, supplemented by his 2019 book, Thirteen Pieces of the Jigsaw.His latest book, published in 2020, is COVID-19 and the Agendas to Come, Red-Pilled.His website is jamesperloff.net and he is on Twitter as James Perloff.“Listening to Two Mikes will make you smarter!”- Gov Robert L. Ehrlich, JrSponsors
Our Gold Guy: https://www.ourgoldguy.comEMP Shield: https://www.empshield.com/?coupon=twomikesMy Pillow: Support a true Patriot in Mike Lindell by ordering pillows and sheets. Use Promo Code TWOMIKES by calling 800-797-8492
www.TooMikes.com

In April of 1917 the US Government had a problem. It had just declared war on Imperial Germany, less than six months after re-electing President Wilson who's entire campaign theme was "He Kept Us Out of the War..." The problem wasn't the political flip-flop, but rather the fact that roughly a third of all American Citizens were either immigrants from or descended from immigrants from... you guessed it... Imperial Germany. Those American Citizens, including one who lived in Hollywood, were not convinced that this "War to Save Democracy" was anything other than a war to destroy their homelands and cultures. The President pondered what to do about the fact that support among the citizenry for this war was tepid, at best. He needed to whip up a war fighting spirit and furor that would carry Americans across the sea, to stand in Paris, and say those words, "Lafayette, nous sommes là!" (Lafayette, we are here!) Wilson's good friend and confidant, George Creel, had an idea. It was an idea to "propagate the faith" in the American version of the truth and get Americans fired up to take on the Germans. What was that idea? It would become known as... The Committee on Public Information. George Creel would go on to lead the effort to inform and coerce millions of American Citizens to support the Great War. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/plausibly-live/message

In April of 1917 the US Government had a problem. It had just declared war on Imperial Germany, less than six months after re-electing President Wilson who's entire campaign theme was "He Kept Us Out of the War..." The problem wasn't the political flip-flop, but rather the fact that roughly a third of all American Citizens were either immigrants from or descended from immigrants from... you guessed it... Imperial Germany. Those American Citizens, including one who lived in Hollywood, were not convinced that this "War to Save Democracy" was anything other than a war to destroy their homelands and cultures. The President pondered what to do about the fact that support among the citizenry for this war was tepid, at best. He needed to whip up a war fighting spirit and furor that would carry Americans across the sea, to stand in Paris, and say those words, "Lafayette, nous sommes là!" (Lafayette, we are here!) Wilson's good friend and confidant, George Creel, had an idea. It was an idea to "propagate the faith" in the American version of the truth and get Americans fired up to take on the Germans. What was that idea? It would become known as... The Committee on Public Information. George Creel would go on to lead the effort to inform and coerce millions of American Citizens to support the Great War.

On the eve of the First World War, the German Social Democratic Party (SPD) was the largest and most powerful socialist party in the world. German Social Democracy through British Eyes: A Documentary History, 1870–1914 (U Toronto Press, 2021) examines the SPD's rise using British diplomatic reports from Saxony, the third-largest federal state in Imperial Germany and the cradle of the socialist movement in that country. Rather than focusing on the Anglo-German antagonism leading to the First World War, the book peers into the everyday struggles of German workers to build a political movement and emancipate themselves from the worst features of a modern capitalist system: exploitation, poverty, and injustice. The archival documents, most of which have never been published before, raise the question of how people from one nation view people from another. The documents also illuminate political systems, election practices, and anti-democratic strategies at the local and regional levels, allowing readers to test hypotheses derived only from national-level studies. This collection of primary sources shows why, despite the inhospitable environment of German authoritarianism, Saxony and Germany were among the most important incubators of socialism. Lea Greenberg is a scholar of German studies with a particular focus on German Jewish and Yiddish literature and culture; critical gender studies; multilingualism; and literature of the post-Yugoslav diaspora. 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

On the eve of the First World War, the German Social Democratic Party (SPD) was the largest and most powerful socialist party in the world. German Social Democracy through British Eyes: A Documentary History, 1870–1914 (U Toronto Press, 2021) examines the SPD's rise using British diplomatic reports from Saxony, the third-largest federal state in Imperial Germany and the cradle of the socialist movement in that country. Rather than focusing on the Anglo-German antagonism leading to the First World War, the book peers into the everyday struggles of German workers to build a political movement and emancipate themselves from the worst features of a modern capitalist system: exploitation, poverty, and injustice. The archival documents, most of which have never been published before, raise the question of how people from one nation view people from another. The documents also illuminate political systems, election practices, and anti-democratic strategies at the local and regional levels, allowing readers to test hypotheses derived only from national-level studies. This collection of primary sources shows why, despite the inhospitable environment of German authoritarianism, Saxony and Germany were among the most important incubators of socialism. Lea Greenberg is a scholar of German studies with a particular focus on German Jewish and Yiddish literature and culture; critical gender studies; multilingualism; and literature of the post-Yugoslav diaspora. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

On the eve of the First World War, the German Social Democratic Party (SPD) was the largest and most powerful socialist party in the world. German Social Democracy through British Eyes: A Documentary History, 1870–1914 (U Toronto Press, 2021) examines the SPD's rise using British diplomatic reports from Saxony, the third-largest federal state in Imperial Germany and the cradle of the socialist movement in that country. Rather than focusing on the Anglo-German antagonism leading to the First World War, the book peers into the everyday struggles of German workers to build a political movement and emancipate themselves from the worst features of a modern capitalist system: exploitation, poverty, and injustice. The archival documents, most of which have never been published before, raise the question of how people from one nation view people from another. The documents also illuminate political systems, election practices, and anti-democratic strategies at the local and regional levels, allowing readers to test hypotheses derived only from national-level studies. This collection of primary sources shows why, despite the inhospitable environment of German authoritarianism, Saxony and Germany were among the most important incubators of socialism. Lea Greenberg is a scholar of German studies with a particular focus on German Jewish and Yiddish literature and culture; critical gender studies; multilingualism; and literature of the post-Yugoslav diaspora. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

On the eve of the First World War, the German Social Democratic Party (SPD) was the largest and most powerful socialist party in the world. German Social Democracy through British Eyes: A Documentary History, 1870–1914 (U Toronto Press, 2021) examines the SPD's rise using British diplomatic reports from Saxony, the third-largest federal state in Imperial Germany and the cradle of the socialist movement in that country. Rather than focusing on the Anglo-German antagonism leading to the First World War, the book peers into the everyday struggles of German workers to build a political movement and emancipate themselves from the worst features of a modern capitalist system: exploitation, poverty, and injustice. The archival documents, most of which have never been published before, raise the question of how people from one nation view people from another. The documents also illuminate political systems, election practices, and anti-democratic strategies at the local and regional levels, allowing readers to test hypotheses derived only from national-level studies. This collection of primary sources shows why, despite the inhospitable environment of German authoritarianism, Saxony and Germany were among the most important incubators of socialism. Lea Greenberg is a scholar of German studies with a particular focus on German Jewish and Yiddish literature and culture; critical gender studies; multilingualism; and literature of the post-Yugoslav diaspora. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

On the eve of the First World War, the German Social Democratic Party (SPD) was the largest and most powerful socialist party in the world. German Social Democracy through British Eyes: A Documentary History, 1870–1914 (U Toronto Press, 2021) examines the SPD's rise using British diplomatic reports from Saxony, the third-largest federal state in Imperial Germany and the cradle of the socialist movement in that country. Rather than focusing on the Anglo-German antagonism leading to the First World War, the book peers into the everyday struggles of German workers to build a political movement and emancipate themselves from the worst features of a modern capitalist system: exploitation, poverty, and injustice. The archival documents, most of which have never been published before, raise the question of how people from one nation view people from another. The documents also illuminate political systems, election practices, and anti-democratic strategies at the local and regional levels, allowing readers to test hypotheses derived only from national-level studies. This collection of primary sources shows why, despite the inhospitable environment of German authoritarianism, Saxony and Germany were among the most important incubators of socialism. Lea Greenberg is a scholar of German studies with a particular focus on German Jewish and Yiddish literature and culture; critical gender studies; multilingualism; and literature of the post-Yugoslav diaspora. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/british-studies

The "Eulenberg Affair," a series of media scandals about homosexual behavior at the highest levels of the German Imperial court, dragged on in the press for years as it made and broke careers in journalism, sexology, and the court while helping define both Imperial Germany's relationship to masculinity and the emerging homosexual emancipation movements. Plus drag ballet, Wagnerists, extremely racist paintings, songs about roses, and moustaches with names. ----more---- SOURCES: SOURCES: Robert Beachy, Gay Berlin: Birthplace of a Modern Identity (New York: Vintage, 2014) Miranda Carter, “What Happens When a Bad-Tempered, Distractible Doofus Runs an Empire?,” The New Yorker, June 6, 2018, https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/what-happens-when-a-bad-tempered-distractible-doofus-runs-an-empire Norman Domeier, “The Homosexual Scare and the Masculinization of German Politics before World War I,” Central European History 47, no. 4 (2014): 737–59 Norman Domeier, “Scandal & Science – The Power of Sexology in the Eulenburg Affair, 1906-1909,” n.d., http://www.hist.ceu.hu/conferences/graceh/abstracts/domeier_norman.pdf Martin B. Duberman, Jews, Queers, Germans: A Novel/History, Seven Stories Press first edition (New York ; Oakland: Seven Stories Press, 2017) John C. G. Röhl, The Kaiser and His Court: Wilhelm II and the Government of Germany, trans. Terence F. Cole, 1st ed. (Cambridge University Press, 1994) Alex Ross, Wagnerism: Art and Politics in the Shadow of Music (New York: Picador Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2021) Klaus Theweleit, Male Fantasies, Theory and History of Literature, v. 22-23 (Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press, 1987). Our intro music is Arpeggia Colorix by Yann Terrien, downloaded from WFMU's Free Music Archive and distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Our outro music is by DJ Michaeloswell Graphicsdesigner. The 15-second clip of "Monatsrose" by Philipp, Prince of Eulenburg is sung by tenor Marcel Wittrisch with orchestra and organ conducted by Bruno Seidler-Winkler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq2XXG8JRNU  

Back in the 1870s Otto von Bismarck coined a term that still resonates today, despite the fact that purists on both political sides hate it: realpolitik In December of 1941, a Congresswoman – the first ever – learned a lesson in realpolitik. In April of 1917 she had been among fifty US Representatives who felt that a US Declaration of War on Imperial Germany was a mistake and to be opposed. In retrospect and in the minds of many millions of Americans that day, she was right. But twenty-four years later, she would find herself as the ONLY US Congressperson, House or Senate*, to vote against declaring war on Imperial Japan after the attacks of December 7th. She would pay a personal price for her vote, including some merciless mockery for hiding in a closet after the vote and losing her seat permanently. Rankin claimed that it had been a vote of principle, stating that war is always wrong. Three days later, she would vote “Present” on a Declaration of War against two other countries that had not attacked the United States. She had learned the meaning of realpolitik. Too late, but she had learned it. Today, we watch as 1917 repeats itself. Nations are lining up against nations, some clearly the aggressor. Threats are made, promises are spouted. But what is the realpolitik? This time Congress itself will have almost no say in what happens. No stand, principled or otherwise, will take place. The President alone will decide whether or not your husbands, wives, father, mothers, sons and daughters will go to war against a nation that has not attacked us… *Fifty-five members of Congress were unable to vote as they were not present. All of them would make it clear that they supported the DoW and would have voted in favor of it. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/plausibly-live/message

Back in the 1870s Otto von Bismarck coined a term that still resonates today, despite the fact that purists on both political sides hate it: realpolitik In December of 1941, a Congresswoman – the first ever – learned a lesson in realpolitik. In April of 1917 she had been among fifty US Representatives who felt that a US Declaration of War on Imperial Germany was a mistake and to be opposed. In retrospect and in the minds of many millions of Americans that day, she was right. But twenty-four years later, she would find herself as the ONLY US Congressperson, House or Senate*, to vote against declaring war on Imperial Japan after the attacks of December 7th. She would pay a personal price for her vote, including some merciless mockery for hiding in a closet after the vote and losing her seat permanently. Rankin claimed that it had been a vote of principle, stating that war is always wrong. Three days later, she would vote “Present” on a Declaration of War against two other countries that had not attacked the United States. She had learned the meaning of realpolitik. Too late, but she had learned it. Today, we watch as 1917 repeats itself. Nations are lining up against nations, some clearly the aggressor. Threats are made, promises are spouted. But what is the realpolitik? This time Congress itself will have almost no say in what happens. No stand, principled or otherwise, will take place. The President alone will decide whether or not your husbands, wives, father, mothers, sons and daughters will go to war against a nation that has not attacked us… *Fifty-five members of Congress were unable to vote as they were not present. All of them would make it clear that they supported the DoW and would have voted in favor of it.

Heard of this guy before? If you haven't, I'm with you. I hadn't either. And then once I got into this story, I wondered HOW had I never heard of him? This story is insane. Karl Denke killed, it seems, at least 30 people in Ziębice, Poland (formerly Münsterberg, Weimar Republic aka Germany). And he ate them. And he sold some of their meat to others. Probably many, MANY others. And he made suspenders out of their skin and shoelaces out of their hair and on and on and on. And he did that out of his apartment, surrounded by neighbors, for over two decades. How? Partially - due to hyperinflation. Yes, hyperinflation in the Weimar Republic led to so much economic chaos that people were a lot more worried about surviving than they were about what their neighbors were up to. And why haven't more of us heard about Karl? Because of another killer operating nearby at the same time who was even more disturbing - Fritz Haarmann. We'll go over some of his crimes as well. True crime, the economic chaos of German's Interwar Years and more on an outlandish edition of Timesuck.  Thanks for helping Bad Magic Productions donate $13,800 this month to The Ocular Melanoma Foundation, in honor of Timesucker Alex Roach. To find out more, go to http://www.ocularmelanoma.org/ Watch the Suck on YouTube: https://youtu.be/oIvZy2JwlHs Merch  - https://badmagicmerch.com/   Discord! https://discord.gg/tqzH89v Want to join the Cult of the Curious private Facebook Group? Go directly to Facebook and search for "Cult of the Curious" in order to locate whatever current page hasn't been put in FB Jail :) For all merch related questions/problems: store@badmagicproductions.com (copy and paste) Please rate and subscribe on iTunes and elsewhere and follow the suck on social media!! @timesuckpodcast on IG and http://www.facebook.com/timesuckpodcast Wanna become a Space Lizard? We're over 10,000 strong! Click here: https://www.patreon.com/timesuckpodcast  Sign up through Patreon and for $5 a month you get to listen to the Secret Suck, which will drop Thursdays at Noon, PST. You'll also get 20% off of all regular Timesuck merch PLUS access to exclusive Space Lizard merch. You get to vote on two Monday topics each month via the app. And you get the download link for my new comedy album, Feel the Heat. Check the Patreon posts to find out how to download the new album and take advantage of other benefits. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The unbelievably busy schedule of a Rav in Germany in the Kaiser's era

So much history surrounds Niagara Falls it is near impossible to dive into: from initial exploration by white folk, exploitation of the falls and indigenous peoples, to the history of hydroelectric power, strange mortuary science experiments, and daredevils who have ridden down the falls in barrels (only some who have survived) – like the water over the crest, the history seemingly never ends.  However, while Niagara Falls is heralded for its natural beauty, booming tourist trade, and rich history -- behind its bridal veil lies something sinister, brooding beneath the foam.    Follow the Podcast on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/crimesandwitchdemeanors Submit your feedback or personal stories to crimesandwitchdemeanors@gmail.com  Like The Podcast on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/crimesandwitchdemeanors  Episode Transcript: Available below the sources in the show notes Visit the website: https://www.crimesandwitchdemeanors.com  Main podcast illustration by GiAnna Ligammari: https://gialigammari.wixsite.com/portfolio    Sources: Cave of the Evil Spirit. (n.d.). Roadtrippers. Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://maps.roadtrippers.com/us/lewiston-ny/points-of-interest/cave-of-the-evil-spirit     Devil's Hole Cave—Niagara County, New York. (n.d.). Retrieved April 13, 2021, from http://falzguy.com/devils-hole-cave.html     Goat Island (New York). (2021). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Goat_Island_(New_York)&oldid=1004636526     Luna Island. (2020). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Luna_Island&oldid=953221872     May 12, R. R.-L. S. C. & 2017. (n.d.). Facts About Niagara Falls. Livescience.Com. Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://www.livescience.com/59099-niagara-falls-facts.html     Niagara Falls. (2021). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Niagara_Falls&oldid=1017113129     Niagara Falls USA. (n.d.). Niagara Falls USA. Retrieved April 14, 2021, from https://www.niagarafallsusa.com/directory/three-sisters-islands/     Niagara Falls—Devil's Hole Massacre. (n.d.). Retrieved April 13, 2021, from http://www.niagarafrontier.com/devilhole.html     Official guide to Niagara—Cave of the Evil Spirit, Devil's Hole—Details. (n.d.). Retrieved April 16, 2021, from http://www.nflibrary.ca/nfplindex/show.asp?id=91217&b=1 Szczepaniec, K. (2018). Indigenous People of Western New York. FACT SHEET, 23.     The Cementation of the Dead; the story of Theodore Graves Hulett's most curious work in Oakwood Cemetery. (n.d.). Oakwood Cemetery | Niagara Falls, NY. Retrieved April 14, 2021, from https://oakwoodniagara.org/kratts-korner/2012/3/15/the-cementation-of-the-dead-the-story-of-theodore-graves-hul.html     Three Sisters Islands (New York). (2020). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Three_Sisters_Islands_(New_York)&oldid=956552156   TRANSCRIPT: Hello, hello, hello!  Long time no see, you may have thought I became a ghost myself!  My name is Joshua Spellman, and I'm your – very much alive – at least on the outside– host of Crimes & Witch-Demeanors.  The podcast where we get to the good old fashioned truth behind our favorite ghostly haunts using archival and historic resources.               Maybe you care where I've been.  Maybe you were even happy to hear me go.  Long story short – I was creatively and emotionally burnt out.  I was pouring myself into this podcast,  my drag, sewing garments, and cultivating my TikTok…and with things going on in my personal life I just crashed.  I stopped doing everything.  Had some health stuff to worry about but I digress!  We're here.  We're back.  I'm going to do my best to stay motivated and on top of things, but this pod is a lot of work!               Today's podcast episode is something new.  And something I'm excited about.  I don't want to give too much away… but we're going to investigate the satanic underpinnings of a famous worldwide attraction and city, that just so happens to be in my back yard: Niagara Falls.  And also, one of my favorite hiking spots at the aptly named Devil's Hole.  But be sure to stick around for the truth, as always it is much more interesting than the myth.  So, for lack of a better word: let's dive right in.     Niagara Falls – one of the seven wonders of the natural world, is a group of three waterfalls (the bridal veil falls, horseshoe falls, and American falls, respectively) that spans the border between the Canadian province of Ontario and the state of New York.  Located on the Niagara River, which drains into both Lake Erie and Lake Ontario, the combined Niagara Falls has the highest flow rate of any waterfall in North America.  More than 168,00 square meters, or six million cubic feet, of water goes over the crest every minute.   So much history surrounds Niagara Falls it is near impossible to dive into: from initial exploration by white folk, exploitation of the falls and indigenous peoples, to the history of hydroelectric power, mortuary science experiments, and daredevils who have ridden down the falls in barrels (only some who have survived) –it seemingly never ends.  However, while Niagara Falls is heralded for its natural beauty, booming tourist trade, and rich history -- behind its bridal veil lies something sinister, brooding beneath the foam.    At first glance, it seems innocent enough – if you discount historic atrocities to its indigenous inhabitants – but as you peer a little closer a pattern emerges. Perhaps most glaringly, is Devil's Hole state park.  Named as such for…no discernable reason.  It is a park that overlooks and descends into the Niagara river gorge, a 6.8 mile long canyon with cliffs as high as 1200 feet, carved by the Niagara River.  The hiking in this particular area can become quite hazardous.  In fact, the current of the Niagara River in the gorge is one of the most powerful river currents in the world: which, unsurprisingly has taken many lives.  Perhaps this is where its hellish name originates.   Perhaps it is partially due to the famed cave halfway down the steep escarpment: the Cave of the Evil Spirit.  While not a clever name, it sums up its origin quite well.  Long ago, the Great Spirit who created man, sealed away the Evil Spirit within the walls of the Niagara Gorge.  However, over time as man turned evil and began waging wars, the walls of the gorge began to split.  Eventually, the cave opened and the Evil Spirit was once again free, cursing all those who entered the cave.   Famously, the explorer Robert Cavalier de LaSalle ignored the warnings of his Seneca guide.  Upon entering deep into the cave he heard a voice tell him   "Return" said the voice, "to your home in Canada, and wealth, honors, a long life and usefulness will be yours, and when death comes, generations of your descendants shall follow you to your grave, and history shall transmit your name to prosperity as the successful founder of a great empire. Proceed to the West, and although gleams of hope may, at times, shine in your path, in gratitude and disappointment will be sure to meet and follow you, until a treacherous murder shall end your days remote from human habitation, without the shelter of even a wigwam of a friendly red man. The Eagles of the desert shall strip the flesh from your bones, which shall lay bleaching under the tropical sun, unburied and unprotected by the cross you now so devotedly cherish."   LaSalle foolishly disregarded the warning of the Evil Spirit.  LaSalle's fortune eventually dwindled and he became poor and desolate.  In a last-ditch effort to regain his wealth and fame, he decided to go out west to Louisiana to begin a colony – doing exactly what the spirit warned him against.  Even LaSalle's precious crucifix of his Christian god could not save him from the curse of the Evil Spirit.  LaSalle was eventually murdered by his own men and left to rot in the woods near the Mississippi river.   But the city's connection to the crowned prince of hell and malevolent spirits do not end at the mouth of the Niagara Gorge, instead we must look to the Niagara rapids at the top of the falls and turn our attention to five innocuous islands.   Bisecting the Bridal Veil Falls and the Horseshoe Falls is an island known as Goat Island.  It is the location of the famed Terrapin point observation area and is large enough that it carries not only pedestrian traffic, but car and trackless train traffic as well.  Goat Island is largely wooded with many nature trails.  The island also provides access to the Cave of the Winds tour, which takes you down the escarpment to the foot of the falls.   Just off the southern shoreline of Goat Island are the Three Sisters Islands.  These small islands provide an excellent view of the upper rapids.  They are connected by a series of bridges and consist solely of nature trails.  Biologically speaking they are fascinating: each sports a variety of microhabitats and possess its own unique floristic character. However as is the nature of…well, nature, it is not all pretty petals.    It is easy to access the raging rapids from these islands, which spell certain death for those unlucky enough to be swept into the current and hurled over the falls…that is if the large boulders hiding in the cataracts or the undertow don't do you in first.   The Three Sisters islands were home to mysterious rituals before European settlers came to the area.  Iroquois shamans would offer sacrifices and gifts to the spirit that dwells inside the mist shrouded cave at the base of the falls.  Mediums and psychics who visit these islands in modern times can hear the voices and screams of spirits long gone.   Lastly, there is Luna island.  Which, like, Goat island, bisects two of the falls but unlike its larger counterpart it is situated between the American Falls and the Bridal Veil Falls.   Aside from sacrifices – you may be asking – how are these satanic?  Let's take a closer look at the names.  Devil's hole is quite obvious in its own right.  And while innocuous at first glance you may now realize…Goat Island.  The goat has long been a symbol of the horned demon Lucifer.  Luna island.  The moon.  Where dark rituals take place beneath.  And, the most insidious of these names: Bridal Veil Falls and the Three Sisters.  It's subtle, but for those who know satanic lore, the Devil married Three Sisters.   Niagara Falls has always been a nexus of spiritual and physical power: as evidenced by its hydroelectric powerplants and numerous malevolent hauntings and the spirits that Native tribes worshipped and feared.  The city was erected and planned around these power sources, built to exploit them and harness them.  Niagara Falls was created in the same fashion as Washington D.C. Both hiding occult symbols in their streets and place names, used to exploit the negative energies they draw forth, and route them to areas of their choosing.   Next time you visit the falls, remember to hold that crucifix tight.  Or don't…it didn't quite help LaSalle…did it?                   Wow, it's so crazy this isn't talked about more!  All these satanic connections…that…I just made up?  Yeah.  I made it up.  Kind of?  All the place names are real but they're not satanic in origin.  With all the crazy conspiracy theories flying around I wanted to illustrate how easy it is to draw lines between seemingly unconnected things and create a new narrative.               To be clear: to my knowledge no one has drawn up these satanic connections before me.  I did it while researching something else entirely and was like “wow these names really all have a connection to the devil” until I learned the real origins of these place names.  The three sisters, goat island, luna island, the bridal veil falls, and devil's hole are all very real names.  But they don't have any connections to satanism or the occult.  But what they do have are really interesting and unique histories.               Devil's hole and the Niagara gorge are two of my favorite places in the world.  I have spent countless hours alone on those treacherous trails.  The trails can be narrow and precarious, made from silty, crumbling rock, overhead you have the risk of huge boulders falling down, and directly below you is one of the most powerful river currents in the world.   Of course my favorite time to go is when it's raining…which is pretty reckless.  Probably the only reckless thing I like participating in willingly.  But I do love it.  I have a deep personal and spiritual connection to the area and learning it's history has definitely made me appreciate it even more.    Sadly, people do die there.  I know one individual personally who has.  As with many things in nature it's to be both revered and feared.  Nature has many sides, and sadly nature can also destroy.   That being said let's talk about the history of Devil's Hole itself and the state park named after it.   Devil's Hole The area surrounding Devil's Hole has a lengthy indigenous history long before white settlers came into the area.  Devil's Hole received its name from either the story told earlier of the Evil Spirit or from the area's inhabitation by the Neuter Nation.    When white settlers first appeared in the area the area was mainly inhabited by what the French called the Neuter Nation of Indians.  It was used as a hiding place during times of war or conflict, and in order to keep their hiding place secret they would kill anyone who entered the gorge.  These people would never return to tell of the location and this is possibly the root of the tale of the Evil Spirit.   However, the same friend/medium that saw the Red Lady at my old house before I ever talked about her, which I still haven't told this story to y'all, came on a hike with me to Devil's Hole State Park.  He was not from the area at all, not even from the region of the state, but he did mention he sensed a very old, angry spirit in the area.  I didn't think anything of it…but now knowing of the Evil Spirit, I can't help but wonder…but again, I digress.   What made Devil's Hole such a great hiding spot was not only that it is set in the cliff face but a rock, known as ambush rock was positioned perfectly above the cave that nothing could be shot down into it.  The area is prone to rockslides…or boulder slides really, it's made of of massive limestone boulders.  You would honestly be amazed by how large they are…but I digress.  Ambush rock was removed for safety reasons, though a rock fall in the 1990's left a similar rock, albeit much, much smaller, at the entrance to the cave.   According to an old brochure for the area published in 1890, at the top of the park, before you begin your descent into the gorge there is a large boulder, one of many, known as Council Rock.  It was shaped like an arrow, but centuries of weathering slowly changed its shape, and it is now believed to have been removed since the brochure is over 120 years old.   Council rock was a meeting place where yearly councils of Native people would take place.  Others claim that it was a “worshipping stone” that was connected with indigenous “religion”.  Legend has it that due to the way the Seneca Chiefs would stand on the rock during meetings, with one hand on the rock, that anyone who touches the rock can drive the devil away for a year. Of course, this narrative comes from white folk.    Also just a great time to remind everyone that indigenous people are still around.  They are not bygone people of history!  History likes to act like they are ancient, mysterious, and extinct.  The Seneca Nation still has a strong presence in the area, so it is possible that stories of council rock still exis within their traditions and oral histories.    There was a massacre known as the Devil's Hole massacre that occurred on September 14, 1763 during the 7 Year's War, also known as the French & Indian War.  A supply train of 350 British soldiers that were making their way from Fort Niagara to Fort Schlosser stopped to rest for dinner on a large flat rock near Devil's Hole.  While enjoying their supper they were attacked by a group of Senecas.  There was a massive loss of life, and those not killed directly by the ambush jumped off the precipice to have a chance at survival.  But those that did so, if they survived the steep jump, did not survive much longer as the Senecas sent the wagons, baggage, and horses of the supply chain off the edge, crushing and killing those that remained.  There were only two survivors.    Sadly, modern day Devil's Hole cave bears no resemblance to what it once was.  It is covered in graffiti and often littered with trash as it has become a favourite place for wayward teenagers to party.   There is a large cave at the bottom of the gorge that many people think is Devil's Hole cave…but it's not.  In fact there are many caves in the area, some of which aren't true caves but just massive boulders that have fallen on top of one another.   To find the real Devil's Hole cave you have to make your way partially down the gorge precipice and veer off to a path that backtracks partially back up the cliff.  The cave is made up of DeCew Dolostone, a fine crystalline dolostone that is dark grey in color.  The cave's entrance is 10 feet wide and 8 feet high.  The initial passage of the cave is at a gentle incline, and after making your way about 12 feet into the cave the ceiling is only 4 feet high.  However, if you continue onward the ceiling will reach a height of 9 feet.  At this point one will find a manmade wall, beyond which there is a drop in floor level of about three feet.  Beyond the wall the 6 foot tall passage continues at a very narrow width of 6 inches.  It continues for about 10 feet before veering off to the east where you lose sight of its path.   There was once a mineral spring in the cave but it seems to have since dried up, much like the now defunct stream known as Bloody Run.   And that's the short and long on Devil's Hole!  Not demonic, but definitely a hole.  What?   Chile, anyway.   Now, back to the city of Niagara Falls.  There are so many actual haunted locations in Niagara Falls which you may have seen on television like the Red Coach Inn that I could cover another time if you'd like – just let me know!   But I do need to set the record straight on Goat and the Three Sisters Islands. Especially with the bridal veil falls my fake conspiracy makes so much sense, but no, the Three Sister Islands did not get their name from the three brides of Satan.  Instead, they are named after the daughters of General Parkhurst Whitney: Celinda, Angelina, and Asenath Whitney.  Although…that does sound demonic.  Asenath Metrione Zinthos?  Azarath Metrione Zinthos?  No?  Okay, I need to bury that one just like the three sisters are in the famous Oakwood Cemetery.  Well, maybe infamous as it is the only place in the world where individuals are interred using a unique form of corpse preservation known as cementation.  Essentially bodies were encased in cement for years, and the “watery portions” of the body would be absorbed, leaving behind a well preserved body  along with a perfect cast of the original corpse.   The story behind this is fascinating and the inventor (and I'm not joking here), Judge Theodore Graves Hulett was quite the kook.  But I digress!   Offerings were presented at this island by the Iroquois, that is true.  But no sacrifice or anything sinister was involved.  More along the lines of gifts and presents.   Goat Island!  Not demonic, though a part of H.G. Well's 1908 novel The War in the Air is set on Goat Island.  During the novel the United States is iinvaded by Imperial Germany and the protagonist is left stranded on the island with two German soldiers and must fight for survival.  Exciting stuff…but sadly, the origin of its name is much less exciting.    Goat Island is named such because John Stedman, who was an earlier pioneer, kept a heard of goats on the island.  SO…yeah…very descriptive, very literal.  The island officially obtained the  name in 1780 when he returned after a terrible winter to find all but one of his goats dead.  And if you know anything about Western New York winters…wow.  I…yeah.  Niagara Falls can literally freeze in place, that's how cold it can get.    Other than the fact there is a very cool Nikola Tesla monument on the island gifted by the government of Yugoslavia, it's rather unremarkable.  I do have rather flamboyant picture of myself in Daddy Tesla's lap, as I call him, from a few years ago when I scaled the statue.  Shh.  It didn't happen.  I'll slap it up on the gram for you to see.

With World War One lost, the edifice of Imperial Germany falls apart. But as one door closes, another is opened, and a free for all begins to decide on what a post-Kaiser Germany will look like. The workers and soldiers of the nation take to the streets while the old establishment scrambles to keep as much of their power as they possibly can.    Bibliography for this episode:  Evans, Richard The Coming of the Third Reich Penguin Books, 2003 Peukert, Detlev The Weimar Republic Suhrkamp Verlag am Main, 1987 Harman, Chris The Lost Revolution, Germany 1918 to 1923 Haymarket Books 2017 Weitz, Eric Weimar Germany: Promise and Tragedy Princeton University Press 2007 Jones, Nigel The Birth of the Nazis Constable & Robinson Ltd 2004   Questions? Comments? Follow the podcast on twitter at @pitthistorypod (https://twitter.com/pitthistorypod) or email me at peaceintheirtime@gmail.com

Oh boy, it's the Germans. You've either been waiting for or dreading this one. The instability of 20s Germany was critical in making sure a lasting, peaceful equilibrium could not be established in Europe. And that instability was caused by the disintegration of Imperial Germany under the stress of WWI. Turns out staking your legitimacy on militarism only works if you win every time, and to start things off, Germany lost big.    Bibliography for this episode:  Evans, Richard The Coming of the Third Reich Penguin Books, 2003 Peukert, Detlev The Weimar Republic Suhrkamp Verlag am Main, 1987 Harman, Chris The Lost Revolution, Germany 1918 to 1923 Haymarket Books 2017   Questions? Comments? Follow the podcast on twitter at @pitthistorypod (https://twitter.com/pitthistorypod) or email me at peaceintheirtime@gmail.com

Many thought that Germany was capable of winning World War One until the very end. Unlike World War 2, in which the Allies believed that victory was inevitable as early as 1943, this was not the case with the Great War. It is also easy to assume that German defeat was inevitable at the hands of an Allied coalition richer in manpower, weapons and money. Yet Germany nearly captured Paris in 1914, crushed Serbia and Romania, bled the French Army until it mutinied, drove Russia out of the war, and then came oh-so-close to victory on the Western Front in 1918. One should not underestimate the power of Imperial Germany. Until the armistice was signed in a French railway carriage on November 11, 1918, Germany's enemies didn't.

If anything, my life view of things is that of a pragmatist. Many, many years ago I read about Otto von Bismarck, the Iron Chancellor of the newly formed Empire of Germany. He was dedicated to the idea of the “realpolitik,” that is to say that his politics were based not on moral or ideological considerations, but rather on the practical realities of 19th Century Europe. That is not definitely not to say that he was a man without principles or ideology, but he also understood the concept that some things are beyond the ability to accomplish given the realities of human and national interactions. For all of that, he ALWAYS placed Imperial Germany’s interests above his own. In many cases, that brought him into direct conflict with the new Kaiser, Wilhelm II, who had no such understanding of careful realpolitik. In many ways, the world struggles today are a result of Kaiser Wilhelm’s impudence. History teaches us many, many things. Despite that, what it has so often failed to do is to change the outlook of people who believe that they have been wronged. Regardless of the validity of their complaints, there is a special ability of humans to grasp and hold on to the desire for revenge. People will go to incredible lengths to justify that desire. But in the end, how often does it actually succeed, outside of Hollywood? What it does far more often, and with much more lasting and tragic results, is to destroy ones own home.

Many thought that Germany was capable of winning World War One until the very end. Unlike World War 2, in which the Allies believed that victory was inevitable as early as 1943, this was not the case with the Great War. It is also easy to assume that German defeat was inevitable at the hands of an Allied coalition richer in manpower, weapons and money. Yet Germany nearly captured Paris in 1914, crushed Serbia and Romania, bled the French Army until it mutinied, drove Russia out of the war, and then came oh-so-close to victory on the Western Front in 1918. One should not underestimate the power of Imperial Germany. Until the armistice was signed in a French railway carriage on November 11, 1918, Germany's enemies didn't.

Dennis Prager Videos- Why I Love America and Do You Know How Special America Is?Why I Love America- https://youtu.be/CDobY9rIaMo Do You Know How Special America Is?- https://youtu.be/GLT3gn14b4s  Why I Love Americahttps://youtu.be/CDobY9rIaMo PragerUDennis Prager has traveled all over the world. But at the end of every trip, he returns home with a new appreciation for America. Why? Because no country is more open, more generous, and has done more for the cause of freedom than America has. Script: I am a third-generation American—my parents and my maternal grandmother were born in Brooklyn, New York. But I didn’t know I loved America until my early twenties. In my third year of college, I studied in England and began a life of travel that eventually took me to one hundred and thirty countries. That was when I began to understand how important America was to the world—and still is. That was when I began to understand how unique America was—and still is. That was when I began to appreciate the decency of the American people. Being away from America for a year, spending the Christmas season in Morocco, where there was no Christmas season, and ending the year with a month in the Soviet Union, where there was no freedom—this all had a life-changing impact on me. I realized how lucky I was to be an American. I even realized how much I simply enjoyed being an American. I'll explain: 1. How important America is to the world. Without in any way diminishing the enormous sacrifices made by England and France, it was America’s entry into World War I that made the defeat of Imperial Germany possible and ended that horrible war. It was America that made the Allied victory possible in World War II and kept Western Europe free during the Cold War. Thirty-seven thousand Americans died fighting the North Korean and Chinese communist regimes. Were it not for America, all of Korea would have no human rights and would endure the mass torture, starvation, and murder that have been routine in North Korea until today. The next time you hear the lie that America fought in Vietnam for colonialist reasons, ask that person: Why did America fight in Korea? I’ll tell you why: to stop the spread of communism, the greatest genocidal and totalitarian ideology in history, and thereby enable more than half of Korea to live in freedom. Another fifty-eight thousand Americans died in Vietnam to enable the South Vietnamese to live in the same freedom America made possible for South Koreans. Neither Vietnam nor Korea had any natural resources that America wanted. Americans died in those two countries solely so that their people could be free. And, without diminishing the role of the great British prime minister, Margaret Thatcher, and the great pope, John Paul II, it was America that ended communism in the Soviet Union, Poland, East Germany, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria, and liberated, among other nations, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. 2. America is unique. America is the only country that was founded not on a race, ethnicity, or nationality, but on an idea: limited government—because the founders of America believed, first and foremost, in liberty. America became the freest country in world history, which is why France gave the Statue of Liberty to one country: America. And America has given more liberty and opportunity to more people from more nations than any country in world history. Yes, America allowed slavery in half of its states. But every society in the world practiced slavery. What rendered America unique is that Americans killed one another in its bloodiest war to abolish slavery and that it eventually became the least racist multiracial country in history. It remains the only white-majority country to have ever elected a black leader. And Africans know how good America is, which is why, by the 1980s, more black Africans had come to America voluntarily as immigrants seeking freedom and opportunity than ever came as slaves. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/why-i-l... This video is sponsored by Colorado Christian University. CCU is offering a $1,000 scholarship to PragerU subscribers for online classes through CCU Online. Go to https://www.prageru.com/ccu/ to learn more. FOLLOW us! Facebook:

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler’s Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler’s Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler’s Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler’s Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler's Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix.

Was Weimar doomed from the outset? In November 1918: The German Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2020), Robert Gerwarth argues that this is the wrong question to ask. Forget 1929 and 1933, the collapse of Imperial Germany began as a velvet revolution where optimism was as common as pessimism. A masterful synthesis told through diaries and memories, Gerwarth reminds us that contemporaries live events before we have them act out history. Robert Gerwarth is Professor of Modern History at UCD and Director of the Centre for War Studies. He is the author of The Bismarck Myth (Oxford UP, 2005) and a biography of Reinhard Heydrich (Yale UP, 2011). His third monograph, The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End was published by Penguin (UK) and FSG (US) in the autumn of 2016. Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His forthcoming book Enemies of the People: Hitler’s Critics and the Gestapo explores enforcement practices toward different social groups under Nazism. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Martin captains an episode examining the life and reign of Kaiser Wilhelm II's father, Frederick III. He reigned only 99 days, but if he had lived, could he have transformed the nascent German empire from Prussian militarism to a model constitutional monarchy? Would that have transformed Europe and prevented (or mitigated) the cataclysm of World War I? Although they don't mention it in the episode, the guys highly recommend Our Fritz: Emperor Frederick III and the Political Culture of Imperial Germany by Frank Lorenz Muller from 2011 as an excellent source not only about Frederick's life, but also about all of the many cultural considerations that they guys discuss here as well.

This event will be host to author Bruce Gaunson and a lecture based on his book Fighting the Kaiserreich: Australia’s within the Great War. The book explores World War 1 and Australia’s struggle with Imperial Germany during the Great War. After some years as a teacher and academic, Bruce Gaunson became the West Europe political analyst at the Office of National Assessments (Canberra) during the Cold War’s final outcomes. His teaching career culminated in thirteen years as Head of History at Sydney Grammar School. Fighting the Kaiserreich is his third book. The Estaminet Group is an interest group initially created by Great War researchers/specialists associated with The Australian War Memorial and ADFA. It provides a forum based on lectures around the broad topic of Australia’s involvement in world wars; commencing with WW1. The Estaminet itself is affiliated with the Western Front Association in the UK – one of the largest military history organisations in Europe.

What can the lives of journalists under Hitler and Adenauer reveal? How did they navigate the Third Reich as "internal emigrants"? How did the emerging Cold War shape new tensions with their government and publishers? Volker Berghahn examines the lives and careers of three media giants with his latest book Journalists between Hitler and Adenauer: From Inner Emigration to the Moral Reconstruction of West Germany(Princeton University Press, 2019). In it, Berghan's exploration of German journalists' compromises and moral vision for their country illuminates perennial issues around press freedom and the place of media in modern societies. Volker Berghahn is the Seth Low Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia University. His numerous contributions to the field have covered the social and cultural history of modern Germany and Euro-American relations. He taught in England and Germany before coming to Brown University in 1988 and going on to Columbia ten years later. A selected list of Berghahn's books includes America and the Intellectual Cold Wars in Europe (2001), Imperial Germany (1995), The Americanization of West German Industry, 1945-1973 (1986), Modern Germany (1982), The Tirpitz Plan (1971), Europe in the Era of Two World Wars (2006), and Industrial Society and Cultural Transfer (2010). Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His research exploring Gestapo enforcement practices toward different social groups is nearing completion under the working title A Discriminating Terror. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What can the lives of journalists under Hitler and Adenauer reveal? How did they navigate the Third Reich as "internal emigrants"? How did the emerging Cold War shape new tensions with their government and publishers? Volker Berghahn examines the lives and careers of three media giants with his latest book Journalists between Hitler and Adenauer: From Inner Emigration to the Moral Reconstruction of West Germany(Princeton University Press, 2019). In it, Berghan's exploration of German journalists' compromises and moral vision for their country illuminates perennial issues around press freedom and the place of media in modern societies. Volker Berghahn is the Seth Low Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia University. His numerous contributions to the field have covered the social and cultural history of modern Germany and Euro-American relations. He taught in England and Germany before coming to Brown University in 1988 and going on to Columbia ten years later. A selected list of Berghahn's books includes America and the Intellectual Cold Wars in Europe (2001), Imperial Germany (1995), The Americanization of West German Industry, 1945-1973 (1986), Modern Germany (1982), The Tirpitz Plan (1971), Europe in the Era of Two World Wars (2006), and Industrial Society and Cultural Transfer (2010). Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His research exploring Gestapo enforcement practices toward different social groups is nearing completion under the working title A Discriminating Terror. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What can the lives of journalists under Hitler and Adenauer reveal? How did they navigate the Third Reich as "internal emigrants"? How did the emerging Cold War shape new tensions with their government and publishers? Volker Berghahn examines the lives and careers of three media giants with his latest book Journalists between Hitler and Adenauer: From Inner Emigration to the Moral Reconstruction of West Germany(Princeton University Press, 2019). In it, Berghan's exploration of German journalists' compromises and moral vision for their country illuminates perennial issues around press freedom and the place of media in modern societies. Volker Berghahn is the Seth Low Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia University. His numerous contributions to the field have covered the social and cultural history of modern Germany and Euro-American relations. He taught in England and Germany before coming to Brown University in 1988 and going on to Columbia ten years later. A selected list of Berghahn's books includes America and the Intellectual Cold Wars in Europe (2001), Imperial Germany (1995), The Americanization of West German Industry, 1945-1973 (1986), Modern Germany (1982), The Tirpitz Plan (1971), Europe in the Era of Two World Wars (2006), and Industrial Society and Cultural Transfer (2010). Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His research exploring Gestapo enforcement practices toward different social groups is nearing completion under the working title A Discriminating Terror. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What can the lives of journalists under Hitler and Adenauer reveal? How did they navigate the Third Reich as "internal emigrants"? How did the emerging Cold War shape new tensions with their government and publishers? Volker Berghahn examines the lives and careers of three media giants with his latest book Journalists between Hitler and Adenauer: From Inner Emigration to the Moral Reconstruction of West Germany(Princeton University Press, 2019). In it, Berghan's exploration of German journalists' compromises and moral vision for their country illuminates perennial issues around press freedom and the place of media in modern societies. Volker Berghahn is the Seth Low Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia University. His numerous contributions to the field have covered the social and cultural history of modern Germany and Euro-American relations. He taught in England and Germany before coming to Brown University in 1988 and going on to Columbia ten years later. A selected list of Berghahn's books includes America and the Intellectual Cold Wars in Europe (2001), Imperial Germany (1995), The Americanization of West German Industry, 1945-1973 (1986), Modern Germany (1982), The Tirpitz Plan (1971), Europe in the Era of Two World Wars (2006), and Industrial Society and Cultural Transfer (2010). Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His research exploring Gestapo enforcement practices toward different social groups is nearing completion under the working title A Discriminating Terror. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What can the lives of journalists under Hitler and Adenauer reveal? How did they navigate the Third Reich as "internal emigrants"? How did the emerging Cold War shape new tensions with their government and publishers? Volker Berghahn examines the lives and careers of three media giants with his latest book Journalists between Hitler and Adenauer: From Inner Emigration to the Moral Reconstruction of West Germany(Princeton University Press, 2019). In it, Berghan's exploration of German journalists' compromises and moral vision for their country illuminates perennial issues around press freedom and the place of media in modern societies. Volker Berghahn is the Seth Low Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia University. His numerous contributions to the field have covered the social and cultural history of modern Germany and Euro-American relations. He taught in England and Germany before coming to Brown University in 1988 and going on to Columbia ten years later. A selected list of Berghahn's books includes America and the Intellectual Cold Wars in Europe (2001), Imperial Germany (1995), The Americanization of West German Industry, 1945-1973 (1986), Modern Germany (1982), The Tirpitz Plan (1971), Europe in the Era of Two World Wars (2006), and Industrial Society and Cultural Transfer (2010). Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His research exploring Gestapo enforcement practices toward different social groups is nearing completion under the working title A Discriminating Terror. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What can the lives of journalists under Hitler and Adenauer reveal? How did they navigate the Third Reich as "internal emigrants"? How did the emerging Cold War shape new tensions with their government and publishers? Volker Berghahn examines the lives and careers of three media giants with his latest book Journalists between Hitler and Adenauer: From Inner Emigration to the Moral Reconstruction of West Germany(Princeton University Press, 2019). In it, Berghan's exploration of German journalists' compromises and moral vision for their country illuminates perennial issues around press freedom and the place of media in modern societies. Volker Berghahn is the Seth Low Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia University. His numerous contributions to the field have covered the social and cultural history of modern Germany and Euro-American relations. He taught in England and Germany before coming to Brown University in 1988 and going on to Columbia ten years later. A selected list of Berghahn's books includes America and the Intellectual Cold Wars in Europe (2001), Imperial Germany (1995), The Americanization of West German Industry, 1945-1973 (1986), Modern Germany (1982), The Tirpitz Plan (1971), Europe in the Era of Two World Wars (2006), and Industrial Society and Cultural Transfer (2010). Ryan Stackhouse is a historian of Europe specializing in modern Germany and political policing under dictatorship. His research exploring Gestapo enforcement practices toward different social groups is nearing completion under the working title A Discriminating Terror. He also cohosts the Third Reich History Podcast and can be reached at john.ryan.stackhouse@gmail.com or @Staxomatix. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Eric Hoffer (July 25, 1898 – May 21, 1983) was an American moral and social philosopher. He was the author of ten books and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in February 1983. His first book, The True Believer (1951), was widely recognized as a classic, receiving critical acclaim from both scholars and laymen, although Hoffer believed that The Ordeal of Change (1963) was his finest work. Hoffer was born in 1898 in The Bronx, New York, to Knut and Elsa (Goebel) Hoffer. His parents were immigrants from Alsace, then part of Imperial Germany. When he was five, his mother fell down the stairs with him in her arms. He recalled, I lost my sight at the age of seven. Two years before, my mother and I fell down a flight of stairs. She didn't recover and died in that second year after the fall. I lost my sight and, for a time, my memory. His eyesight inexplicably returned when he was 15. Join Ed and Ron for a look at Eric Hoffer's body of work and legacy.

Eric Hoffer (July 25, 1898 – May 21, 1983) was an American moral and social philosopher. He was the author of ten books and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in February 1983. His first book, The True Believer (1951), was widely recognized as a classic, receiving critical acclaim from both scholars and laymen, although Hoffer believed that The Ordeal of Change (1963) was his finest work. Hoffer was born in 1898 in The Bronx, New York, to Knut and Elsa (Goebel) Hoffer. His parents were immigrants from Alsace, then part of Imperial Germany. When he was five, his mother fell down the stairs with him in her arms. He recalled, I lost my sight at the age of seven. Two years before, my mother and I fell down a flight of stairs. She didn't recover and died in that second year after the fall. I lost my sight and, for a time, my memory. His eyesight inexplicably returned when he was 15. Join Ed and Ron for a look at Eric Hoffer's body of work and legacy.

Eric Hoffer (July 25, 1898 – May 21, 1983) was an American moral and social philosopher. He was the author of ten books and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in February 1983. His first book, The True Believer (1951), was widely recognized as a classic, receiving critical acclaim from both scholars and laymen, although Hoffer believed that The Ordeal of Change (1963) was his finest work. Hoffer was born in 1898 in The Bronx, New York, to Knut and Elsa (Goebel) Hoffer. His parents were immigrants from Alsace, then part of Imperial Germany. When he was five, his mother fell down the stairs with him in her arms. He recalled, I lost my sight at the age of seven. Two years before, my mother and I fell down a flight of stairs. She didn't recover and died in that second year after the fall. I lost my sight and, for a time, my memory. His eyesight inexplicably returned when he was 15. Join Ed and Ron for a look at Eric Hoffer's body of work and legacy.

What is the future of U.S.-Chinese relations? Will a rising China seek to overturn the U.S.-led international order? What is China doing inside the first island chain? In cyberspace? Orbital space? Is China more like Imperial Germany or is it more like France in the late 19th century? Dean Cheng and Brad Carson explore these questions and many more in the inaugural episode of “Jaw-Jaw,” the newest addition to the War on the Rocks family of podcasts. Dean even recommends some of his favorite books on China – which will be a regular “Jaw-Jaw” feature. You can read the entire transcript of this episode at War on the Rocks. Biographies Dean Cheng is Senior Research Fellow, Asian Studies Center, Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, at the Heritage Foundation. He specializes in China’s military and foreign policy, in particular China’s relationship with its Asian neighbors and with the United States. His most recent book is Cyber Dragon: Inside China’s Information Warfare and Cyber Operations (2016). Cheng is a frequent media commentator on China-related issues. Brad Carson is a professor at the University of Virginia, where he teaches in the Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy. He served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2001-2005 and was Undersecretary of the Army and acting Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness in the Obama Administration. He welcomes comments at brad.carson@warontherocks.com. Links Richard E. Nisbett, The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently…and Why (Free Press, 2004). Alfred Wilhelm, The Chinese at the Negotiating Table: Style & Characteristics (Diane Publishing Co., 1994). David Finkelstein and James Mulvenon (Eds), China's Revolution in Doctrinal Affairs: Emerging Trends in the Operational Art of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (Center for Naval Analyses, 2005)    

What is the future of U.S.-Chinese relations? Will a rising China seek to overturn the U.S.-led international order? What is China doing inside the first island chain? In cyberspace? Orbital space? Is China more like Imperial Germany or is it more like France in the late 19th century? Dean Cheng and Brad Carson explore these questions and many more in the inaugural episode of “Jaw-Jaw,” the newest addition to the War on the Rocks family of podcasts. Dean even recommends some of his favorite books on China – which will be a regular “Jaw-Jaw” feature. You can read the entire transcript of this episode at War on the Rocks. And, more importantly, you can subscribe to the "Jaw-Jaw" feed right here! Biographies Dean Cheng is Senior Research Fellow, Asian Studies Center, Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, at the Heritage Foundation. He specializes in China’s military and foreign policy, in particular China’s relationship with its Asian neighbors and with the United States. His most recent book is Cyber Dragon: Inside China’s Information Warfare and Cyber Operations (2016). Cheng is a frequent media commentator on China-related issues. Brad Carson is a professor at the University of Virginia, where he teaches in the Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy. He served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2001-2005 and was Undersecretary of the Army and acting Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness in the Obama Administration. He welcomes comments at brad.carson@warontherocks.com. Links Richard E. Nisbett, The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently…and Why (Free Press, 2004). Alfred Wilhelm, The Chinese at the Negotiating Table: Style & Characteristics (Diane Publishing Co., 1994). David Finkelstein and James Mulvenon (Eds), China's Revolution in Doctrinal Affairs: Emerging Trends in the Operational Art of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (Center for Naval Analyses, 2005) Music and Production by Tre Hester

The last two decades have seen a surge in global histories, be they global histories of food, of ideas, or social movements.  But why this move away from strictly national and regional histories? Is it because we think of ourselves as an increasingly globalized society? And how can we think globally without succumbing to some of the pitfalls of both globalization and global history? Sebastian Conrad’s What is Global History? (Princeton University Press, 2016) is an attempt at setting down a methodology —or perhaps a perspective—to inspire historians going forward. In the book, he tracks the history of the discipline, the implications of the discipline, and several approaches to writing global history. We go over the ABC’s of global history, what critics have to say about global history, global history beyond the academy and ultimately, how to write a global history. Sebastian Conrad is professor of global history, intellectual history, and post-colonial history at the Free University of Berlin. He is the author of German Colonialism: A Short History, Globalisation and the Nation in Imperial Germany, and The Quest for the Lost Nation: Writing History in Germany and Japan in the American Century. Nadirah Mansour is a graduate student at Princeton University’s Department of Near Eastern Studies working on the global intellectual history of the Arabic-language press. She tweets @NAMansour26 and produces another Middle-East and North Africa-related podcast: Reintroducing. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The last two decades have seen a surge in global histories, be they global histories of food, of ideas, or social movements.  But why this move away from strictly national and regional histories? Is it because we think of ourselves as an increasingly globalized society? And how can we think globally without succumbing to some of the pitfalls of both globalization and global history? Sebastian Conrad’s What is Global History? (Princeton University Press, 2016) is an attempt at setting down a methodology —or perhaps a perspective—to inspire historians going forward. In the book, he tracks the history of the discipline, the implications of the discipline, and several approaches to writing global history. We go over the ABC’s of global history, what critics have to say about global history, global history beyond the academy and ultimately, how to write a global history. Sebastian Conrad is professor of global history, intellectual history, and post-colonial history at the Free University of Berlin. He is the author of German Colonialism: A Short History, Globalisation and the Nation in Imperial Germany, and The Quest for the Lost Nation: Writing History in Germany and Japan in the American Century. Nadirah Mansour is a graduate student at Princeton University’s Department of Near Eastern Studies working on the global intellectual history of the Arabic-language press. She tweets @NAMansour26 and produces another Middle-East and North Africa-related podcast: Reintroducing. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The last two decades have seen a surge in global histories, be they global histories of food, of ideas, or social movements.  But why this move away from strictly national and regional histories? Is it because we think of ourselves as an increasingly globalized society? And how can we think globally without succumbing to some of the pitfalls of both globalization and global history? Sebastian Conrad’s What is Global History? (Princeton University Press, 2016) is an attempt at setting down a methodology —or perhaps a perspective—to inspire historians going forward. In the book, he tracks the history of the discipline, the implications of the discipline, and several approaches to writing global history. We go over the ABC’s of global history, what critics have to say about global history, global history beyond the academy and ultimately, how to write a global history. Sebastian Conrad is professor of global history, intellectual history, and post-colonial history at the Free University of Berlin. He is the author of German Colonialism: A Short History, Globalisation and the Nation in Imperial Germany, and The Quest for the Lost Nation: Writing History in Germany and Japan in the American Century. Nadirah Mansour is a graduate student at Princeton University’s Department of Near Eastern Studies working on the global intellectual history of the Arabic-language press. She tweets @NAMansour26 and produces another Middle-East and North Africa-related podcast: Reintroducing. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The last two decades have seen a surge in global histories, be they global histories of food, of ideas, or social movements.  But why this move away from strictly national and regional histories? Is it because we think of ourselves as an increasingly globalized society? And how can we think globally without succumbing to some of the pitfalls of both globalization and global history? Sebastian Conrad’s What is Global History? (Princeton University Press, 2016) is an attempt at setting down a methodology —or perhaps a perspective—to inspire historians going forward. In the book, he tracks the history of the discipline, the implications of the discipline, and several approaches to writing global history. We go over the ABC’s of global history, what critics have to say about global history, global history beyond the academy and ultimately, how to write a global history. Sebastian Conrad is professor of global history, intellectual history, and post-colonial history at the Free University of Berlin. He is the author of German Colonialism: A Short History, Globalisation and the Nation in Imperial Germany, and The Quest for the Lost Nation: Writing History in Germany and Japan in the American Century. Nadirah Mansour is a graduate student at Princeton University’s Department of Near Eastern Studies working on the global intellectual history of the Arabic-language press. She tweets @NAMansour26 and produces another Middle-East and North Africa-related podcast: Reintroducing. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Britain has suffered heavy casualties in the Spring Offensive and attempts to introduce conscription to Ireland has been hampered by Nationalist opposition there. The new administration in Dublin Castle will use the appearance of a mysterious figure off on the west coast of Ireland to accuse Sinn Féin of being part of a German plot and on the 16-17th of May 1918 it will move to arrest it's entire leadership. On this episode of The Irish Nation Lives we will look at what evidence existed for such a move and examine witness statements to see if there was indeed communication with Imperial Germany. For more information on the Irish Brigade in Germany and Roger Casement's time there: www.irishbrigade.eu Witness Statements from the Bureau of Military History: www.bureauofmilitaryhistory.ie/ Eamon Broy: http://www.bureauofmilitaryhistory.ie/reels/bmh/BMH.WS1280.pdf Seán T. O'Kelly: http://www.bureauofmilitaryhistory.ie/reels/bmh/BMH.WS1765%20PART%202.pdf Liam De Róiste: http://www.bureauofmilitaryhistory.ie/reels/bmh/BMH.WS1698%20PART%202.pdf Dominick Molloy: http://www.bureauofmilitaryhistory.ie/reels/bmh/BMH.WS1570.pdf Richard Walsh: http://www.bureauofmilitaryhistory.ie/reels/bmh/BMH.WS0400.pdf Robert Brennan: http://www.bureauofmilitaryhistory.ie/reels/bmh/BMH.WS0779%20Section%201.pdf

Dan once said that he thought Germany's First World War military was superior to Nazi Germany's Wehrmacht. He is often asked to elaborate, so he does in this show (note:this “pilot” show was previously posted on YouTube) Notes: The Pity Of War: Explaining World War I by Niall Ferguson The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy by Adam Tooze Inside the Third Reich by Albert Speer Panzer Leader by Heinz Guderian (post war memoirs) Blood, Tears and Folly: An Objective Look at World War II by Len Deighton

WWI Centennial News SPECIAL This is another special feature presentation of the WW1 Centennial News Podcast. Welcome to PART II of  “In Sacrifice for Liberty and Peace”. This two part special is an adaptation from a live staged event the Commission produced on the April 6, 2017 centennial of America’s entry into: “ war that changed the world”. Edward Bilous as the artistic director, and Chris Christopher as the US WW1 Centennial Commission’s executive producer pulled together an amazing group of artists, historians musician, actors, and others for a live performance staged at the National WWI Museum and Memorial  in Kansas City to an audience of over 3,000 attendees. For this 2-part special we have excerpted key moments from the story that unfolds, the music that was performed and the readings from a cast of amazing actors, orators, musicians and other luminaries. In Part 1 we examined the great debate in America about getting into the war, and today, in Part 2, we present how events overtook the debate and as America declared its entry into WW1.----more---- Talent Credits This podcast was adapted from the live event In Sacrifice for Liberty and Peace: Centennial Commemoration of the US entry into WWI Credits for the live event include: Edward Bilous Artistic Director John Rensenhouse Narrator Michelle DiBucci Music Director Sarah Outhwaite Video Designer   Carlos Murillo Script and Adaptation Greg Kalember Music Producer, Mix Engineer, Sound Design   Portia Kamons Executive Artistic Producer For Virtua Creative Shelby Rose Producer, Media and Special Events For Virtua Creative   Dale Morehouse Speaker   Carla Noack Speaker   David Paul Pre-Recorded Speaker   Janith English Principal Chief of the Wyandot Nation of Kansas   Sergeant Debra Kay Mooney Choctaw Nation   Col. Gerald York Grandson of Sergeant Alvin C. York   Deborah York Great-Granddaughter of Sergeant Alvin C. York   Noble Sissle Jr. Son of Noble Sissle   Featuring Musical Performances by 1st Infantry Division Band Michael Baden John Brancy Francesco Centano Billy Cliff Peter Dugan Ramona Dunlap Lisa Fisher Samantha Gossard Adam Holthus Christopher T. McLaurin Chrisi Poland Aaron Redburn Reuben Allen Matt Rombaum Alan Schwartz Yang Thou Charles Yang Alla Wijnands Bram Wijnands   Cast (In Alphabetical Order) Freddy Acevedo Yetunde Felix-Ukwu Jason Francescon Khalif Gillett Emilie Karas Chelsea Kisner Christopher Lyman Marianne McKenzie Victor Raider-Wexler   Artillery Master Charles B. Wood MEDIA CREDITS National World War I Museum and Memorial:  TheWorldWar.org Library of Congress: LOC.gov New York Public Library: DigitalCollections.nypl.org National Archives: Archives.gov National Historic Geographic Information System: NHGIS.org State Library of New South Wales: SL.nsw.gov.au Imperial War Museums: IWM.org.uk National Museum of African American History and Culture: NMAAHC.si.edu The Sergeant York Patriotic Foundation and the York Family: SgtYork.org Australian War Memorial: AWM.gov.au National Media Museum: NationalMediaMuseum.org.uk Woodrow Wilson Presidential Library Archive: WoodrowWilson.org Mathers Museum of World Culture: Mathers.indiana.edu Front Page Courtesy of The New York Times Company   PODCAST   THEO MAYERWW1 Centennial News is brought to you by the U.S. World War I Centennial Commission and the Pritzker Military Museum and Library. I’m Theo Mayer - the Chief Technologist for the Commission and your host. Before we get into the main part of the show - - Let me try to set it up: [SOUND EFFECT - WAYBACK MACHINE] We have gone back in time to January 1917. Late last year, in 1916, Woodrow Wilson ran for president under the slogan “He Kept us Out Of War” and “America First” and he won - by a slim margin. In Western  Europe, Eastern Europe, the middle east and other areas around the world -  All tied together by colonial imperialism - the war rages on! NARRATOR Not long after the election of 1916, events would unfold at a rapid pace, until the United States reached a tipping point where isolationism could no longer be an option. January 19, 1917 – Arthur Zimmerman, Foreign Secretary of the German Empire, sent a telegram to German Ambassador to Mexico, proposing an alliance between Germany and Mexico in the event of US entry into the War. ZIMMERMAN "We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare. We shall endeavor in spite of this to keep the United States of America neutral. In the event of this not succeeding, we make Mexico a proposal of alliance... make war together, make peace together... and an understanding... that Mexico is to reconquer the lost territory in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona.... You will inform the President of the above... as soon as the outbreak of war with the United States of America is certain...." NARRATOR The British Admiralty, which had cracked German diplomatic cipher systems, decoded the message within hours. Seeking to influence the American government, the British provided the Americans a copy of the telegram. On the 28t h  of February, President Wilson released the telegram to the press. The appearance of the news nationwide on March 1s t  galvanized American support for entry into the war. January 31, 1917, Robert Lansing, Secretary of State, received a note from the German Ambassador to the United States. GERMAN AMBASSADOR A new situation has... been created which forces Germany to new decisions.... England is using her naval power for a criminal attempt to force Germany into submission by starvation. In brutal contempt of international law, the... powers led by England..., by ruthless pressure, compel neutral countries either to altogether forego every trade not agreeable to the Entente Powers, or to limit it according to their arbitrary decrees. From February 1, 1917, sea traffic will be stopped with every available weapon and without further notice.... NARRATOR This message from the German Ambassador directly contravened the German guarantee to Wilson   that ended unrestricted submarine warfare following the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915. Coupled with the Zimmerman telegram, Germany’s renewed aggression decisively changed American attitudes about the war.    On February 3, 1917, the United States formally ended diplomatic relations with Imperial Germany. On February 25, 1917, the Cunard Line ship Laconia was struck by German Torpedoes. Floyd Gibbons, an American correspondent for the Chicago Tribune, was on board and lived to describe the scene: FLOYD GIBBONS At 10:30 p.m., there was a muffled noise. Five sharp blasts – the signal to abandon. We walked hurriedly down the corridor ... to the lounge which was amidships. We moved fast but there was no crowding and no panic. ...we looked down the slanting side of the ship and noticed ... her water line ... was a number of feet above the waves. ... the lifeboats... rested against the side of the ship.... I could see that we were going to have difficulty in the descent to the water. ‘Lower away!’ someone gave the order and we started downward ... toward the seemingly hungry... swells. The stern of the boat was down; the bow up, leaving us at an angle of about 45 degrees.... The tiers of lights dimmed slowly from white to yellow, then to red, and nothing was left but the murky mourning of the night..... The ship sank rapidly at the stern until at last its nose stood straight in the air. Then it slid silently down and out of sight.... NARRATOR Austin Y. Hoy, a Chicago machinery company executive working in London, cabled President Woodrow Wilson after the sinking of the LACONIA: AUSTIN HOY My beloved mother and sister, passengers on the LACONIA, have been foully murdered.... I call upon my government to preserve its citizens’ self-respect and save others of my countrymen from such deep grief as I now feel. I am of military age, able to fight. If my country can use me against these brutal assassins, I am at its call. If it stultifies my manhood and my nation’s by remaining passive under outrage, I shall seek a man’s chance under another flag. NARRATOR Events abroad also served to tip American opinion. The fall of the Russian Tsar's regime on March 15, 1917 resulted in a greater moral clarity for the Allied cause: the war was now a struggle of democratic nations against autocratic empires. Despite the passions aroused by the Zimmerman telegram and the resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare, Wilson himself had no personal desire to bring the US into conflict in Europe. Wilson told a journalist off the record: WILSON If there is any alternative, for God’s sake, let’s take it! NARRATOR March 20. Wilson confers with his cabinet. They unanimously vote for War. March 21. Wilson calls Congress into special session for April the 2n  d . On the evening of April the second, 1917, President Wilson addresses a joint session of Congress asking for a Declaration of War. WILSON “While we do these momentous things, let us make very clear to all the world what our motives are. Our object, now as then, is to vindicate the principles of peace and justice as against selfish and autocratic power. Neutrality is no longer feasible or desirable where the peace of the world is involved and the freedom of its peoples, and the menace to that peace and freedom lies in the existence of autocratic governments. We have seen the last of neutrality. We are at the beginning of an age in which it will be insisted that the same standards of conduct and of responsibility for wrong done shall be observed among nations and their governments that are observed among the individual citizens of civilized states.” NARRATOR The Congress rose to its feet and applauded enthusiastically. Cheering crowds lined the streets as Wilson departed from the Capitol. As author Byron Farwell wrote: FARWELL QUOTE It was the greatest speech of Wilson’s life. At about 10:00, when the president had returned to the White House, he and his wife had dinner with friends, after which Wilson wandered into the empty cabinet room. His secretary, Joseph Tumulty, found him there: ‘Think what they were applauding,’ he said to Tumulty. ‘My message today was a message of death for our young men. How strange it seems to applaud that.’ He put his head down on the table in the Cabinet Room, and sobbed.’ NARRATOR Still, in the face of aggression, there were voices of opposition. Arkansas Senator George Norris: SENATOR NORRIS Belligerency would benefit only the class of people who will be made prosperous should we become entangled in the present war, who have already made millions..., and who will make hundreds of millions more if we get into the war. To whom does the war bring prosperity? Not to the soldier. Not to the broken hearted widow. Not to the mother who weeps at the death of her brave boy.... I feel that we are about to put the dollar sign on the American Flag.” NARRATOR The Senate passed the War Resolution with only three Republicans and three Democrats opposed. The House voted 373 for, with 50 opposed. Jeanette Rankin, the first woman to serve in Congress, and the lone female Representative, voted against the resolution. The approved Declaration of War was sent to President Wilson on April 6, 1917. At 1pm that day he signed: “Approved 6 April, 1917, Woodrow Wilson.”   Tolling of the bells 19 gun canon salute   DEBORAH YORK As the country mobilized, we leave you with the voices of two soldiers: PERSHING Major General John J. Pershing to President Woodrow Wilson, April 10, 1917:  “Dear Mr. President: As an officer of the army, may I not extend to you, as Commander-in-Chief of the armies, my sincere congratulations upon your soul-stirring patriotic address to Congress on April 2d. Your strong stand for the right will be an inspiration to humanity everywhere, but especially to the citizens of the Republic. It arouses in the breast of every soldier feelings of the deepest admiration for their leader. I am exultant that my life has been spent as a soldier, in camp and field, that I may now the more worthily and more intelligently serve my country and you. With great respect, Your obedient servant, JOHN J. PERSHING Major General, U.S. Army DEBORAH YORK And from the diary of Sergeant York serialized in  Liberty magazine in 1927: SERGEANT YORK I had no time to bother much about a lot of foreigners quarrelling and killing each other over in Europe. I just wanted to be left alone to live in peace and love. I wasn’t planning my life any other way. ... I figured that if some people in the Wolf River Valley were quarrelling... it wasn’t any of my business to go and interfere, and Europe was much further away.... I never dreamed we’d go over there to fight. So I didn’t pay much attention to it. I didn’t let it bother me until I received from the post office a little red card telling me to register for the draft. That’s how the war came to me, in the midst of all my peace and happiness and dreams, which I felt all along were too good to be true, and just couldn’t last.” THEO MAYER In the meantime, the popular music of the time begins to address the American soldier, his image and his place in the world. IF HE CAN FIGHT LIKE HE CAN LOVE, GOOD NIGHT, GERMANY! If he can fight like he can love, Oh what a soldier boy he’ll be! If he’s just have as good in the trench As he was in the park or on a bench,   Then ev’ry Hun had better run And find a great big linden tree I know he’ll be a hero ‘over there’ ‘Cause he’s a bear in any Morris chair And if he fights like he can love Why, then it’s goodnight, Germany!   Verse 2 Ev’ry single day all the papers say, Mary’s beau is, oh, so brave With his little gun, chasing ev’ry Hun He has taught them to behave Little Mary proudly shakes her head, And says, “Do you remember what I said?”   Chorus If he can fight like he can love, Oh what a soldier boy he’ll be! If he’s just have as good in the trench As he was in the park or on a bench, Then ev’ry Hun had better run And find a great big linden tree I know he’ll be a hero ‘over there’ ‘Cause he’s a bear in any Morris chair And if he fights like he can love Why, then it’s goodnight, Germany! ANNOUNCER I Have A Rendezvous With Death (POEM: No Music or Sound) I have a rendezvous with Death At some disputed barricade, When Spring comes back with rustling shade And apple-blossoms fill the air— I have a rendezvous with Death When Spring brings back blue days and fair. It may be he shall take my hand And lead me into his dark land And close my eyes and quench my breath— It may be I shall pass him still. I have a rendezvous with Death On some scarred slope of battered hill, When Spring comes round again this year And the first meadow-flowers appear. God knows ‘twere better to be deep Pillowed in silk and scented down, Where love throbs out in blissful sleep, Pulse nigh to pulse, and breath to breath, Where hushed awakenings are dear... But I’ve a rendezvous with Death At midnight in some flaming town, When Spring trips north again this year, And I to my pledged word am true, I shall not fail that rendezvous. THEO MAYER And so America goes to war and takes her place on the world stage. Nothing would be same again as the country heads into the most rapid and profound transformation of her young existence. World War 1 Centennial news is here to tell you the story - We will explore WW1 Centennial News THEN - what was happening 100 years ago this week. And we will explore WW1 Centennial News NOW - what is happening today with the centennial commemoration of the war that changed the world. And so it begins [MUSIC] That was Part 2 of our special feature presentation of “In Sacrifice for Liberty and Peace” our 2-part special of America’s reluctant entry into World War 1. The US World War One Centennial Commission was created by Congress to honor, commemorate and educate about WW1. Our programs are to-- inspire a national conversation and awareness about WW1; Our podcast and these specials are a part of that endeavor We are bringing the lessons of the 100 years ago into today's classrooms; We are helping to restore WW1 memorials in communities of all sizes across our country; and of course we are building America’s National WW1 Memorial in Washington DC.   If you like the work we are doing, please support it with a tax deductible donation at ww1cc.org/donate - all lower case Or if you are on your smartphone text  the word: WW1 to 41444. that's the letters ww the number 1 texted to 41444. Any amount is appreciated.   We want to thank commission’s founding sponsor the Pritzker Military Museum and Library for their support. The podcast can be found on our website at ww1cc.org/cn   on  iTunes and google play ww1 Centennial News. Our twitter and instagram handles are both @ww1cc and we are on facebook @ww1centennial. Thanks for listening to this special presentation of WW1 Centennial News… A full list of the many talented people who contributed to this production is in the podcast notes.   [OVER THERE]   So long.

-Written and narrated by Peter Bejger.“I saw that that the windows of these ruined houses were stuffed with rags or boarded up. In these unheated kennels were human beings, whole families, starving, usually sick because all kinds of epidemics were raging….”One hundred years a bitter war was raging throughout Europe. One of the most devastated regions was the borderland of Galicia. Here the massive armies of Tsarist Russia clashed with those of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Imperial Germany. The front surged back and forth. Refugees streamed in all directions. Towns were looted and burned to the ground. Villagers were taken hostage. Exiled. Lynched. And raped.Into this devastation the influential Jewish-Russian writer S. Ansky was sent to organize relief for devastated Jewish communities. Ansky, born Shloyme Zanvel ben-Aaron Rappaport in Belarus, lived from 1863 to 1920. He is best known for his classic drama The Dybbuk. One of Ansky’s greatest contributions was the archive of Jewish folklore he collected during ethnographic expeditions in the Pale of Settlement before the First World War. These songs, stories, and superstitions recorded a culture already on the brink. A culture hit by the forces of emigration, persecution, and modernity. And now war.Ansky maneuvered through a treacherous terrain in wartime Galicia during his relief work. His harrowing experiences were detailed in the Yiddish-language book The Destruction of Galicia published after his death. The book is available in English under the title The Enemy At His Pleasure.Ansky was a citizen of a Russian Empire that was often capriciously brutal to Jews and other minorities. The Russian army brought along this brutality when marching into Austrian-ruled Galicia. There it faced a complex ethnic and political situation. Galician Jews under Austria had enjoyed civil equality. Two very different worlds collided. Ansky saw that Galician Jews had a cult-like dedication to the old Austrian Kaiser Franz Joseph. But everyone had to navigate among other groups. The politically dominant German speakers, the Poles, or the Ruthenians, as the Ukrainians were then called, had their own conflicting agendas.Ansky observed, “At the start of the war, Austria’s Poles were in an ambiguous position, while the Ruthenians stood apart from everyone. The Galician Jews, however, stuck to their pro-Austrian orientation, flaunting it in the most delicate of circumstances, with no concern for horrible consequences.”The consequences were bleak, and Ansky’s sharply observant reports detailed how the people of Galicia “had lost the supreme sanctity of human dignity.”“Packed military trains dashed by every few minutes….Now a medical train flew by. In every window you could see bandaged heads, hands, and other parts of the body….Next, a freight train stuffed with prisoners.…Long, long trains, one after another, kept lumbering by, carrying Ruthenian refugees, most women and children. The passengers were crammed together like chickens in a cage. Some cars were packed with schoolboys, others with intellectuals. No baggage, no belongings were to be seen.”After bearing witness to the devastation, Ansky was affected by a form of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. He described one visit to Russian-occupied Chernivtsi, which he called “an oasis in the wasteland.”“Riding through the wide, bustling streets, I saw large boutiques filled with all sorts of elegant articles, the rich edifices, the hotels with their good, clean rooms, the posters announcing soirees, concerts, spectacles, and other entertainments. I felt spirited away to a different world. And yet I experienced a strange and horrible sensation: I caught myself longing for the burned, mutilated homes and stores. My eyes looked for them. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

@ the National Library of Ireland, Kildare Street recorded at 7pm Tuesday 23 May The centenary of the entry of the United States into the WWI provides a timely opportunity to review the ‘unique relationship' with Ireland. But it was not always close or cordial. The 1916 Rising had cast Ireland's ‘exiled children in America' in the role of potential subversives, in league with Imperial Germany. After the war, to their great disappointment, Irish nationalists discovered that President Woodrow Wilson's advocacy of self-determination did not apply to the subject nations of the victorious Allied powers. Relations reached their nadir with US ambassador David Gray's ‘American note' of February 1944, implicitly threatening violation of Ireland's neutrality unless Dublin's Axis missions were expelled. Things only improved in the wake of JFK's 1963 visit, and, notwithstanding continuing popular opposition to US foreign policy, particularly during the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bushe, reached their high-point with the ‘shamrock diplomacy' of the Clinton era. But where stands the ‘unique relationship' in the wake of the election of the xenophobic and protectionist Donald Trump? To discuss these and related matters join History Ireland editor, Tommy Graham, fwas joined by Michael Kennedy (RIA's Documents on Irish Foreign Policy), Bernadette Whelan (UL), Patrick Geoghegan (TCD) and John Borgonovo (UCC).

As the debates rolled on, the nation considered many elements of the proposed Constitution. In Rhode Island, there was grave concern over the idea that the State would not be able to print its own paper currency. In Virginia, the Kentucky Counties worried about the navigational rights on the Mississippi River. But nearly everyone agreed on one issue - the idea that if the nation went to war, it would be stronger united than not. On April 6, 1917, Congress gathered to vote on whether or not the United States should declare war on Imperial Germany. Four days earlier President Woodrow Wilson had made it clear that the United States was needed and ready for the fight against an evil and depraved monarchy that chose war over peace and threatened the entire world. But, he also made he it clear, that it would not be, could not be, his decision alone to send the US into World War I. Despite the changes in the world since 1787, one thing remained the same. It was that one thing that the Framers had in their prescience foreseen: that no one person should ever be allowed to take the US to war.

As the debates rolled on, the nation considered many elements of the proposed Constitution. In Rhode Island there was grave concern over the idea that the State would not be able to print its own paper currency. In Virginia the Kentucky Counties worried about the navigational rights on the Mississippi River. But nearly everyone agreed on one issue - the idea that if the nation went to war, it would be stronger united than not. On April 6, 1917, Congress gathered to vote on whether or not the United States should declare war on Imperial Germany. Four days earlier President Woodrow Wilson had made it clear that the United States was needed and ready for the fight against an evil and depraved monarchy that chose war over peace and threatened the entire world. But, he made he clear, that it would not be, it could not be, his decision alone to send the US into World War I. Despite the changes in the world since 1787, one thing remained the same. It was that one thing that the Framers had in their prescience foreseen: that no one person should ever be allowed to take the US to war.

From Part 3, "German Nazism". This audio book is made available through the generosity of Mr. Tyler Folger. Narrated by Millian Quinteros.

There's a little red-faced man, Which is Bobs, Rides the tallest 'orse 'e can- Our Bobs. If it bucks or kicks or rears, 'E can sit for twenty years With a smile round both 'is ears- Can't yer, Bobs? That is the ditty British troops would recite about Field Marshall Lord Roberts (1832-1914) veteran of the Boer War and the 19th century wars in Afghanistan.  In this podcast, produced by Love Archaeology for Pod Academy, Tom Horne and Terence Christian explore the life of Lord Roberts whose statue in Kelvingrove, Glasgow has been restored recently.  They talk to his biographer, Dr. Rodney Atwood (The Life of Field Marshall Lord Roberts) and then take a walk in the rain to Kelvingrove to see the statue. Popularly known as ‘Bobs,’ Roberts was born in 1832 and died on the Western Front in 1914. Roberts won the Victoria Cross, as his son would go on to do, in the Boer War in South Africa. He’d also be involved in the strategic defence of India. As a course of this, he campaigned successfully in Afghanistan. Later on he also saved the British army from disaster in South Africa before going on to introduce army reform and campaigning for national service. He was one of the few who recognised that Imperial Germany was going to be a threat to European and world peace. Before and after his death, Field Marshal Lord Roberts was honoured with memorials in Glasgow, Kolkata, and London and also, during his life, he was immortalised in poetry by none other than Rudyard Kipling. Also, being very much aware of the power of the press and the necessity to craft one’s own image, he published an autobiography entitled Forty-One Years in India. When he died visiting the troops in France in 1914, he lay in state in Westminster Hall – joining Winston Churchill as the only other non-Royal to have this honour bestowed upon them in the 20th century. Thereafter, he was buried in St. Paul’s Cathedral in a ceremony that can only be likened to that of Lord Nelson a hundred years before. So who is this Lord Roberts, the person behind poems, and memorials throughout the length of the former British Empire? And why is a figure who was buried by his King alongside the bodies of Wellington and Nelson been neglected in recent years? This is a darkness and light story of empire, fame, notoriety, and charity. From hanging 'traitors' in Afghanistan and using scorched earth tactics and even concentration camps during the Boer War in South Africa to his family providing charity and opportunity for wounded veterans, Roberts—once paralleled with the Duke of Wellington himself—remains a compelling, if problematic, figure who won incredible victories including a famous march from Kandahar, foresaw the Great War with Imperial Germany, carefully crafted his own legend in pursuit of recognition at home, and even interacted with figures as well known as Rudyard Kipling and Lord Kitchener with whom he served in the Boer War. Lord Roberts became our subject of long-term interest due to the proximity of his Glasgow statue. For many years, Lord Roberts’ state stood, nestled in a grove of trees, outside my house. I would walk by him each day on my way to and from the Glasgow University Archaeology Department. His prominence and anonymity—he seems to have every honour available and fought in every 19th century colonial war but without any sort of modern name recognition—made us wonder: “Who was this man of past importance?” The conservation of his statue by Nicholas Boyes Stone Conservation and Glasgow City Council in 2014/2015 made us even more curious.    In researching Field Marshall Lord Roberts’ incredible and varied life—which reads as though it is a “Boys’ Own” adventure—we met his biographer, Dr. Rodney Atwood. Dr. Atwood kindly spoke to us about Lord Roberts.           After the interview, stay with us and we will walk down to Lord Roberts’ statue and discuss its aesthetics and place in the Kelvingrove Park landscape. Dr.

In this interview with historian Edward Ross Dickinson we talk about sex. Well, actually we talk about the talk about sex. Since Michel Foucault's epochal work History of Sexuality (1976) how moderns talked about sex has been a central concern of cultural and intellectual historians. Foucault linked a number of nineteenth-century phenomena, such as the growth of sexology as a discipline and the pathologization of homosexuality, to the formation of new sexual subjectivities and the emergence of biopolitical strategies of population management. Taking a cue from Foucault, some historians of modern Germany have interpreted the talk about sex and reproduction in the Kaiserreich as the foundational stage of a discourse about eugenics that would ultimately contribute to National Socialism and its racial state. In his book Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), Dickinson challenges this view. He likens German sex talk to a barroom brawl that started at one table and spread across a crowded room. Sex was as a field of contestation, involving Christian moralists, sex reformers and sexologists, each tied to social and political interests. In this interview, we discuss the different anthropologies that undergirded the respective positions. Christian (and some Jewish) morality activists argued that sex had to be overcome through the moral virtue, while sex reformers and sexologists understood sex in a monist vein, as a natural drive and the engine of creative production and human biological and social evolution.

In this interview with historian Edward Ross Dickinson we talk about sex. Well, actually we talk about the talk about sex. Since Michel Foucault’s epochal work History of Sexuality (1976) how moderns talked about sex has been a central concern of cultural and intellectual historians. Foucault linked a number of nineteenth-century phenomena, such as the growth of sexology as a discipline and the pathologization of homosexuality, to the formation of new sexual subjectivities and the emergence of biopolitical strategies of population management. Taking a cue from Foucault, some historians of modern Germany have interpreted the talk about sex and reproduction in the Kaiserreich as the foundational stage of a discourse about eugenics that would ultimately contribute to National Socialism and its racial state. In his book Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), Dickinson challenges this view. He likens German sex talk to a barroom brawl that started at one table and spread across a crowded room. Sex was as a field of contestation, involving Christian moralists, sex reformers and sexologists, each tied to social and political interests. In this interview, we discuss the different anthropologies that undergirded the respective positions. Christian (and some Jewish) morality activists argued that sex had to be overcome through the moral virtue, while sex reformers and sexologists understood sex in a monist vein, as a natural drive and the engine of creative production and human biological and social evolution. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this interview with historian Edward Ross Dickinson we talk about sex. Well, actually we talk about the talk about sex. Since Michel Foucault's epochal work History of Sexuality (1976) how moderns talked about sex has been a central concern of cultural and intellectual historians. Foucault linked a number of nineteenth-century phenomena, such as the growth of sexology as a discipline and the pathologization of homosexuality, to the formation of new sexual subjectivities and the emergence of biopolitical strategies of population management. Taking a cue from Foucault, some historians of modern Germany have interpreted the talk about sex and reproduction in the Kaiserreich as the foundational stage of a discourse about eugenics that would ultimately contribute to National Socialism and its racial state. In his book Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), Dickinson challenges this view. He likens German sex talk to a barroom brawl that started at one table and spread across a crowded room. Sex was as a field of contestation, involving Christian moralists, sex reformers and sexologists, each tied to social and political interests. In this interview, we discuss the different anthropologies that undergirded the respective positions. Christian (and some Jewish) morality activists argued that sex had to be overcome through the moral virtue, while sex reformers and sexologists understood sex in a monist vein, as a natural drive and the engine of creative production and human biological and social evolution.

In this interview with historian Edward Ross Dickinson we talk about sex. Well, actually we talk about the talk about sex. Since Michel Foucault’s epochal work History of Sexuality (1976) how moderns talked about sex has been a central concern of cultural and intellectual historians. Foucault linked a number of nineteenth-century phenomena, such as the growth of sexology as a discipline and the pathologization of homosexuality, to the formation of new sexual subjectivities and the emergence of biopolitical strategies of population management. Taking a cue from Foucault, some historians of modern Germany have interpreted the talk about sex and reproduction in the Kaiserreich as the foundational stage of a discourse about eugenics that would ultimately contribute to National Socialism and its racial state. In his book Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), Dickinson challenges this view. He likens German sex talk to a barroom brawl that started at one table and spread across a crowded room. Sex was as a field of contestation, involving Christian moralists, sex reformers and sexologists, each tied to social and political interests. In this interview, we discuss the different anthropologies that undergirded the respective positions. Christian (and some Jewish) morality activists argued that sex had to be overcome through the moral virtue, while sex reformers and sexologists understood sex in a monist vein, as a natural drive and the engine of creative production and human biological and social evolution. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this interview with historian Edward Ross Dickinson we talk about sex. Well, actually we talk about the talk about sex. Since Michel Foucault’s epochal work History of Sexuality (1976) how moderns talked about sex has been a central concern of cultural and intellectual historians. Foucault linked a number of nineteenth-century phenomena, such as the growth of sexology as a discipline and the pathologization of homosexuality, to the formation of new sexual subjectivities and the emergence of biopolitical strategies of population management. Taking a cue from Foucault, some historians of modern Germany have interpreted the talk about sex and reproduction in the Kaiserreich as the foundational stage of a discourse about eugenics that would ultimately contribute to National Socialism and its racial state. In his book Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), Dickinson challenges this view. He likens German sex talk to a barroom brawl that started at one table and spread across a crowded room. Sex was as a field of contestation, involving Christian moralists, sex reformers and sexologists, each tied to social and political interests. In this interview, we discuss the different anthropologies that undergirded the respective positions. Christian (and some Jewish) morality activists argued that sex had to be overcome through the moral virtue, while sex reformers and sexologists understood sex in a monist vein, as a natural drive and the engine of creative production and human biological and social evolution. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this interview with historian Edward Ross Dickinson we talk about sex. Well, actually we talk about the talk about sex. Since Michel Foucault’s epochal work History of Sexuality (1976) how moderns talked about sex has been a central concern of cultural and intellectual historians. Foucault linked a number of nineteenth-century phenomena, such as the growth of sexology as a discipline and the pathologization of homosexuality, to the formation of new sexual subjectivities and the emergence of biopolitical strategies of population management. Taking a cue from Foucault, some historians of modern Germany have interpreted the talk about sex and reproduction in the Kaiserreich as the foundational stage of a discourse about eugenics that would ultimately contribute to National Socialism and its racial state. In his book Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), Dickinson challenges this view. He likens German sex talk to a barroom brawl that started at one table and spread across a crowded room. Sex was as a field of contestation, involving Christian moralists, sex reformers and sexologists, each tied to social and political interests. In this interview, we discuss the different anthropologies that undergirded the respective positions. Christian (and some Jewish) morality activists argued that sex had to be overcome through the moral virtue, while sex reformers and sexologists understood sex in a monist vein, as a natural drive and the engine of creative production and human biological and social evolution. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this interview with historian Edward Ross Dickinson we talk about sex. Well, actually we talk about the talk about sex. Since Michel Foucault’s epochal work History of Sexuality (1976) how moderns talked about sex has been a central concern of cultural and intellectual historians. Foucault linked a number of nineteenth-century phenomena, such as the growth of sexology as a discipline and the pathologization of homosexuality, to the formation of new sexual subjectivities and the emergence of biopolitical strategies of population management. Taking a cue from Foucault, some historians of modern Germany have interpreted the talk about sex and reproduction in the Kaiserreich as the foundational stage of a discourse about eugenics that would ultimately contribute to National Socialism and its racial state. In his book Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), Dickinson challenges this view. He likens German sex talk to a barroom brawl that started at one table and spread across a crowded room. Sex was as a field of contestation, involving Christian moralists, sex reformers and sexologists, each tied to social and political interests. In this interview, we discuss the different anthropologies that undergirded the respective positions. Christian (and some Jewish) morality activists argued that sex had to be overcome through the moral virtue, while sex reformers and sexologists understood sex in a monist vein, as a natural drive and the engine of creative production and human biological and social evolution. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this interview with historian Edward Ross Dickinson we talk about sex. Well, actually we talk about the talk about sex. Since Michel Foucault’s epochal work History of Sexuality (1976) how moderns talked about sex has been a central concern of cultural and intellectual historians. Foucault linked a number of nineteenth-century phenomena, such as the growth of sexology as a discipline and the pathologization of homosexuality, to the formation of new sexual subjectivities and the emergence of biopolitical strategies of population management. Taking a cue from Foucault, some historians of modern Germany have interpreted the talk about sex and reproduction in the Kaiserreich as the foundational stage of a discourse about eugenics that would ultimately contribute to National Socialism and its racial state. In his book Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), Dickinson challenges this view. He likens German sex talk to a barroom brawl that started at one table and spread across a crowded room. Sex was as a field of contestation, involving Christian moralists, sex reformers and sexologists, each tied to social and political interests. In this interview, we discuss the different anthropologies that undergirded the respective positions. Christian (and some Jewish) morality activists argued that sex had to be overcome through the moral virtue, while sex reformers and sexologists understood sex in a monist vein, as a natural drive and the engine of creative production and human biological and social evolution. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

If you’re a native-born American, you’re probably familiar with Aunt Jemima (pancake syrup), Uncle Ben (precooked rice), and Rastus (oatmeal)–commercial icons all. They were co-oped in whole or part from stock characters in American minstrel shows, largely because they suggested to white consumers a comforting though bygone hospitality. Aunt Jemima said “You might not have a loving mammy to do your home cookin’, but you can eat as if you did.” I grew up with Aunt Jemima and loved her syrup dearly, so I knew this. But I did not know that a similar tradition of racist commercial icons existed in Imperial Germany. I do now, thanks to David Ciarlo‘s insightful Advertising Empire: Race and Visual Culture in Imperial Germany (Harvard UP, 2011). The Germans had been using images such as the “tobacco moor” to stamp their exotic trade goods since the eighteenth century. But it was only in the 1890s that they began to use the “moor” in mass advertising per se. It was only then, too, that they began to carve out an empire full of “moors” in southwest Africa. David skillfully connects the two phenomenon, showing that the latter tangibly altered the character of the former. The image of Africans in ads went from one that emphasized the exotic to one that stressed the exotic under German domination. Depictions that were almost entirely fanciful became much more concrete. Africans came to represent racial Untermenchen in the service of their German overlords. It was an appealing picture, and one the Germans would–unfortunately–not soon forget. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

If you’re a native-born American, you’re probably familiar with Aunt Jemima (pancake syrup), Uncle Ben (precooked rice), and Rastus (oatmeal)–commercial icons all. They were co-oped in whole or part from stock characters in American minstrel shows, largely because they suggested to white consumers a comforting though bygone hospitality. Aunt Jemima said “You might not have a loving mammy to do your home cookin’, but you can eat as if you did.” I grew up with Aunt Jemima and loved her syrup dearly, so I knew this. But I did not know that a similar tradition of racist commercial icons existed in Imperial Germany. I do now, thanks to David Ciarlo‘s insightful Advertising Empire: Race and Visual Culture in Imperial Germany (Harvard UP, 2011). The Germans had been using images such as the “tobacco moor” to stamp their exotic trade goods since the eighteenth century. But it was only in the 1890s that they began to use the “moor” in mass advertising per se. It was only then, too, that they began to carve out an empire full of “moors” in southwest Africa. David skillfully connects the two phenomenon, showing that the latter tangibly altered the character of the former. The image of Africans in ads went from one that emphasized the exotic to one that stressed the exotic under German domination. Depictions that were almost entirely fanciful became much more concrete. Africans came to represent racial Untermenchen in the service of their German overlords. It was an appealing picture, and one the Germans would–unfortunately–not soon forget. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices