Podcasts about northwestern europe

Send us a message or question! *** PART 1 OF 2***Subscribers can listen to Part 2  now. In this episode of Never Mind the Dam Busters, host James Jefferies and guest Jane Gulliford Lowes delve into the often-overlooked history of RAF Bomber Command's gardening operations during World War II. They discuss Jane's new book, 'The Invisible Campaign', which sheds light on the complexities and significance of mine laying operations. The conversation covers the mechanics of mines, the aims of the campaign, the types of aircraft used, and the coordination between the RAF and the Royal Navy. They also address myths surrounding gardening operations, the experiences of the crews involved, and the public perception of these missions.You can order Jane's book here: https://mortonsbooks.co.uk/book/the-invisible-campaign-bomber-command-gardening-operations-19401945If you'd like a signed copy, contact us at nmtdambusters@gmail.com TakeawaysGardening operations involved laying aerial mines in enemy waters.The term 'gardening' was a code for mine laying to confuse the enemy.Mines were designed to create pressure waves to destroy vessels.The campaign aimed to disrupt enemy shipping and trade routes.Bomber Command's mine laying operations began in April 1940.The geographical scope of mine laying extended across Northwestern Europe.Various aircraft were adapted for mine laying throughout the war.Coordination between the RAF and Royal Navy was crucial for success.Myths about gardening operations being easy or for inexperienced crews are unfounded.Public perception of mine laying operations was often overshadowed by bombing raids.Chapters00:00 Introduction to Bomber Command and Myths03:07 Jane's Journey and Previous Works05:54 Understanding Gardening Operations08:46 The Mechanics of Mines11:26 Aims of the Mine Laying Campaign13:42 The Evolution of Mine Laying16:15 Geographical Scope of Mine Laying18:05 Types of Aircraft Used for Mine Laying20:39 Coordination Between RAF and Royal Navy26:45 The Importance of Naval Expertise in Mine Warfare27:51 Coastal Command's Role and Challenges30:06 Debunking Myths: Gardening Operations37:25 Typical Gardening Operations: Training and Execution41:08 Crew Sentiments on Gardening Operations43:44 Researching the History of Mine Laying47:53 Harris's Perspective on Gardening Operations50:33 Public Perception of Gardening Operations53:22 Show intro.wavSupport the showPlease subscribe to Never Mind The Dambusters wherever you get your podcasts. You can support the show, and help us produce great content, by becoming a paid subscriber from just $3 a month here https://www.buzzsprout.com/2327200/support . Supporters get early access to episodes and invitations to livestreams. Thank you for listening! You can reach out to us on social media at @RAF_BomberPod (X) or @NeverMindTheDambusters (Instagram)You can find out about James' research, articles, lectures and podcasts here .You can read more about Jane's work on her website at https://www.justcuriousjane.com/, and listen to podcasts/media stuff here

Subscriber-only episodeSend us a message or question! *** PART 1 OF 2*** Episode on general release Wednesday 26 March 2025. ***Subscribers can listen to Part 2  now. In this episode of Never Mind the Dam Busters, host James Jefferies and guest Jane Gulliford Lowes delve into the often-overlooked history of RAF Bomber Command's gardening operations during World War II. They discuss Jane's new book, 'The Invisible Campaign', which sheds light on the complexities and significance of mine laying operations. The conversation covers the mechanics of mines, the aims of the campaign, the types of aircraft used, and the coordination between the RAF and the Royal Navy. They also address myths surrounding gardening operations, the experiences of the crews involved, and the public perception of these missions.You can order Jane's book here: https://mortonsbooks.co.uk/book/the-invisible-campaign-bomber-command-gardening-operations-19401945If you'd like a signed copy, contact us at nmtdambusters@gmail.com TakeawaysGardening operations involved laying aerial mines in enemy waters.The term 'gardening' was a code for mine laying to confuse the enemy.Mines were designed to create pressure waves to destroy vessels.The campaign aimed to disrupt enemy shipping and trade routes.Bomber Command's mine laying operations began in April 1940.The geographical scope of mine laying extended across Northwestern Europe.Various aircraft were adapted for mine laying throughout the war.Coordination between the RAF and Royal Navy was crucial for success.Myths about gardening operations being easy or for inexperienced crews are unfounded.Public perception of mine laying operations was often overshadowed by bombing raids.Chapters00:00 Introduction to Bomber Command and Myths03:07 Jane's Journey and Previous Works05:54 Understanding Gardening Operations08:46 The Mechanics of Mines11:26 Aims of the Mine Laying Campaign13:42 The Evolution of Mine Laying16:15 Geographical Scope of Mine Laying18:05 Types of Aircraft Used for Mine Laying20:39 Coordination Between RAF and Royal Navy26:45 The Importance of Naval Expertise in Mine Warfare27:51 Coastal Command's Role and Challenges30:06 Debunking Myths: Gardening Operations37:25 Typical Gardening Operations: Training and Execution41:08 Crew Sentiments on Gardening Operations43:44 Researching the History of Mine Laying47:53 Harris's Perspective on Gardening Operations50:33 Public Perception of Gardening Operations53:22 Show intro.wavPlease subscribe to Never Mind The Dambusters wherever you get your podcasts. You can support the show, and help us produce great content, by becoming a paid subscriber from just $3 a month here https://www.buzzsprout.com/2327200/support . Supporters get early access to episodes and invitations to livestreams. Thank you for listening! You can reach out to us on social media at @RAF_BomberPod (X) or @NeverMindTheDambusters (Instagram)You can find out about James' research, articles, lectures and podcasts here .You can read more about Jane's work on her website at https://www.justcuriousjane.com/, and listen to podcasts/media stuff here

It comprises England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.It includes the island of Great Britain, the north-eastern part of the island of Ireland, and most of the smaller islands within the British Isles.Northern Ireland shares a land border with the Republic of Ireland; otherwise, the United Kingdom is surrounded by the Atlantic Ocean, the North Sea, the English Channel, the Celtic Sea and the Irish Sea. The total area of the United Kingdom is 242,495 square kilometres (93,628 sq mi), with an estimated 2023 population of over 68 million people.

The largest of the Channel Islands, when you think of Jersey, it's doubtful that Neanderthals, Woolly Mammoths, and Woolly Rhinoceroses come to mind. But thanks to 20th-century excavations and advancing science in the modern age, we now know that Jersey was one of the largest sites of Neanderthal occupation in Northwestern Europe. With over 200,000 stone tools discovered and skeletal evidence of both Neanderthals and Mega Fauna, it was an island where many coexisted. But how were these incredible items found, and how did Nazi Occupation nearly prevent these brilliant discoveries?In this episode, Tristan welcomes Dr. Matt Pope, the leader of excavations at the Neanderthal site of La Cotte de St Brelade in Jersey, to talk about his team's work and excavations. Looking at how sea levels changed over time, the discovery of Bone Heaps, and Neanderthal migrations, what was Jersey like in the Ice Age, and what remnants of the past can we still see on the island's surface today?Discover the past on History Hit with ad-free original podcasts and documentaries released weekly presented by world renowned historians like Dan Snow, Suzannah Lipscomb, Lucy Worsley, Matt Lewis, Tristan Hughes and more. Get 50% off your first 3 months with code ANCIENTS. Download the app on your smart TV or in the app store or sign up here.You can take part in our listener survey here.For more Ancient's content, subscribe to our Ancient's newsletter here. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Goose-riding is a popular entertainment game that belongs to the early medieval games of torment with animals that were then widespread in the countryside of Northwestern Europe. These games came in various forms, but at the beginning of the 21st century, it is mainly goose riding on horseback that is concerned. In the Middle Ages, the games were rather rough and a live goose was used. In the present day, the use of a dead goose eliminates the cruelty to animals and the cruelty to morals. The main objective of each game is always to separate the head from the body of the goose while it is hung on a gallows.  By the middle of the 19th century, protests against the game of torment were growing, because not everyone saw the game as entertainment. In the Flemish polder villages (Berendrecht, Ekeren, Hoevenen, Lillo, Stabroek and Zandvliet) north of Antwerp, the so-called goose-riding game takes place in the period from Carnival to Mid-Lent. The rider of the association who pulls the goose's head may call himself "King" for a whole year. Every year, the 'Kings' of the different goose-rider associations of the last three years gather to fight for the 'Emperor's crown'.  This year, after two long Covid years, the spectacle could finally take place again. The event is preceded by a parade through the streets of the village of the 'ruling Emperor'. This year 'it took place in Zandvliet. The winner of the spectacle may call himself the "Emperor of the Goose Riders". A real honour, both for the rider and for his association. Next year, the emperor's crown will be fought over sportingly in the beautiful and picturesque village of Lillo. Recorded by Tony van Dorst.

" England & Northwestern Europe - The history of Britain, the heart of our England & Northwestern Europe region, is often presented as one group of invaders after another displacing the native population. The Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, and Normans all left their mark on Britain both politically and culturally. However, the story of Britain is far more complex. In fact, modern studies suggest the earliest populations weren't wiped out, but adapted and absorbed the new arrivals." --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/theysusannamaeohagan/support

Rescue workers struggle to reach survivors of the devastating floods with authorities in Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands trying to take stock of the catastrophic damage. Also, rights groups have condemned raids on media organisations and journalists in Belarus, and the punk group that is asking the establishment to resolve a dispute over music rights.

Northwestern Europe seizes oceanic leadership.

Kim Scipes is a former elected Chicago Chapter Chair and long-time member of the National Writers Union, UAW #1981. He’s previously been a member of the Graphic Communications International Union, the National Education Association, and the American Federation of Teachers. He lives and works in Northwest Indiana, teaching at Purdue University Northwest for the past 16 years. He has published three books, and over 225 articles and book reviews, mostly on labor, in the US, and around the world. His latest book, Building Global Labor Solidarity: Lessons from the Philippines, South Africa, Northwestern Europe, and the United States, will be published late this summer. His writings–many with links to the original article–can be accessed at https://faculty.pnw.edu/kim-scipes/publications/#2 Become a Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/PARCMEDIAFollow Us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Vince_EmanueleFollow Us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/1713FranklinSt/Follow Us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/parcmedia/?... #PARCMedia is a news and media project founded by two USMC veterans, Sergio Kochergin & Vince Emanuele. They give a working-class take on issues surrounding politics, ecology, community organizing, war, culture, and philosophy

Northwestern Europe seizes oceanic leadership.

There have been many  Moors who claim that we should not refer to ourselves as "Black" and that label has a status attached to it of a lower class citizen. Today we investigate this claim and take a look at a case entitled United States v. Cartozian, 6 F.2d 919 (D. Or. 1925) The test is racial, and for practical purposes of the statute must be applied to a group of living persons now possessing in common the requisite characteristics for naturalization. Nor is it one to be wholly determined by ethnological and scientific research, but it must satisfy the common understanding that the racial characteristics are now the same, or sufficiently so to justify the interpreters of the statute written in the words of common speec:h for common understanding by unscientific men in classifying such persons together in the statutory category as white persons. United States v. Thind, 261 U.S. 204, 209, 43 S. Ct. 338, 67 L. Ed. 616. In defining the type of person eligible to citizenship, the court uses this language: "The words of familiar speech, which were used by the original framers of the law, were intended to include only the type of man whom they knew as white. The immigration of that day was almost exclusively from the British Isles and Northwestern Europe, whence they and their forbears had come. When they extended the privilege of American citizenship to `any alien, being a free white person,' it was these immigrants bone of their bone and flesh of their flesh and their kind whom they must have had affirmatively in mind.

CliffCentral.com — Charlemagne’s reign marks the end of the dark ages and the start of the medieval era. In this episode we explore the origins of France and Germany, the genealogies of all the kings and queens of Europe, and the first emergence of Northwestern Europe from savagery and barbarism, since the fall of the Roman Empire. Taylor Blinds & Shutters

Norway (Norwegian: About this soundNorge (Bokmål) or About this soundNoreg (Nynorsk); Northern Sami: Norga; Southern Sami: Nöörje; Lule Sami: Vuodna), officially the Kingdom of Norway, is a Nordic country in Northwestern Europe whose territory comprises the western and northernmost portion of the Scandinavian Peninsula; the remote island of Jan Mayen and the archipelago of Svalbard are also part of the Kingdom of Norway. The Antarctic Peter I Island and the sub-Antarctic Bouvet Island are dependent territories and thus not considered part of the kingdom. Norway also lays claim to a section of Antarctica known as Queen Maud Land. Norway has a total area of 385,207 square kilometres (148,729 sq mi)[6] and a population of 5,312,300 (as of August 2018). The country shares a long eastern border with Sweden (1,619 km or 1,006 mi long). Norway is bordered by Finland and Russia to the north-east, and the Skagerrak strait to the south, with Denmark on the other side. Norway has an extensive coastline, facing the North Atlantic Ocean and the Barents Sea. The maritime influence also dominates Norway's climate with mild lowland temperatures on the sea coasts, whereas the interior, while colder, is also a lot milder than areas elsewhere in the world on such northerly latitudes. Even during polar night in the north, temperatures above freezing are commonplace on the coastline. The maritime influence brings high rainfall and snowfall to some areas of the country. Harald V of the House of Glücksburg is the current King of Norway. Erna Solberg has been prime minister since 2013 when she replaced Jens Stoltenberg. As a unitary sovereign state with a constitutional monarchy, Norway divides state power between the parliament, the cabinet and the supreme court, as determined by the 1814 constitution. The kingdom was established in 872 as a merger of many petty kingdoms and has existed continuously for 1,147 years. From 1537 to 1814, Norway was a part of the Kingdom of Denmark-Norway, and from 1814 to 1905, it was in a personal union with the Kingdom of Sweden. Norway was neutral during the First World War. Norway remained neutral until April 1940 when the country was invaded and occupied by Germany until the end of Second World War. Norway has both administrative and political subdivisions on two levels: counties and municipalities. The Sámi people have a certain amount of self-determination and influence over traditional territories through the Sámi Parliament and the Finnmark Act. Norway maintains close ties with both the European Union and the United States. Norway is also a founding member of the United Nations, NATO, the European Free Trade Association, the Council of Europe, the Antarctic Treaty, and the Nordic Council; a member of the European Economic Area, the WTO, and the OECD; and a part of the Schengen Area. In addition, the Norwegian languages share mutual intelligibility with Danish and Swedish. Norway maintains the Nordic welfare model with universal health care and a comprehensive social security system, and its values are rooted in egalitarian ideals. The Norwegian state has large ownership positions in key industrial sectors, having extensive reserves of petroleum, natural gas, minerals, lumber, seafood, and fresh water. The petroleum industry accounts for around a quarter of the country's gross domestic product (GDP). On a per-capita basis, Norway is the world's largest producer of oil and natural gas outside of the Middle East. The country has the fourth-highest per capita income in the world on the World Bank and IMF lists.l On the CIA's GDP (PPP) per capita list (2015 estimate) which includes autonomous territories and regions, Norway ranks as number eleven. It has the world's largest sovereign wealth fund, with a value of US$1 trillion. Norway has had the highest Human Development Index ranking in the world since 2009, a position also held previously between 2001 and 2006. It also had the highest inequality-adjusted ran --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/thehistoryexpress/support

My guests for this episode are Alex Nowrasteh and Andrew Forrester of the Cato Institute. Our topic is a working paper they recently published titled How Mass Immigration Affects Countries with Weak Economic Institutions: A Natural Experiment in Jordan. The abstract reads as follows: Saddam Hussein’s unexpected 1990 invasion of Kuwait forced 300, 000 Kuwaitis of Palestinian descent to flee into Jordan. By 1991, this large exogenous population shock increased Jordan’s population by about 10 percent. Jordanian law allowed these refugees to work, live, and vote in Jordan immediately upon entry. The refugees did not bring social capital that eroded Jordan’s institutions. On the contrary, we find that Jordan’s economic institutions substantially improved in the decade after the refugees arrived. Our empirical methodology employs difference-in-differences and the synthetic control method, both of which indicate that the significant improvement in Jordanian economic institutions would not have happened to the same extent without the influx of refugees. Our case study indicates that the refugee surge was the main mechanism by which Jordan’s economic institutions improved over this time. Does mass immigration destroy institutions? 1990s Israel as a natural experiment by Benjamin Powell, J.R. Clark and Alex Nowrasteh Jared Rubin's interview about political power and economic growth is complementary with this one. Rubin's theory is that the rising political influence of the bourgeoisie partially caused the economic growth in Northwestern Europe in the early modern period. In Jordan in 1990, the Palestinian minority was particularly urban and bourgeois, so the massive influx of Palestinians increased the political power of the bourgeoisie, thus creating political pressure for increasing economic freedom.  

Today everybody wants to be a capitalist, even Chinese communists. It would be easy to think, then, that capitalism is “natural,” that there is a little profit-seeker in each one of us just waiting to pop out. There is some truth to this notion: humans are the most cooperative species on earth, and one of the most common ways we cooperate is through trade. Some form of “you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours” lies at the heart of almost every human relationship. We are built for reciprocation, and we do it remarkably well. But, as Joyce Appleby shows in her provocative, readable, and thoroughly entertaining The Relentless Revolution: A History of Capitalism (Norton, 2010), the natural impulse for reciprocal back-scratching did not capitalism make. A set of very unusual historical forces did. These historical forces were not everywhere and always. On the contrary, they came together in one place at one time: Northwestern Europe in what we might call the “long modern period,” roughly the 15th though 18th centuries. Of course people in other places and other times traded, and even traded a lot. But they did not develop the culture of capitalism, that is, a set of values that suggested making money was good not only for the money-maker but for everyone else. Alexander Pope, one of the early apologists of capitalism, put the capitalist ethic this way: “Thus God and Nature link'd the gen'ral frame, and bade self-love and social be the same.” (An Essay on Man, 1733) Gordon Gekko, in the (anti-capitalist) film Wall Street (1987), put it more crudely: “Greed…is good.” Neither, it should be said, did pre-capitalist traders develop the institutions that make capitalism operate, that is, things like investment banks, credits, stock markets, insurance, and a whole host of government regulations (yes, government regulations) without which “free trade” could not be “free” at all. Caesar was not concerned about in the federal reserve. He didn't even have a federal reserve to be concerned about. All of which leads to a single and startling conclusion: the culture and institutions of capitalism are Western. Thus when we in the West promote capitalism as the “best” way of going about things economic, we are engaging in a subtle form of cross-cultural persuasion. We may be right, capitalism may indeed be the best way to provision goods and services to the masses (I think it obviously is). But that doesn't make capitalist culture any the less foreign to most of the world. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven't already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today everybody wants to be a capitalist, even Chinese communists. It would be easy to think, then, that capitalism is “natural,” that there is a little profit-seeker in each one of us just waiting to pop out. There is some truth to this notion: humans are the most cooperative species on earth, and one of the most common ways we cooperate is through trade. Some form of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” lies at the heart of almost every human relationship. We are built for reciprocation, and we do it remarkably well. But, as Joyce Appleby shows in her provocative, readable, and thoroughly entertaining The Relentless Revolution: A History of Capitalism (Norton, 2010), the natural impulse for reciprocal back-scratching did not capitalism make. A set of very unusual historical forces did. These historical forces were not everywhere and always. On the contrary, they came together in one place at one time: Northwestern Europe in what we might call the “long modern period,” roughly the 15th though 18th centuries. Of course people in other places and other times traded, and even traded a lot. But they did not develop the culture of capitalism, that is, a set of values that suggested making money was good not only for the money-maker but for everyone else. Alexander Pope, one of the early apologists of capitalism, put the capitalist ethic this way: “Thus God and Nature link’d the gen’ral frame, and bade self-love and social be the same.” (An Essay on Man, 1733) Gordon Gekko, in the (anti-capitalist) film Wall Street (1987), put it more crudely: “Greed…is good.” Neither, it should be said, did pre-capitalist traders develop the institutions that make capitalism operate, that is, things like investment banks, credits, stock markets, insurance, and a whole host of government regulations (yes, government regulations) without which “free trade” could not be “free” at all. Caesar was not concerned about in the federal reserve. He didn’t even have a federal reserve to be concerned about. All of which leads to a single and startling conclusion: the culture and institutions of capitalism are Western. Thus when we in the West promote capitalism as the “best” way of going about things economic, we are engaging in a subtle form of cross-cultural persuasion. We may be right, capitalism may indeed be the best way to provision goods and services to the masses (I think it obviously is). But that doesn’t make capitalist culture any the less foreign to most of the world. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today everybody wants to be a capitalist, even Chinese communists. It would be easy to think, then, that capitalism is “natural,” that there is a little profit-seeker in each one of us just waiting to pop out. There is some truth to this notion: humans are the most cooperative species on earth, and one of the most common ways we cooperate is through trade. Some form of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” lies at the heart of almost every human relationship. We are built for reciprocation, and we do it remarkably well. But, as Joyce Appleby shows in her provocative, readable, and thoroughly entertaining The Relentless Revolution: A History of Capitalism (Norton, 2010), the natural impulse for reciprocal back-scratching did not capitalism make. A set of very unusual historical forces did. These historical forces were not everywhere and always. On the contrary, they came together in one place at one time: Northwestern Europe in what we might call the “long modern period,” roughly the 15th though 18th centuries. Of course people in other places and other times traded, and even traded a lot. But they did not develop the culture of capitalism, that is, a set of values that suggested making money was good not only for the money-maker but for everyone else. Alexander Pope, one of the early apologists of capitalism, put the capitalist ethic this way: “Thus God and Nature link’d the gen’ral frame, and bade self-love and social be the same.” (An Essay on Man, 1733) Gordon Gekko, in the (anti-capitalist) film Wall Street (1987), put it more crudely: “Greed…is good.” Neither, it should be said, did pre-capitalist traders develop the institutions that make capitalism operate, that is, things like investment banks, credits, stock markets, insurance, and a whole host of government regulations (yes, government regulations) without which “free trade” could not be “free” at all. Caesar was not concerned about in the federal reserve. He didn’t even have a federal reserve to be concerned about. All of which leads to a single and startling conclusion: the culture and institutions of capitalism are Western. Thus when we in the West promote capitalism as the “best” way of going about things economic, we are engaging in a subtle form of cross-cultural persuasion. We may be right, capitalism may indeed be the best way to provision goods and services to the masses (I think it obviously is). But that doesn’t make capitalist culture any the less foreign to most of the world. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today everybody wants to be a capitalist, even Chinese communists. It would be easy to think, then, that capitalism is “natural,” that there is a little profit-seeker in each one of us just waiting to pop out. There is some truth to this notion: humans are the most cooperative species on earth, and one of the most common ways we cooperate is through trade. Some form of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” lies at the heart of almost every human relationship. We are built for reciprocation, and we do it remarkably well. But, as Joyce Appleby shows in her provocative, readable, and thoroughly entertaining The Relentless Revolution: A History of Capitalism (Norton, 2010), the natural impulse for reciprocal back-scratching did not capitalism make. A set of very unusual historical forces did. These historical forces were not everywhere and always. On the contrary, they came together in one place at one time: Northwestern Europe in what we might call the “long modern period,” roughly the 15th though 18th centuries. Of course people in other places and other times traded, and even traded a lot. But they did not develop the culture of capitalism, that is, a set of values that suggested making money was good not only for the money-maker but for everyone else. Alexander Pope, one of the early apologists of capitalism, put the capitalist ethic this way: “Thus God and Nature link’d the gen’ral frame, and bade self-love and social be the same.” (An Essay on Man, 1733) Gordon Gekko, in the (anti-capitalist) film Wall Street (1987), put it more crudely: “Greed…is good.” Neither, it should be said, did pre-capitalist traders develop the institutions that make capitalism operate, that is, things like investment banks, credits, stock markets, insurance, and a whole host of government regulations (yes, government regulations) without which “free trade” could not be “free” at all. Caesar was not concerned about in the federal reserve. He didn’t even have a federal reserve to be concerned about. All of which leads to a single and startling conclusion: the culture and institutions of capitalism are Western. Thus when we in the West promote capitalism as the “best” way of going about things economic, we are engaging in a subtle form of cross-cultural persuasion. We may be right, capitalism may indeed be the best way to provision goods and services to the masses (I think it obviously is). But that doesn’t make capitalist culture any the less foreign to most of the world. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today everybody wants to be a capitalist, even Chinese communists. It would be easy to think, then, that capitalism is “natural,” that there is a little profit-seeker in each one of us just waiting to pop out. There is some truth to this notion: humans are the most cooperative species on earth, and one of the most common ways we cooperate is through trade. Some form of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” lies at the heart of almost every human relationship. We are built for reciprocation, and we do it remarkably well. But, as Joyce Appleby shows in her provocative, readable, and thoroughly entertaining The Relentless Revolution: A History of Capitalism (Norton, 2010), the natural impulse for reciprocal back-scratching did not capitalism make. A set of very unusual historical forces did. These historical forces were not everywhere and always. On the contrary, they came together in one place at one time: Northwestern Europe in what we might call the “long modern period,” roughly the 15th though 18th centuries. Of course people in other places and other times traded, and even traded a lot. But they did not develop the culture of capitalism, that is, a set of values that suggested making money was good not only for the money-maker but for everyone else. Alexander Pope, one of the early apologists of capitalism, put the capitalist ethic this way: “Thus God and Nature link’d the gen’ral frame, and bade self-love and social be the same.” (An Essay on Man, 1733) Gordon Gekko, in the (anti-capitalist) film Wall Street (1987), put it more crudely: “Greed…is good.” Neither, it should be said, did pre-capitalist traders develop the institutions that make capitalism operate, that is, things like investment banks, credits, stock markets, insurance, and a whole host of government regulations (yes, government regulations) without which “free trade” could not be “free” at all. Caesar was not concerned about in the federal reserve. He didn’t even have a federal reserve to be concerned about. All of which leads to a single and startling conclusion: the culture and institutions of capitalism are Western. Thus when we in the West promote capitalism as the “best” way of going about things economic, we are engaging in a subtle form of cross-cultural persuasion. We may be right, capitalism may indeed be the best way to provision goods and services to the masses (I think it obviously is). But that doesn’t make capitalist culture any the less foreign to most of the world. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices