Podcasts about Roosevelt

George Selgin has spent over four decades thinking about money, banking, and economic history, and Tyler has known him for nearly all of it. Selgin's new book False Dawn: The New Deal and the Promise of Recovery, 1933–1947 examines what the New Deal actually accomplished—and failed to accomplish—in confronting the Great Depression.  Tyler and George discuss the surprising lack of fiscal and monetary stimulus in the New Deal, whether revaluing gold was really the best path to economic reflation, how much Glass-Steagall and other individual parts of the New Deal mattered, Keynes' "very sound" advice to Roosevelt, why Hayek's analysis fell short, whether America would've done better with a more concentrated banking sector, how well the quantity theory of money holds up, his vision for a "night watchman" Fed, how many countries should dollarize, whether stablecoins should be allowed to pay interest, his stake in a fractional-reserve Andalusian donkey ownership scheme, why his Spanish vocabulary is particularly strong on plumbing, his ambivalence about the eurozone, what really got America out of the Great Depression, and more. Read a full transcript enhanced with helpful links, or watch the full video on the new dedicated Conversations with Tyler channel. Recorded September 26th, 2025. Other ways to connect Follow us on X and Instagram Follow Tyler on X Follow George on X Sign up for our newsletter Join our Discord Email us: cowenconvos@mercatus.gmu.edu Learn more about Conversations with Tyler and other Mercatus Center podcasts here. Photo Credit: Richie Downs

‘There is only one thing worse than fighting with allies, and that is fighting without them.' – Winston Churchill In a world where geopolitical alliances are fraying and tensions are rising, what can the fragile coalition that defeated Hitler teach us about the challenges facing the West today? In September 2025 historian Tim Bouverie came to the Intelligence Squared stage to discuss his Sunday Times bestselling book Allies at War: The Politics of Defeating Hitler. In conversation with Editor of The Spectator Michael Gove, Bouverie described how Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin overcame deep ideological differences and strategic rivalries to form a fragile but ultimately victorious alliance against Nazi Germany. Now, with Donald Trump threatening to abandon NATO, Vladimir Putin intent on exploiting Western fissures, and democratic nations questioning their own cohesion, the lessons of WWII's Grand Alliance have never felt more relevant. --- If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all our full ad free conversations, plus all of our Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events  ...  Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series … Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. … Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Shifting the pass-the-parcel of news and removing the wrapping when the music stops. Which this week happens here … … will rock bands get offered the Saudi money? … “there could be no British nightclubs in 2030” … Diane Keaton and why all men were besotted … the day Led Zeppelin played an Aqua Theatre for an audience swimming and in boats … “the optimum number of band members is either three or loads” … did Easy Rider invent the music video? … Trainspotting, Reservoir Dogs, Midnight Cowboy, Almost Famous – soundtrack moments that made their movies … 12 million more UK tickets were sold than in 2019 yet 150 small venues closed in two years: “scale is now part of the appeal” … the genius of John Sebastian … the end of MTV UK and how video changed the landscape … “Here's to you Mrs Roosevelt”: how Simon & Garfunkel got into the Graduate … can anyone fathom Ghost Town Blues by Prefab Sprout? Plus Tim Hardin, Harry Nilsson and birthday guest Matthew Elliott on why three is the magic number.Help us to keep The Longest Conversation In Rock going: https://www.patreon.com/wordinyourear Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Shifting the pass-the-parcel of news and removing the wrapping when the music stops. Which this week happens here … … will rock bands get offered the Saudi money? … “there could be no British nightclubs in 2030” … Diane Keaton and why all men were besotted … the day Led Zeppelin played an Aqua Theatre for an audience swimming and in boats … “the optimum number of band members is either three or loads” … did Easy Rider invent the music video? … Trainspotting, Reservoir Dogs, Midnight Cowboy, Almost Famous – soundtrack moments that made their movies … 12 million more UK tickets were sold than in 2019 yet 150 small venues closed in two years: “scale is now part of the appeal” … the genius of John Sebastian … the end of MTV UK and how video changed the landscape … “Here's to you Mrs Roosevelt”: how Simon & Garfunkel got into the Graduate … can anyone fathom Ghost Town Blues by Prefab Sprout? Plus Tim Hardin, Harry Nilsson and birthday guest Matthew Elliott on why three is the magic number.Help us to keep The Longest Conversation In Rock going: https://www.patreon.com/wordinyourear Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

‘There is only one thing worse than fighting with allies, and that is fighting without them.' – Winston Churchill In a world where geopolitical alliances are fraying and tensions are rising, what can the fragile coalition that defeated Hitler teach us about the challenges facing the West today? In September 2025 historian Tim Bouverie came to the Intelligence Squared stage to discuss his Sunday Times bestselling book Allies at War: The Politics of Defeating Hitler. In conversation with Editor of The Spectator Michael Gove, Bouverie described how Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin overcame deep ideological differences and strategic rivalries to form a fragile but ultimately victorious alliance against Nazi Germany. Now, with Donald Trump threatening to abandon NATO, Vladimir Putin intent on exploiting Western fissures, and democratic nations questioning their own cohesion, the lessons of WWII's Grand Alliance have never felt more relevant. ---- s is the first instalment of a two-part episode. If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all our full ad free conversations, plus all of our Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events  ...  Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series … Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. … Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Diving into the history of Morgan Stanley's first bond deal, our Head of Corporate Credit Research Andrew Sheets explains the value of high-quality corporate bonds.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Head of Corporate Credit Research at Morgan Stanley. Today, a look at the first bond that Morgan Stanley helped issue 90 years ago and what it might tell us about market uncertainty. It's Thursday, October 9th at 4pm in London. In times of uncertainty, it's common to turn to history. And this we think also applies to financial markets. The Great Depression began roughly 95 years ago. Of its many causes, one was that the same banks that were shepherding customer deposits were also involved in much riskier and more volatile financial market activity. And so, when the stock market crashed, falling over 40 percent in 1929, and ultimately 86 percent from a peak to a trough in 1932, unsuspecting depositors often found their banks overwhelmed by this market maelstrom. The Roosevelt administration took office in March of 1933 and set about trying to pick up the pieces. Many core aspects that we associate with modern financial life from FDIC insurance to social security to the somewhat unique American 30-year mortgage rose directly out of policies from this administration and the financial ashes of this period. There was also quite understandably, a desire to make banking safer. And so the Glass Steagall Act mandated that banks had a choice. They could either do the traditional deposit taking and lending, or they could be active in financial market trading and underwriting. In response to these new separations, Morgan Stanley was founded 90 years ago in 1935 to do the latter. It was a very uncertain time. The U.S. economy was starting to recover under President Roosevelt's New Deal policies, but unemployment was still over 17 percent. Europe's economy was struggling, and the start of the Second World War would be only four years away. The S&P Composite Equity Index, which currently sits at a level of around 6,700, was at 12. It was into this world that Morgan Stanley brought its first bond deal, a 30-year corporate bond for a AA rated U.S. utility. And so, listeners, what do you think that that sort of bond yielded all those years ago? Luckily for us, the good people at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis digitized a vast array of old financial newspapers. And so, we can see what the original bond yielded in the announcement. The first bond, Morgan Stanley helped issue with a 30-year maturity and a AA rating had a yield of just 3.55 percent. That was just 70 basis points over what a comparable U.S. treasury bond offered at the time. Anniversaries are nice to celebrate, but we think this example has some lessons for the modern day. Above anything, it's a clear data point that even in very uncertain economic times, high quality corporate bonds can trade at very low spreads – much lower than one might intuitively expect. Indeed, the extra spread over government bonds that investors required for a 30-year AA rated utility bond 90 years ago, in the immediate aftermath of the Great Depression is almost exactly the same as today. It's one more reason why we think we have to be quite judicious about turning too negative on corporate credit too early, even if the headline spreads look low. Thank you as always for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market useful, let us know by leaving a review wherever you listen. And also, please tell a friend or colleague about us today.

Historian David Beito discusses his new book “FDR: A New Political Life” and exposes how FDR's New Deal laid the foundations for America's surveillance state, media censorship, and executive dictatorship. From telegram spying and gold confiscation to secret war plans and Supreme Court power grabs, this interview reveals how Roosevelt redefined tyranny in democratic disguise—and how today's leaders are repeating his playbook. Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHTFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

Historian David Beito discusses his new book “FDR: A New Political Life” and exposes how FDR's New Deal laid the foundations for America's surveillance state, media censorship, and executive dictatorship. From telegram spying and gold confiscation to secret war plans and Supreme Court power grabs, this interview reveals how Roosevelt redefined tyranny in democratic disguise—and how today's leaders are repeating his playbook. Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHTFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-real-david-knight-show--5282736/support.

Hey guys, what you are about to listen to is basically a “what if” Japan performed Hokushin-ron instead of Nanshin-ron, ie: What if Japan invaded the USSR during WW2? Before I jump into it I just want to thank all of you that signed up for the patreon, you guys are awesome. Please leave a comment on this episode to let me know what more you want to hear about in the future. With all of that said and done lets jump right into it.   Part 1 The Geopolitical context   Ok so, one of the questions I get the most is, what if Japan invaded the USSR. I've actually already tackled this subject, albeit lightly with Cody from AlternatehistoryHub and once with my friend Eric. Its too complicated to give a real answer, a lot of this is guess work, though I really will try to provide hard numbers. I think off the bat something needs to be made clear since we are dealing with alternate history. I am not doing a “what if Japan developed completely different, or what if the IJA got their way in the early 1930's” no no, this is going to be as realistic as possible…even though this is batshit crazy.    Japan faced the decision of whether to go to war with the USSR in 1941 during Operation Barbarossa. They held meetings, made plans, and ultimately it was decided they would not engage the Soviets. Our scenario will follow exactly what they did to a T, but when the made the decision not to go to war, we will see them go to war.    Now before I jump into our this timeline, I think its very important to explain the actual situation Japan faced in 1941. There were two major strategies that emerged during the 1930's within the Japanese military. Many junior officers in the IJA favored the Hokushin-ron “northern strike” strategy against the USSR. Many officers in the IJN with some in the IJA favored the Nanshin-ron “southern strike” strategy, to seize the resource rich dutch east indies by invading Southeast Asia and the Pacific. The idea of Hokushin-ron was to perform an invasion into Southern Siberia and outer mongolia ending around Lake Baikal where they would set up defenses. They had already tried to establish this during the Russian civil war as part of the Siberian Intervention, but failed to create a buffer state. From 1935-1939 there were 108 border clashes between the USSR and Japan. In 1938 one of these border clashes turned into quite a catastrophe, it was called the battle of Lake Khasan.  The Soviets suffered nearly 800 deaths, more than 3000 wounded, perhaps nearly 50 tanks were destroyed with another 100 damaged. The Japanese suffered about 600 deaths with 2500 wounded. The result ultimately was a ceasefire, but for the Kwantung army it seemed to them like a victory. In May of 1939 they had a much larger and more famous battle known as the battle of Khalkhin Gol.  During the early part of the battle the IJA sent 80 tanks crossing over Khalkhin Gol, driving the Soviets back towards Baintsagan Hill. Zhukov was waiting for the attack and sent 450 tanks and armored cars unsupported by infantry to attack the IJA from three sides. The IJA were practically encircled and lost half their armored units as they struggled to fight back as it withdrew. The two armies spared for the next 2 weeks along the east bank of the Khalkhin Gol. Problem was the Japanese were having issues getting their supplies to the area as they lacked motor transport while Zhukov whose army was over 460 miles away from its base of supply had 2600 trucks supplying them. On july 23rd the Japanese launched attacks supported by artillery and within two days they had consumed half their ammunition stores. The situation was terrible, they suffered 5000 casualties and made little progress breaking the Soviet lines. Zhukov then unleashed an offensive on august 20th using over 4000 trucks to transport supplies from Chita base. He assembled around 500 tanks, 550 fighters and bombers and his 50,000 infantry supported by armored cars. This mechanized force attacked the Japanese first using artillery and the aircraft as his armor and infantry crossed the river. The IJA were quickly flanked by the fast moving Soviet armor and encircled by August 25th. The IJA made attempts to break out of the encirclement but failed. They refused to surrender despite overwhelming artillery and aerial bombardment; by the 31st the Japanese forces on the Mongolian side of the border were destroyed. The Japanese suffered nearly 20,000 casualties, the lost 162 aircraft, 29 tanks, 7 tankettes, 72 artillery pieces a large number of vehicles. The Soviets took a heavy hit also suffering almost 25,000 casualties, 250 aircraft, 250 tanks, 133 armored cars, almost 100 artillery pieces, hundreds of vehicles. While these numbers make it seem the Japanese did a great job, you need to consider what each party was bringing to this fight. The Japanese brought roughly 30,000 men, 80 tanks and tankettes, 400 aircraft, 300 artillery pieces, 1000 trucks. The Soviets brought nearly 75,000 men, 550 tanks, 900 aircraft, 634 artillery pieces, 4000 trucks. There are some sources that indicate the IJA brought as many artillery rounds as they could muster from Japan, Manchuria and Korea, roughly 100,000 rounds for the operation. The Soviets fired 100,000 rounds per day. A quick look at wikipedia numbers, yes I know its a no no, but sometimes its good for quick perspectives show: USSR: Bomber sorties 2,015, fighter sorties 18,509; 7.62 mm machine gun rounds fired 1,065,323; 20 mm (0.80 in) cannon rounds expended 57,979; bombs dropped 78,360 (1,200 tons). Japan: Fighter/bomber sorties 10,000 (estimated); 7.7 mm (0.30 in) machine gun rounds fired 1.6 million; bombs dropped 970 tons. What I am trying to say is there was an enormous disparity in military production. And this is not just limited to numbers but quality. After the battle the Japanese made significant reforms. They increased tank production from 500 annually to 1200. The Japanese funded research into new anti-tank guns, such as the Type 1 47 mm. They mounted this gun to their Type 97 Chi-Ha tanks, the new standard medium tank of the IJA. Because of the tremendous defeat to Soviet armor they send General Yamashita to Germany to learn everything he could about tank tactics. But they simply could not produce enough tanks to ever hope to match 10% of the USSR. The Soviets had mostly been using T-26's, BT-5's and BT-7's who were crudely made, but made en masse. The Japanese would find most of their tank models with less effective range, less armor and some with less penetration power. It took the Japanese a hell of a lot more time to produce tanks, they were simply not on par with the Soviets in quantity or quality. Their tank tactics, albeit improved via Yamashita after 1939, were still nothing compared to the Soviets.  The major outcome of the battle of Lake Khasan and Khalkhin Gol was the abandonment of the hokushin-ron strategy and adoption of the nanshin-ron strategy. But, that didnt mean Japan did not have a plan in case they had to go to war with the USSR. Part 2 Kantōgun Tokushu Enshū Kantōgun Tokushu Enshū or the Kwantung Army Special Maneuvers was an operational plan created by the General Staff of the IJA for an invasion of the Russian Far East to capitalize on Operation Barbarossa. Here our story truly begin. Between 1938-1939 the IJA General Staff and Kwantung Army formed two “Hachi-Go” plans. Variants A and B examined the possibility of an all out war with the USSR beginning in 1943. In both plans they expected to be facing 60 Soviet divisions, while they could deliver 50 divisions, delivered incrementally from China and Japan. Plan A called for attacks across the eastern and northern borders of Manchuria while maintaining a defensive stance in the west. Plan B, much more ambitious, called for striking into the vast steppe between the Great Khingan Mountains and Lake Baikal, hoping to cut off the trans-siberian railway. If this was done successfully it was believed the whole of European Russia would be doomed to be defeated in detail. Defeated in detail means to divide and conquer. This battle would take place over 5000 kilometers with Japan's final objective being to advance 1200 km into the USSR. That dwarves Operation Barbarossa in distance, let that sink in. Both plans faced impossible odds. First of all the railway networks in Manchuria were not sufficiently expanded for such far reaching offensives, especially for plan B. Furthermore the 50 divisions required for them would be impossible to come by, since 1937 Japan was bogged down in a war with China. When Japan went to war with the west in 1941 she had 51 divisions. She left the base minimum in China, 35 divisions and tossed nearly 20 into southeast asia and the pacific. On top of not having the men, the IJA estimated a fleet of 200,000 vehicles would be necessary to sustain an offensive to Lake Baikal. That was twice the number of military vehicles Japan had at any given time. After the battle of Khalkhin Gol, plan B was completely abandoned. Planning henceforth focused solely on the northern and eastern fronts with any western advance being limited in scope. Now Japan formed a neutrality pact with the USSR because of her defeat at Khalkhin Gol and Molotov Ribbentrop pact between Germany and the USSR. The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact came as a bitter and complete surprise to Japan. It pushed Japan to fully adopt the Nanshin-ron strategy and this began with her invasion of French IndoChina, which led the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and United States to embargo her. The Netherlands Dutch East Indies refused to sell oil to Japan, the UK refused to sell oil from Burma and the US gradually cut off selling oil to Japan, with her oil exports alone being 80% of Japans supply, the rest from the Dutch east indies. The United States also placed an embargo on scrap-metal shipments to Japan and closed the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping. 74.1% of Japan's scrap iron came from the United States in 1938, and 93% of Japan's copper in 1939. Other things like Rubber and tin were also off the table, as this was mostly acquired from British held Malaya and the Dutch East Indies.    Now the crux of everything is the China War. Japan was stuck, she needed to win, in order to win she needed the resources she was being denied. The only logical decision was to attack the places with these resources. Thus until 1941, Japan prepared to do just that, investing in the Navy primarily. Then in June of 1941, Hitler suddenly informs the Japanese that he is going to invade the USSR. The Japanese were shocked and extremely angry, they nearly left the Tripartite Pact over the issue. This unprecedented situation that ushered in the question, what should Japan do? There were those like Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka who argued they must abandon the neutrality pact and launch a simultaneous offensive with the Germans against the USSR. The IJA favored this idea….because obviously it would see them receiving more funding as the IJN was currently taking more and more of it for the Nanshin-ron plans. But this is not a game of hearts of Iron IV, the Japanese government had to discuss and plan if they would invade the USSR….and boy it took awhile. I think a lot of you will be very disappointed going forward, but there is no grand unleashing of a million Japanese across the borders into the Soviet Far East, in the real world there is something called logistics and politics.    The Japanese military abided by a flexible response policy, like many nations do today. Theres was specifically called the Junbi Jin Taisei or “preparatory formation setup”. Japan would only go to war with the USSR if favorable conditions were met. So in our timeline the Junbi Jin encountered its first test on June 24th when the IJA/IJN helped a conference in the wake of operation barbarossa. A compromise was made allowing the IJA to prepare an invasion plan if it did not impede on the nanshin-ron plans. There was those in the IJA who argued they should invade the USSR whether conditions were favorable or not, there were those who only wanted to invade if it looked like the USSR was on the verge of collapse. One thing agreed upon was if Japan unleashed a war with the USSR, the hostilities needed to be over by mid-October because the Siberian climate would hit winter and it would simply be impossible to continue. The IJA needed 60-7 days to complete operational preparations and 6-8 weeks to defeat the Soviets within the first phase of the offensive. Here is a breakdown of what they were thinking: 28 June: Decide on mobilization 5 July: Issue mobilization orders 20 July: Begin troop concentration 10 August: Decide on hostilities 24 August: Complete readiness stance 29 August: Concentrate two divisions from North China in Manchuria, bringing the total to 16 5 September: Concentrate four further divisions from the homeland, bringing the total to 22; complete combat stance 10 September (at latest): Commence combat operations 15 October: Complete first phase of war   The plan called for 22 divisions (might I add my own calculations of 20 divisions were pretty spot on), with roughly 850,000 men, including Manchukuo allies, supported by 800,000 tons of shipping. The Japanese hoped the Soviets would toss at least half their forces in the Far East, perhaps 2/3rd of their armor and aircraft against the Germans giving them a 2-1 superiority. Even the 22 divisions was questionable, many in the war ministry thought only 16 divisions could be spared for such a venture, something only suitable for mop up operations in the aftermath of a German victory along the eastern front. It was clear to all, Japan needed perfect conditions to even think about performing such a thing.    The War hawks who still sought to perform Hokushin-ron tried to persaude Hideki Tojo on july 5th to go through with a new plan using a total of 25 divisions. This plan designated “Kantogun Tokushu Enshu or Kantokuen” would involve 2 phases, a buildup and readiness phase and an offensive phase. On July 7th they went to Hirohito for his official sanction for the build up. Hirohito questioned everything, but gradually relented to it. The plan was nearly identical to the former plans, banking on the Soviets being unable to reinforce the Far East because of Germany's progress. The level of commitment was scaled down somewhat, but still enormous. Again a major looming issue was the Manchurian railways that would need to be expanded to accomodate the movement of men and supplies. This meant the construction of port facilities, military barracks, hospitals and such. Kantokuen would begin with a initial blow against the Ussuri front, targeting Primorye and would be followed up by a northern attack against Blagoveshchensk and Kuibyshevka. The 1st area army, 3rd and 20 armies with the 19th division of the Korean army would penetrade the border south of Lake Khanka to breach the main soviet defensive lines, thus threatening Vladivostok. The 5th army would strike south of Dalnerechensk to complete the isolation of the maritime province, sever the trans-sierian railway and block Soviet reinforcements. The 4th army would attack along the Amur river before helping out against Blagoveshchensk. Two reinofrced divisions would invade Sakhalin from land and sea. The second phase would see the capture of Khabarovsk, Komsomolsk, Skovorodino, Sovetskaya Gavan, and Nikolayevsk. Additionally, amphibious operations against Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and other parts of the Kamchatka Peninsula were contemplated.   It was agreed the operation could only afford 24 divisions, with 1,200,000 men, 35,000 vehicles, 500 tanks, 400,000 horses and 300,000 coolies. The deployment of thse forces would mean the western front facing Mongolia and the Trans-baikal region would be pretty much open, so delaying actions would have to be fought if the soviets performed a counter offensive there. Air forces were critical to the plan. They sought to dispatch up to roughly 2000 aircraft cooperating with 350 naval aircraft to launch a sudden strike against the Soviet Far East Air Force to knock them out early.    The Soviet Far East had two prominent weaknesses to be exploited. Number 1 was Mongolia's 4500 km long horeshoe shaped border. Number 2 was its 100% dependency on European Russia to deliver men, food and war materials via the trans-siberian railway. Any disruption of the trans-siberian railway would prove fatal to the Soviet Far East.    Now as for the Soviets. The 1930's and early 1940's saw the USSR take up a defensive policy, but retained offensive elecments as well. Even with the German invasion and well into 1942, the Soviets held a strategy of tossing back the IJA into Manchuria if attacked. The primary forces defending the Far east in 1941 were the Far Eastern and Trans-Baikal Fronts, under the command of Generals Iosif Apanasenko and Mikhail Kovalyov. The Trans-Baikal front held 9 divisions, including 2 armored, a mechanized brigade and a heavily fortified region west of the Oldoy River near Skovorodino had a garrison. The Far Eastern Front had 23 divisions including 3 armored, 4 brigades and 11 heavily fortified regions with garrisons including Vladivostok. Altogether they had 650,000 men, 5400 tanks, 3000 aircraft, 57,000 vehicles, 15,000 artillery pieces and nearly 100,000 horses. By 1942 the Vladivostok sector had 150 artillery pieces with 75 -356 mm calibers organized into 50 batteries. As you can imagine after Operation Barbarrosa was unleashed, things changed. From June to December, roughly 160,000 men, 3000 tanks, 2670 artillery pieces, 12,000 vehicles and perhaps 1800 aircraft were sent to deal with the Germans. Despite this, the Soviets also greatly expanded a buildup to match the apparent Japanese buildup in Manchuria. By July 22nd 1941 the Far Eastern and Trans-Baikal Fronts were to be raised by 1 million men for august. By December it was nearly 1.2 million. Even the Soviet Far East Navy saw an increase from 100,000 men to 170,000 led by Admiral Yumashev. The Soviet Mongolian allies were capable of manning about 80,000, though they lacked heavy equipment.    Thus if this war broke out in September the Soviets and Mongolians would have just over a million men, with 2/3rds of them manning the Amur-Ussuri-Sakhalin front, the rest would defend Mongolia and the Trans-Baikal region. Even though the war against the Germans was dire, the Soviets never really gave up their prewar planning for how to deal with the Japanese. There would be an all-out defense over the border to prevent any breach of Soviet territory. The main effort would see the 1st and 25th armies holding a north-south axis between the Pacific ocean and Lake Khanka; the 35th army would defend Iman; the 15th and 2nd Red Banner armies would repel the Japanese over the Amur River; and other forces would try to hold out on Sakhalin, Kamchatka and the Pacific coast. The Soviets had constructed hundreds of fortified positions known as Tochkas along the border. Most of these were hexagonal concrete bunkers contained machine gun nests and 76 mm guns. The fortified regions I mentioned were strategically placed forcing the Japanese to overcome them via frontal attacks. This would require heavy artillery to overcome. Despite the great defensive lines, the Soviets did not intend to be passive and would launch counteroffensives. The Soviet air force and Navy would play an active role in defeating a Japanese invasion as well. The air force's objetice would be to destroy the Japanese air force in the air and on the ground, requiring tactical ground attack mission. They would also destroy key railways, bridges and airfields within Manchuria and Korea alongside intercepting IJN shipping. Strategic bombing against the home islands would be limited to under 30 DB-3's who could attack Tokyo, Yokosuka, Maizuru and Ominato. The Soviet Navy would help around the mouth of the Amur River, mine the Tatar Strait and try to hit any IJN ships landing men or materials across the Pacific Coasts.    Japan would not be able to continue a land war with the USSR for very long. According to Japanese military records, in 1942 while at war they were required to produce 50 Kaisenbun. A Kaisenbun is a unit of measurement for ammunition needed for a single division to operate for 4 months. Annual production never surpassed 25 kaisenbun with 100 in reserve. General Shinichi Tanaka estimated for an operation against the USSR 3 Kaisenbun would be needed per divisions, thus a total of 72 would be assigned to 24 divisions. This effectively meant 2/3rds of Japans ammunition stockpile would be used on the initial strike against the USSR. Japan would have been extremely hard pressed to survive such a war cost for 2 years.    Now in terms of equipment Japan had a lot of problems. During the border battles, Japanese artillery often found itself outranged and grossly under supplied compared to the Soviet heavier guns. Despite moving a lot of men and equipment to face the Germans, the Red Army maintained a gross superiority in armor. The best tank the Kwantung Army had in late 1941 was the Type 97 Chi-Ha, holding 33mm armor with a low velocity 57 mm gun. There was also Ha-Go and Te-Ke's with 37 mm guns but they had an effective range less than 1 km.   The Soviet T-26, BT-5 and BT-7's had 45 mm guns more than capable of taking out the Japanese armor and the insult to injury was they were crudely made and very expendable. Every Japanese tank knocked out was far greater a loss, as Japan's production simply could not remotely match the USSR. For aircraft the Japanese were a lot better off. The Polikarpov I-16 was the best Soviet fighter in the Far East and performed alright against the Nakajima Ki-27 at Khalkhin Gol. The rest of the Soviet air arsenal were much older and would struggle. The Soviets would have no answer to the IJN's Zero fighter or the IJA's high speed KI-21 bomber that outraced the Soviet SB-2. Japanese pilots were battle hardened by China and vastly experienced.   Another thing the Japanese would have going for them was quality of troops. The Soviets drained their best men to fight the Germans, so the combat effectiveness in the far east would be less. Without the Pacific War breaking out, some of Japan's best Generals would be brought into this war, of course the first one that comes to mind for me is General Yamashita, probably the most armor competent Japanese general of ww2.    Come August of 1941 those who still sought the invasion of the USSR were facing major crunch time. The IJA planners had assumed the Soviets would transfer 50% or more of their power west to face the Germans, but this was not the case. By August 9th of 1941, facing impossible odds and with the western embargos in full motion, in our timeline the Japanese Hokushin-Ron backers gave up. But for the sake of our story, for some batshit insane reason, the Japanese military leadership and Hirohito give the greenlight for an invasion on August 10th.   Part 3 the catastrophe   So to reiterate the actual world plan had    10 August: Decide on hostilities 24 August: Complete readiness stance 29 August: Concentrate two divisions from North China in Manchuria, bringing the total to 16 5 September: Concentrate four further divisions from the homeland, bringing the total to 22; complete combat stance 10 September (at latest): Commence combat operations 15 October: Complete first phase of war   So what is key to think about here is the events of September. The Battle for Moscow is at the forefront, how does a Japanese invasion in the first week or two of September change things? This is going to probably piss off some of you, but Operation Typhoon would still fail for Germany.  In our time line the legendary spy Richard Sorge sent back information on Japan's decision to invade the USSR between August 25th to September 14th. On the 25th he informed Stalin the Japanese high command were still discussing whether to go to war or not with the USSR. On September 6th Stalin was informed the Japanese were beginning preparations for a war against the west. Then on September 14th, the most important message was relayed to Stalin "In the careful judgment of all of us here... the possibility of [Japan] launching an attack, which existed until recently, has disappeared...."[15]    With this information on hand from 23 June to 31 December 1941, Stalin transferred a total of 28 divisions west. This included 18 rifle divisions, 1 mountain rifle division, 3 tank divisions, 3 mechanized divisions and 3 mountain cavalry divisions. The transfers occurred mainly in June (11 divisions) and October (9 divisions).    Here we come to a crossroads and I am going to have to do some blunt predictions. Let's go from the most optimistic to the most pessimistic. Scenario 1) for some insane reason, Stalin abandons Moscow and moves his industry further east, something the Soviets were actively preparing during Operation Typhoon. This is not a defeat of the USSR, it certainly would prolong the war, but not a defeat. Now that seems rather silly. Scenario 2) Stalin attempts transferring half of what he did in our time line back to Moscow and the Germans fail to take it. The repercussions of course is a limited counteroffensive, it wont be as grand as in our timeline, but Moscow is saved. Scenario 3) and the most likely in my opinion, why would Stalin risk moscow for the Far East? Stalin might not transfer as many troops, but certainly he would have rather placed his chips in Moscow rather than an enemy literally 6000 km's away who have to cross a frozen desert to get to anything he cares about.  Even stating these scenarios, the idea the German army would have taken Moscow if some of the very first units from the far east arrived, because remember a lot of these units did not make it in time to defend moscow, rather they contributed to the grand counteroffensive after the Germans stalled. The German armies in front of Moscow were depleted, exhausted, unsupplied and freezing. Yes many of the Soviet armies at Moscow were hastily thrown together, inexperienced, poorly led and still struggling to regain their balance from the German onslaught. Yet from most sources, and by sources I mean armchair historian types argue, the Germans taking Moscow is pretty unlikely. And moscow was not even that important. What a real impact might have been was the loss of the Caucasus oil fields in early 1942, now that could have brought the USSR down, Moscow, not so much, again the Soviets had already pulled their industry further east, they could do it again.   So within the context of this Second Russo-Japanese War, figure the German's still grind to a halt, they don't take Moscow, perhaps Soviets dont push them back as hard, but the USSR is not collapsing by any means. Ok now before we talk about Japans invasion we actually need to look at some external players. The UK/US/Netherlands already began massive embargoes against Japan for oil, iron, rubber, tin, everything she needed to continue her war, not just against the USSR, but with over 35 divisions fighting in China. President Roosevelt was looking for any excuse to enter WW2 and was gradually increasing ways to aid Britain and the Soviets.  Now American's lend-lease program seriously aided the USSR during WW2, particularly the initial stages of the war. The delivery of lend-lease to the USSR came through three major routes: the Arctic Convoys, the Persian Corridor, and the Pacific Route. The Arctic route was the shortest and most direct route for lend-lease aid to the USSR, though it was also the most dangerous as it involved sailing past German-occupied Norway. Some 3,964,000 tons of goods were shipped by the Arctic route; 7% was lost, while 93% arrived safely. The Persian Corridor was the longest route, and was not fully operational until mid-1942. Thereafter it saw the passage of 4,160,000 tons of goods, 27% of the total. The most important was the Pacific Route which opened up in August of 1941, but became affected when Japan went to war with America. The major port was Vladivostok, where only Soviet ships could transport non-military goods some 8,244,000 tons of goods went by this route, 50% of the total. Vladivostok would almost certainly be captured by the Japanese in our scenario so it won't be viable after its capture. Here is the sticky part, Japan is not at war with the US, so the US is pretty much free to find different Pacific paths to get lend-lease to the Soviets, and to be honest there's always the Arctic or Persian corridors. Hell in this scenario America will be able to get supplies easily into China as there will be no war in Burma, hong kong, Malaya and such. America alone is going to really ruin Japans day by increasing lend-lease to the UK, China and the USSR. America wont be joining the war in 1941, but I would strongly wager by hook or by crook, FDR would pull them into a war against Germany, probably using the same tactic Woodrow Wilson did with WW1. This would only worsen things for Japan. Another player of course is China. Late 1941, China was absolutely battered by Japan. With Japan pulling perhaps even more troops than she did for the Pacific war to fight the USSR, Chiang Kai-Shek would do everything possible to aid his new found close ally Stalin. How this would work out is anyone's guess, but it would be significant as I believe America would be providing a lot more goodies.    Ok you've all been patient, what happens with the war? Japan has to deliver a decisive knock out blow in under 4-6 months, anything after this is simply comical as Japan's production has no resources. The oil in siberia is not even remotely on the table. The Japanese can't find it, would not be able to exploit it, let alone quick enough to use it for the war. Hell the Italians were sitting on oil in Libya and they never figured that out during WW2.   So Kantokuen is unleashed with an initial blow against the Primorye in the Ussuri Front followed by an assault against Blagoveshchensk and Kiubyshevka. The main soviet lines south of Lake Khanka are attacked by the Japanese 1st area army, 3rd and 20th armies and the 19th Korean division. This inturn threatens Vladivostok who is also being bombarded by IJA/IJN aircraft. The 5th Ija army attacks south of Dalnerechensk in an attempt to sever the trans-siberian railway, to block Soviet reinforcements and supplies. The 4th IJA army fords the Amur river to help with the assault of Blagoveshchensk. Meanwhile Sakhalin is being attacked from land and sea by two IJA divisions.  Despite the Soviets being undermanned the western front facing Mongolia and the Trans-Baikal region is wide up to an attack as its only defended by the 23rd IJA division, so a limited counteroffensive begins there. The Japanese quickly win air superiority, however the heavily fortified Tochkas are not being swept aside as the Japanese might have hoped. A major problem the Japanese are facing is Soviet artillery. The Japanese artillery already placed along the borders, initially performed well, crushing Tochkas in range, but when the Japanese begin advancing and deploying their artillery units they are outgunned perhaps 3-1, much of the Soviet artillery outranges them and the Soviets have a much larger stockpile of shells. Airpower is failing to knock out soviet artillery which is placed within Tochkas and other fortified positions with anti-aircraft guns. Without achieving proper neutralization or counter battery fire, the Japanese advance against the fortified Soviet positions. The Soviets respond shockingly with counterattacks. The 15th and 35th Soviet armies with the Amur Red Banner Military Flotilla toss limited counterattacks against both sides of the Sungari River, harassing the Japanese. While much of the soviet armor had been sent west, their light tanks which would be useless against the Germans have been retained in the far east and prove capable of countering the IJA tanks. The Soviets inflict tremendous casualties, however General Yamashita, obsessed with blitzkrieg style warfare he saw first hand in the west, eventually exploits a weak area in the line.Gradually a blitzkrieg punches through and begins to circle around hitting Soviet fortified positions from the rear. The Soviets knew this would be the outcome and had prepared to fight a defense in depth, somewhat managing the onslaught.  The trans-siberian railway has been severed in multiple locations close to the border area, however this is not as effective as it could be, the Japanese need to hook deeper to cut the line further away. In the course of weeks the Soviets are gradually dislodged from their fortified positions, fighting a defense in depth over great stretches of land. Vladivostok holds out surprisingly long until the IJN/IJA seize the city. Alongside this Sakhalin is taken with relative ease. The Soviet surface fleet is annihilated, but their large submarine force takes a heavy toll of the IJN who are attempting Pacific landings. Kantokuen phase 1 is meeting its objectives, but far later than expected with much more casualties than expected. The Japanese are shocked by the fuel consumption as they advance further inland. Each truck bearing fuel is using 50% of said fuel to get to the troops, something reminiscent of the north african campaign situation for Rommel. The terrain is terrible for their vehicles full of valleys, hills, forests and mountains. Infrastructure in the region is extremely underdeveloped and the Soviets are burning and destroying everything before the Japanese arrive. All key roads and cities are defended until the Japanese can encircle the Soviets, upon which they depart, similar to situations the Japanese face in China. It is tremendously slow progress. The IJA are finding it difficult to encircle and capture Soviet forces who have prepared a series of rear lines to keep falling back to while performing counterattacks against Japanese columns. As the Japanese advance further into the interior, the IJN are unable to continue supporting them with aircraft and much of the IJA aircraft are limited in operations because of the range. The second phase of Kantokuen calls for the capture of Khabarovsk, Komsomolsk, Skovorodino, Sovetskaya Gavan, and Nikolayevsk. Additionally, amphibious operations against Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and other parts of the Kamchatka Peninsula are on standby as the IJN fears risking shipping as a result of Soviet submarine operations. The sheer scope of the operation was seeing the tide sides stretching their forces over a front nearly 5000 km in length. At some points the Japanese were attempting to advance more than 1000 km's inland, wasting ungodly amounts of fuel and losing vehicles from wear and tear.  So what does Japan gain? Within the span of 4 months, max 6 months Japan could perhaps seized: Sakhalin, the Primorsye krai including Vladivostok, segments of the trans siberian railway, Blagoveshchensk, Kuibyshevka. If they are really lucky Khabarovsk, Komsomolsk, Skovorodino, Sovetskaya Gavan, Nikolayevsk. Additionally, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and other parts of the Kamchatka Peninsula. What does this mean? Really nothing. Pull out a map of manchuria during WW2, take a pencil and expand the manchurian border perhaps 1000 km if you really want to be generous, that's the new extent of the empire of the rising sun. The real purpose of attacking the USSR is not to perform some ludicrous dash across 6000 km's of frozen wasteland to whittle down and defeat the Soviets alongside the rest of the Axis. It was only to break them, in late 1941 at Moscow there was perhaps a fools chance, but it was a fool's chance for Japan.  Japan has run out of its stockpiles of Kaisenbun, oil, iron, rubber, tin, all types of resources necessary for making war. Unlike in our timeline where Japan began exporting resources from its conquests in southeast asia and the pacific, here Japan spent everything and now is relying on the trickles it has within its empire. The China war will be much more difficult to manage. The lend-lease will increase every day to China. The US/UK/Netherlands will only increase pressure upon Japan to stop being a nuisance, Japan can't do anything about this as the US Pacific Fleet is operating around the Philippines always a looming threat. The Japanese are holding for a lack of better words, useless ground in the far east. They will build a buffer area to defend against what can only be described as a Soviet Invasion of Manchuria x1000. The Allies will be directing all of their effort against Germany and Italy, providing a interesting alternate history concept in its own right. After Germany has been dealt with, Japan would face a existential threat against a very angry Stalin. Cody from Alternate History Hub actually made an episode on this scenario, he believed the Soviets would conquer most of Japan occupied Asia and even invade the home islands. It would certainly be something on the table, taking many years, but the US/UK would most likely interfere in some way. The outcome would be so much worse for Japan. Perhaps she is occupied and a communist government is installed. Perhaps like in our timeline the Americans come in to bolster Japan up for the looming coldwar.  But the question I sought to answer here was, Japan invading the USSR was a dumb idea. The few Japanese commanders who pushed it all the way until August 9th of 1941 simply had to give up because of how illogical it was. I honestly should not have even talked about military matters, this all came down to logistics and resources. You want to know how Japan could have secured itself a better deal in WW2? 1941, the China War is the number one problem Japan can't solve so they look north or south to acquire the means to solve the China problem? Negotiate a peace with China. That is the lackluster best deal right there.    Sorry if this episode did not match your wildest dreams. But if you want me to do some batshit crazy alternate history stuff, I am more than happy to jump into it and have fun. Again thank all of you guys who joined the patreon, you guys are awesome. Until next time this is the Pacific War channel over and out. 

I’m back at Noon Whistle’s Lombard Brewpub (800 E. Roosevelt) for this one. They’ve pulled me back with yet another mad scientist idea. I’ve had cicada-infused Malort there. I choked down Garlic Butterlort, still an all-time low taste experience. And now, I’m back for a Car Con Carne collaboration of sorts: Malort Con Carne, which is Malort infused with… chili. I’m joined once again by Marketing Director Joey Giardiniera for a twisted odyssey into spirits and mix-ins. We don’t bury the lede on this one - we get right to trying it. As far as good drinks go, I loved the Festbier I had on this visit. Noon Whistle’s line of beers ranges from “brilliant at the basics” through, “Oh, I need to know what that tastes like.” You really can’t go wrong there. And yes, have a pizza when you’re there. They absolutely kill it with their food menu. Car Con Carne is sponsored by Easy Automation: Looking to transform your home, office, or business into a smart, seamlessly connected space? Easy Automation delivers custom automation solutions tailored to your lifestyle. Whether you’re upgrading your home entertainment, streamlining your office tech, or enhancing the atmosphere in your restaurant or sports bar, they’ve got you covered. Their expert team designs and installs personalized systems—from smart lighting and climate control to audio/video distribution and robust Wi-Fi networks—all managed through an intuitive app on your favorite device. Easy Automation makes technology work for you—effortlessly, reliably, and always with your satisfaction guaranteed. Visit easy-automation.net or call Dan at 630-730-3728 and take control of your environment today! Car Con Carne is also sponsored by Exploding House Printing. Exploding House can help with all of your screen printing, embroidery and other merch needs. They’re a truly local Chicago business, right in the Hermosa neighborhood. And their focus is on small businesses, bands, brands, and everything in between. They’ve worked on products for Meat Wave, Empty Bottle, the Music Box, Dante’s Pizzeria, the Brokedowns, and so many others (check out explodinghouseprinting.com to see the list). Jonathan at Exploding House has been doing screen printing for decades. He knows what he’s doing - besides his technical expertise, he delivers production efficiency and cost awareness to offer boutique print shop quality at much lower, large print shop prices. Check out their work on Instagram at (at)explodinghouse, or go to their website or email info@explodinghouseprinting.com to get a quote! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Show Notes — Not the Critic Who Counts, But the Leader Who DaresHosted by Todd DeVoe and Dan ScottIn this powerful episode, Todd and Dan dive deep into one of the most timeless lessons on leadership, courage, and purpose — inspired by Theodore Roosevelt's legendary “Man in the Arena” speech. Together, they unpack what it means to truly dare greatly in the face of criticism, fear, and uncertainty.This is not a conversation about perfection — it's about presence.It's about showing up when others hesitate, leading when the path isn't clear, and owning both the victories and the scars that come with meaningful work.Todd and Dan reflect on:* The difference between critics and creators, and why leaders must embrace vulnerability to grow.* The emotional toll and moral courage required to lead through crisis, chaos, and change.* Lessons from the field — from the battlefield to the EOC — about standing firm when the stakes are high.* The power of resilience, humility, and conviction as anchors for authentic leadership.* Why daring leadership is not about status, but service — and how every act of courage, big or small, shapes the world around us.Whether you lead a team, a city, or simply yourself, this episode challenges you to step into the arena. Because, as Roosevelt reminded us, “The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena… who errs, who comes short again and again… but who does actually strive to do the deeds.”This is a raw, reflective, and empowering conversation that reminds us that leadership is not about being fearless — it's about daring to act despite fear.

On this week's Labor History Today: Mary Kenney O'Sullivan, first AFL woman organizer; novelist Jack London's classic definition of a scab; Southern Tenant Farmers' Union leads Missouri Highway sit-down; Roosevelt creates National War Labor Board to mediate labor disputes during World War II. Today's show is an encore of our January 7-13, 2018 and features labor historians Joe McCartin and Leon Fink. Questions, comments, or suggestions are welcome, and to find out how you can be a part of Labor History Today, email us at LaborHistoryToday@gmail.com Labor History Today is produced by the Labor Heritage Foundation and the Kalmanovitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor. #LaborRadioPod #History #WorkingClass #ClassStruggle @GeorgetownKILWP #LaborHistory @UMDMLA @ILLaborHistory @AFLCIO @StrikeHistory #LaborHistory @wrkclasshistory  

Have you ever dreamed of hunting a huge Red Stag in New Zealand? So have we... so we got a couple of experts on the phone and unpacked just how to get it done, along with chasing big fallow deer, himalayan tahr, chamois, and even Roosevelt elk on the tip of the South Island. This was one of the coolest and most informative episodes we've done in a long time. ENJOY!    FRIENDS, PLEASE SUPPORT THE PODCAST!  Join the Backcountry Hunting Podcast tribe and get access to all our bonus material on www.patreon.com/backcountry   Check out our new "recommended outfitters" hunt booking agency! We're super excited about this venture that allows us to share our favorite destinations around the world with our loyal listeners. We'll also be doing hosted hunts each year, which will be available first to our loyal listeners on Patreon.  We have a new advertising partner! Check out Swift Bullets, known and trusted as the best of the best by most African Dangerous Game specialists.  It's Porter's Firearms' 30-year anniversary this month! They're offering some incredible deals specifically to podcast listeners. Call Shane Porter at 870-701-0504 for details.    VISIT ALL OUR SPONSORS HERE:  www.timneytriggers.com www.browning.com www.leupold.com www.siembidacustomknives.com www.onxmaps.com www.silencercentral.com https://www.portersfirearms.com/ https://javelinbipod.com www.swiftbullets.com

"Fed Up With Your Job" by Stereolab from Fed Up With Your Job; "The Year of the Rabbit" by Tim Barnes featuring Alan Licht, Tara Jane O'Neil, Ken Vandermark from Lost Words; "Milestones" by GIFT from Illuminator; "Ashes That Made the Shape of My Dreams" by metra.vestlud from Ashes That Made the Shape of My Dreams; "Synesthesia" by Edapollo from Foreign Family Collective, Vol 3; "Prelude for the Hollow" by Endon from Fall of Spring; "All I Have" by Fawning from Illusions of Control; "12 C" by Whatever the Weather from Whatever the Weather II; "Secret City" by Kieran Hebden and William Tyler from 41 Longfield Street Late '80s; "A New Dream" by Daniel Davies from Soeurs De Glisse OST; "Lodestone" by Ex Easter Island Head from Norther.

The last 100 days of Franklin Roosevelt's life coincided with some momentous events in US history. As WWII was drawing to a close, the Yalta Conference brought together the three Allied leaders, Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin to confront some of the thorniest issues of the day and that still loom large to this day. That conference laid the groundwork for the Post World War II Order which prevail to this day, 80 years later.

PREVIEW::  This source details President Franklin D. Roosevelt's covert strategy to maneuver the United States into supporting Great Britain despite strong domestic anti-war resistance, and the ideological clash this caused with Charles Lindbergh. America First: Roosevelt vs. Lindbergh in the Shadow of War Hardcover – September 24, 2024 by  H. W. Brands  (Author)  1941 Roosevelt's Covert Strategy: Roosevelt was highly committed to Churchill and intended to bring the U.S. in on the British side. Since he could not openly support intervention due to resistance from Lindbergh, Congress, and the anti-war movement, Roosevelt utilized a highly confidential strategy. He managed an influence-peddling operation designed to prepare the American people for war against the "Hitlerites in Europe" and the "Imperial Japanese Navy and Army in the Pacific." Roosevelt maintained secret correspondence with Churchill; the American public was unaware that Rooseveltwas planning with Churchill on how they would fight together should war occur. Roosevelt had morally sided with the British but told Churchill it would take time to bring the American people around politically. He brought in covert operators from Great Britain. The administration gave its covert blessing to a large-scale British propaganda effort directed by William Stephenson in America. Stephenson's goal was explicitly to move American public opinion to the side of Britain. Stephenson's crew, channeled to Roosevelt via William Donovan, employed standard propaganda techniques, such as planting unacknowledged stories and arranging for rumors to appear and be confirmed by other rumors. The source highlights the hypocrisy of the administration engaging in this manipulation while simultaneously "complaining bitterly against the Germans for attempting to do the very same thing." Ideological Conflict: Imperialism vs. Democracy: Roosevelt recognized that the interests of Britain were "not identical to the interests of the United States." Roosevelt's public rationale for aiding Britain was that the U.S. would be "aiding democracy." Lindbergh "calls him out on this," arguing that aiding Britain meant "aiding imperialism." Lindbergh questioned whether Americans should fight to defend the British Empire, asking if American soldiers would go to "defend British rule in India." Churchill is characterized as the "most unreconstructed of British imperialists" who was determined to defend the British Empire, a goal Roosevelt had no desire to pursue.

[This is one of the finalists in the 2025 review contest, written by an ACX reader who will remain anonymous until after voting is done. I'll be posting about one of these a week for several months. When you've read them all, I'll ask you to vote for a favorite, so remember which ones you liked] 1. The Internet That Would Be In July 1945, Vannevar Bush was riding high. As Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, he'd won World War II. His proximity fuse intercepted hundreds of V-1s and destroyed thousands of tanks, carving a path for Allied forces through the French countryside. Back in 1942, he'd advocated to President Roosevelt the merits of Oppenheimer's atomic bomb. Roosevelt and his congressional allies snuck hundreds of millions in covert funding to the OSRD's planned projects in Oak Ridge and Los Alamos. Writing directly and secretively to Bush, a one-line memo in June expressed Roosevelt's total confidence in his Director: “Do you have the money?” Indeed he did. The warheads it bought would fall on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in mere weeks. The Germans had already given up; Victory in the Pacific was nigh. So Bush was thinking ahead. In The Atlantic, Bush returned to a pre-war obsession with communication and knowledge-exchange. His essay, “As We May Think,” imagined a new metascientifical endeavor (emphasis mine): https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/your-review-project-xanadu-the-internet

Eddie, owner of MyGuy Market, shares his journey from working three restaurant jobs to creating Fresno's most talked-about sandwich shop. His business stands as a testament to authenticity, hard work, and the power of finding your unique identity in the food industry.• MyGuy Market was founded in February 2022 after Eddie and his business partner researched authentic chopped cheese sandwiches in New York• The viral "Checkmate" sandwich—featuring an 8-hour smoked beef short rib that customers pull the bone from—transformed their business• Eddie's father was a chef in Spain before the family immigrated to the US, instilling a strong work ethic and culinary foundation• Running a small business presents challenges including work-life balance, physical exhaustion, and competing with corporate wages• Eddie emphasizes the importance of authenticity in entrepreneurship—you don't need a suit and tie to be a successful business owner• Community building should focus on support rather than gatekeeping, with genuine collaborations that don't require monetary exchanges• Fresno has its own distinct Central Valley identity that isn't Northern or Southern California but deserves to be celebrated• Outside of business, Eddie practices Muay Thai, participates in a running club, and enjoys chess and live music eventsStop by MyGuy Market at Belmont and Roosevelt in Fresno and follow @MyGuyMarket on Instagram to see the famous pull-out Checkmate sandwich and other menu offerings.Follow us @ brokeboyz_ff on Instagram and TikTokIntro Music by Rockstar Turtle- Broke Boyz (999)Christmas Intro Song by Nico

The Charlie Kirk murder is nothing but a staged spectacle, with the GOP and their Zionist handlers like Ben Shapiro exploiting his death to ram through anti-freedom laws and weaponize Turning Point USA for their globalist agenda. From Erika's fake forgiveness to the flimsy evidence pinning it on some furry weirdo, this is a textbook false flag, and we're calling out the liars before they bury the truth. JD Sharp exposes the sinister truth behind Charlie Kirk's assassination, revealing a Jewish-led plot to silence his anti-war stance and betrayal of Zionist agendas. They're twisting his legacy to spark a holy war, using a patsy and a looming false flag to pit Christians against the world. We've been fed a pack of lies about World War II, where brave Europeans fought against the Jewish Bolshevik takeover, only to be betrayed by traitors like Churchill and Roosevelt. Now, this new Nuremberg movie is just another Hollywood sham to brainwash a new generation into believing the holohoax, but Germar Rudolf is here to rip the mask off and reveal the Rothschild cabal's conquest of Christendom. Western civilization has been infected by a parasitic invasion of foreign ideals and values that have been introduced into our culture by strange and morally degenerate people whose goal is world domination. We have been OCCUPIED. Watch the film NOW! https://stewpeters.com/occupied/ Locals September Special

Our guest in this episode is Lord Jonathan Sumption, former Justice of the UK Supreme Court, acclaimed historian, and one of Britain's leading public voices on law and democracy. The conversation explores the uneasy boundary between law and politics. Sumption reflects on the long history of the U.S. Supreme Court as a political actor, from the Lochner era's resistance to worker protections, through clashes with Roosevelt's New Deal, to the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision on school segregation. He examines the controversies of Roe v. Wade and its recent reversal, warning that both decisions undermined trust in different ways. Lord Sumption also considers how courts respond when politics fails, the role of judicial appointments in shaping independence, and why democracies today struggle with expectations they cannot meet. Despite widespread skepticism, he insists that neutrality is not a myth: judges can set aside personal opinions, and trust in courts depends on their ability to do so. This episode offers a sobering yet hopeful look at the fragile balance between courts, politics, and public trust and why defending judicial neutrality is essential for the future of democracy.

oops, one correction. That was RFK's service. Better comparison probably.   @CBSNews  Charlie Kirk memorial service attended by Trump, Vance and others in Arizona | full video https://www.youtube.com/live/Lkqjzzgc9SU?si=ccIBYFB-n6RXpVib  @NBCNews  Live: Funeral For George Floyd Held In Houston | NBC News https://www.youtube.com/live/mufpOyoFrrg?si=xcYdu2xQfAZ5m3vV  @RafaelMichaelJackson  Michael Jackson's Memorial Service | Full Version  https://youtu.be/nv9KG_F65P4?si=PfioOhgYwbt7ZT41  @USNationalArchives  Funeral of President Roosevelt https://youtu.be/pJS5-YfJTpI?si=s6_a3nZFSddVQDEA  @SheltonWalden  CBS News Coverage of the RFK Funeral and Funeral Train, June 8, 1968 (Partial) https://youtu.be/XKHfKU946l8?si=jgDpbdbAtwquqFNE  @memoryretro  State funeral of Ronald Reagan CNN live coverage 6-11-2004 https://youtu.be/FhIxybSILTw?si=2ZB9VYP1N92IvF8d    https://www.southeastuary.com/ https://www.livingstonescrc.com/give Paul Vander Klay clips channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX0jIcadtoxELSwehCh5QTg https://www.meetup.com/sacramento-estuary/ My Substack https://paulvanderklay.substack.com/ Bridges of meaning https://discord.gg/MGC5Mm9d Estuary Hub Link https://www.estuaryhub.com/ If you want to schedule a one-on-one conversation check here. https://calendly.com/paulvanderklay/one2one There is a video version of this podcast on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/paulvanderklay To listen to this on ITunes https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/paul-vanderklays-podcast/id1394314333  If you need the RSS feed for your podcast player https://paulvanderklay.podbean.com/feed/  All Amazon links here are part of the Amazon Affiliate Program. Amazon pays me a small commission at no additional cost to you if you buy through one of the product links here. This is is one (free to you) way to support my videos.  https://paypal.me/paulvanderklay Blockchain backup on Lbry https://odysee.com/@paulvanderklay https://www.patreon.com/paulvanderklay Paul's Church Content at Living Stones Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh7bdktIALZ9Nq41oVCvW-A To support Paul's work by supporting his church give here. https://tithe.ly/give?c=2160640 https://www.livingstonescrc.com/give

“Pull the heart of your work out of your chest and lay it out there for the gods,” podcast guest Samuel G. Freedman told his Columbia Journalism School graduate students on the first day of his final semester after 35 years of teaching. “That's all I'm asking of you. Not much.”   No, not much. And yet what Sam Freedman asked of his students during his tenure as one of our leading journalism educators was everything. Before his retirement this spring, his popular book-writing seminar led to the publication of 95 books by his students. “He's been the godfather to an awful lot of publishing over the years,” noted Grove Atlantic executive editor George Gibson, in a New York Times profile on Sam's career and his legacy in journalism and publishing. Sam was named the nation's outstanding journalism professor in 1977 by the Society of Professional Journalists and was awarded Columbia University's coveted Presidential Award for Outstanding Teaching. A former staff reporter and columnist for The New York Times, his work as appeared in numerous publications, including The New Yorker, The Washington Post, Rolling Stone, Tablet, Salon, and New York magazine.     He is the author of 10 acclaimed books, including The Inheritance: How Three Families Moved from Roosevelt to Reagan and Beyond, a 1997 finalist for the Pulitzer Prize; Into the Bright Sunshine: Young Hubert Humphrey and the Fight for Civil Rights; and, Who She Was: My Search for My Mother's Life, which was reissued in a new edition earlier this year.   Learn more about Samuel Freedman: Website Twitter Please support the sponsors who support our show: Gotham Ghostwriters' Gathering of the Ghosts Ritani Jewelers Daniel Paisner's Balloon Dog Daniel Paisner's SHOW: The Making and Unmaking of a Network Television Pilot Heaven Help Us by John Kasich Unforgiving: Lessons from the Fall by Lindsey Jacobellis Film Movement Plus (PODCAST) | 30% discount Libro.fm (ASTOLDTO) | 2 audiobooks for the price of 1 when you start your membership Film Freaks Forever! podcast, hosted by Mark Jordan Legan and Phoef Sutton Everyday Shakespeare podcast A Mighty Blaze podcast The Writer's Bone Podcast Network Misfits Market (WRITERSBONE) | $15 off your first order  Film Movement Plus (PODCAST) | 30% discount Wizard Pins (WRITERSBONE) | 20% discount

Philadelphia stands at a transit crossroads. Amidst uncertainty over SEPTA's financial future, ambitious plans for a Roosevelt Boulevard subway system offer a glimpse of what could transform the city's northeastern corridor. Our conversation with Jay from the Roosevelt Boulevard Subway advocacy group unpacks both challenges and opportunities facing Philly's transit landscape.The SEPTA funding situation exemplifies the frustrating cycle of American transit politics. Despite service resuming after threatened cuts, CEO Leslie Richards has made clear: this is merely a temporary patch. Pennsylvania legislators have essentially kicked the problem two years down the road while depleting reserves meant for critical infrastructure maintenance. What makes this particularly maddening? Solutions exist and work elsewhere. From municipal self-taxation models that built Seattle's light rail network to congestion pricing in urban centers, proven funding mechanisms remain politically untouchable in Pennsylvania.Meanwhile, a transformative vision continues gaining momentum along Roosevelt Boulevard – a notoriously dangerous 12-lane thoroughfare stretching through Northeast Philadelphia. This grassroots campaign for subway service along the corridor has evolved from a university project into a serious transportation alternative currently under study by PennDOT. With a projected ridership of 62,000 daily passengers and a uniquely wide median offering construction advantages, the subway option presents compelling benefits.Perhaps most exciting is the economic development potential. Roosevelt Boulevard's car-centric design has created vast swaths of underutilized land, particularly surface parking lots. These spaces could become vibrant transit-oriented neighborhoods without displacing existing communities – a rare opportunity in established urban areas. With a locally preferred alternative selection expected in 2026 and potential construction readiness by 2030, this century-old dream inches closer to reality.Want to support better transit in Philadelphia? Check out Transit Forward Philly's advocacy work connecting volunteers with decision-makers. Follow the Roosevelt Boulevard Subway campaign on social media or visit blvdsubway.com to learn how this project could finally connect Northeast Philadelphia with opportunities throughout the region.Send us a textSupport the show

Who are the greatest Pixar characters of all time? Woody? Nemo? Mike and Sulley? In this episode, we debate which four characters deserve to be carved into the Mount Rushmore of Pixar. From Toy Story to Finding Nemo, Monsters, Inc. to The Incredibles, Pixar has given us some of the most beloved and influential animated characters in history. But only four can make the cut. Join us as we make our case for the most iconic Pixar characters ever—and let us know which ones you'd choose for your Pixar Mount Rushmore. If you've ever wondered what it's like behind the camera of a Disney YouTube channel, you won't want to miss this conversation. Submit a question/topic for us to discuss on a future episode. Don't forget to check us out on: -Instagram -Facebook  -Youtube Missing the smell of the parks? Check out Magic Candle Company and use code ENCHANTED at checkout to save 15% off your next order. Timestamps Welcome 00:00 Mount Rushmore 01:24 Who's the George Washington of Pixar? 03:06 Our Pick for Jefferson 07:17 Who's Roosevelt? 12:42 The Fourth Greatest Pixar Character Ever 25:58 Has Pixar Lost Its Touch? 34:32 Who Are Your Picks? 39:26

Ephesians 6:1-9 The Family Circle (vv. 1-4) The practice The promise The Workplace Circle (vv. 5-9) The respectful employee The regardful employer More to Consider Paul did not condone slavery when urging both slaves and masters to live as responsible Christians; his concern was to change Christians attitudes toward each other. The gospel is opposed to slavery. Where the gospel permeates lives, the institution of slavery will be undermined and abolished. It is worth noting that the first generation of Christians who had been freed from slavery to sin, gladly called themselves slaves of God or of Christ (see 1 Tm 6:1; Phm 16). Paradoxically, this latter slavery is the highest human freedom. Cabal, T., Brand, C. O., Clendenen, E. R., Copan, P., Moreland, J. P., Powell, D. (2007). The Apologetics Study Bible: Real Questions, Straight Answers, Stronger Faith (p. 1770). Holman Bible Publishers. The New Testament emphasizes a voluntary (James 4:7) rather than a forced (Luke 10:17) submission. Submission is appropriate in social roles (as citizen or servant, see Rom. 13:1; Titus 2:9). It is also appropriate in Christian interpersonal relationships. Here the image is one of responsiveness and willingness to yield to one another out of love. Richards, L. O. (1987). The teachers commentary (p. 927). Victor Books. Start Owne Wister, an old college friend of Theodore Roosevelt, was visiting him at the White House. Roosevelt's daughter Alice kept running in and out of the room until Wister finally asked if there wasn't something Roosevelt could do to control her. "Well," said the President, "I can do one of two things. I can be President of the United States or I can control Alice. I cannot possibly do both." Bits Pieces, December 9, 1993, p. 16. A manager and a sales rep stood looking at a map on which colored pins indicated the company representative in each area. "I'm not going to fire you, Wilson," the manager said, "but I'm loosening your pin a bit just to emphasize the insecurity of your situation." Bits Pieces, May 26, 1994, Page 9. The work of a Beethoven, and the work of a charwoman, become spiritual on precisely the same condition, that of being offered to God, of being done humbly "as to the Lord." This does not, of course, mean that it is for anyone a mere toss-up whether he should sweep rooms or compose symphonies. A mole must dig to the glory of God and a cock must crow. C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory.

Today we're mixing metaphors as we discuss the 30th and final Rhythm at Roosevelt (formerly Rhythm on the River), and other events of Longmont and Boulder County's past. We ask how many cars will drive though buildings, Annie's got the scoop on a new hot pot spot you outta try, and we read some listener emails. Let us know what you'd like to hear us discuss by emailing SideDishLongmont@gmail.com

In the third instalment of our Tunisgrad series, Saul and Roger explore two pivotal moments from early 1943. First, they head to the Casablanca Conference, where Allied leaders Churchill and Roosevelt made the monumental decision to demand the "unconditional surrender" of the Axis powers. Then, we jump into the final, desperate German counter-offensive in Tunisia, Erwin Rommel' 'Last Dance'. Saul breaks down a series of crucial battles, from the initial Axis victories at Sidi Bou Zid and the Kasserine Pass, which exposed weaknesses in the U.S. forces, to the strategic Allied comeback. We'll cover how the Allies regrouped, learned from their mistakes, and ultimately repelled Rommel's last major assaults in Operation Ochsenkopf and the Battle of Medenine, sealing the fate of the North African campaign. If you have any thoughts or questions, you can send them to - podbattleground@gmail.com Producer: James Hodgson X (Twitter): @PodBattleground Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hello Youtube Members, Patreons and Pacific War week by week listeners. Yes this was intended to be an exclusive episode to join the 29 others over on my Youtube Membership and Patreon, but since we are drawing to the end of the Pacific War week by week series, I felt compelled to make some special episodes to answer some of the bigger questions. Why did Japan, or better said, why did Emperor Hirohito decide to finally surrender? It seems obvious on the face of it, but there is actually a lot more to it than bombs or Soviet invasions. I guess you can call this episode a teaser or a shameless plug for going over to my Youtube Membership or Patreon. There's honestly a lot of interesting subjects such as ‘why was the japanese army so brutal”, “Hirohito's war time responsibility”, “the 4 part Kanji Ishiwara series”. Thus if you liked this one please show some love and check out my other stuff on my Youtube Membership or over at www.patreon.com/pacificwarchannel.   Stating all of that lets just jump right into it.   We first need to start off briefly looking at Emperor Hirohito.    Upon taking the throne, Emperor Hirohito in 1926 Hirohito inherited a financial crisis and a military that was increasingly seizing control of governmental policies. From the beginning, despite what many of you older audience members may have been told, Hirohito intensely followed all military decisions. Hirohito chose when to act and when not to. When the Kwantung Army assassinated Zhang Zuolin, he indulged their insubordination. This emboldened them to invade Manchuria in 1931, whereupon Hirohito was furious and demanded they be reigned in. Attempts were made, but they were heavily undermined by radicals. Hirohito could have put his foot down, but he chose not to. On September 22nd, at 4:20pm Hirohito said to the IJA Chief of General staff, Kanaya Hanzo “although this time it couldn't be helped, the army had to be more careful in the future”. Thus Hirohito again acquiesced to the military, despite wanting them to stop or at least localize the conflict. The military had disregarded his wishes, they should have been severely punished. Why did Hirohito not take a firmer stance?    Again for older audience members you may have heard, “hirohito was a hostage at the whim of his own military”. This narrative made it seem he was some sort of hostage emperor, but this is not the case at all. In fact Hirohito was instrumental in many military decisions from 1931-1945. The reason this, I will call it “myth” , went on was because after Japan's surrender, the US basically rewrote the Japanese constitution and covered up the Emperor's involvement in all the nasty stuff, to maintain control over Japan. Yeah it sounds a bit conspiracy esque, but I assure you it was indeed the case. This narrative held firm all the way until Hirohito's death, when finally meeting notes and personal accounts from those close to him came out, illuminating a lot. Though to this day, many records are still red -tapped.   The reason Hirohito did not stamp his foot down has to do with the Kokutai.    The Kokutai   So before I carry on, I have to explain what exactly is the Kokutai.    The Kokutai, loosely translated as "national essence," refers to the qualities that distinguish the Japanese identity. However, this concept is remarkably vague and poorly defined; even Japanese historians acknowledge this ambiguity. In contrast to Kokutai is seitai, or "form of government." While the Kokutai embodies the eternal and immutable aspects of Japanese polity—rooted in history, traditions, and customs centered around the Emperor—Japan's seitai has evolved significantly throughout its extensive history. For instance, shoguns governed for over 700 years until 1868, when the Meiji Restoration reinstated direct imperial rule.   Nevertheless, Emperor Meiji's direct authority came to an end with the adoption of the Meiji Constitution in 1889, which established a constitutional monarchy, introducing significant complexities into the governance system.   Article 4 of the constitution declares: “The Emperor is the head of the Empire, combining in Himself the rights of sovereignty, uniting the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government, although subject to the consent of the Imperial Diet.” Under this framework, the Emperor alone possessed the power to appoint or dismiss ministers of state, declare war, negotiate peace, conclude treaties, direct national administration, and command the army and navy.   A glaring flaw in this arrangement is the inherent ambiguity of the Meiji Constitution. While it established a democratic parliament, it simultaneously afforded the Emperor absolute authority to usurp it. The document failed to clearly define the relationships between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, and its language was intentionally vague. Most critically, the military—the army and navy—were not directly accountable to the civilian government.    So with the kokutai, the Emperor is a divine figure who embodies the state's sovereignty. It was not necessarily the Emperor's job to surrender on behalf of the official government of Japan, but he most certainly could do so, given the Japanese people still remained faithful to the kokutai.    Now Hirohito did not live an ordinary life. According to the imperial custom, Japanese royals were raised apart from their parents, at the age of 3 he was placed in the care of the Kwamura family who vowed to raise him to be unselfish, persevering in the face of difficulties, respectful of the views of others and immune to fear. One thing that was absolutely indoctrinated into him was to defend the kokutai. It became his top mission as a monarch, it was the only mission in many ways. At the very core of how he saw the world and how he acted, it was always to protect the kokutai.    So when the Japanese military began these insubordinate acts, Hirohito's primary concern was to the kokutai, ie: anything that threatened his imperial authority and the imperial institution itself. Although the military usurped his authority, the operations had been successful. Hirohito was not at all opposed to seeing his empire expand. He understood the value of manchuria, he was fully onboard with the military plans to eventually seize control over it, but these radicals were accelerating things to quickly for everyone's liking. He turned a blind eye, dished light punishments and carried on. However the local conflict escalated. It traveled to Shanghai by 1932 and here Hirohito took action. He understood Shanghai was full of western powers. Nations like Britain and America could place economic sanctions on Japan if things were allowed to get out of hand here. So he ordered General Yoshinori Shirakawa to bring the Shanghai expedition to a close.    During this period, two factions emerged within the Japanese military: the Kodoha, or “Imperial Way,” and the Toseiha, or “Control” faction. The Kodoha was founded by General Sadao Araki and his protégé, Jinzaburo Masaki. Their primary objective was a Shōwa Restoration aimed at purging Japan of corrupt politicians and businessmen, especially those associated with the zaibatsu. Composed mainly of young army officers, the Kodoha espoused a romanticized and radical interpretation of Bushido, idealizing pre-industrial Japan, which Araki believed had been tainted by Western influences. To achieve their goals, they resorted to assassinations and planned a coup d'état.   In response, the Toseiha faction was formed, initially led by Lt. General Tetsuzan Nagata and later by Hideki Tojo. Like the Kodoha, the Toseiha sought a Shōwa Restoration but adopted a more moderate and conservative approach. They recognized the importance of preserving traditional values while integrating Western ideals, advocating for a balanced perspective. The Toseiha promoted pragmatic military strategies to navigate the complexities of modern warfare. Although they acknowledged the existence of corrupt politicians and zaibatsu, they preferred to work within the existing political system, anticipating that future total wars would necessitate a strengthened industrial and military capacity. Their ranks primarily included promising graduates from the Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) Academy, Army Staff College, and select naval members. The most significant distinction between the two factions was that the Toseiha explicitly rejected the use of a coup d'état in pursuit of their goals.   Between 1932-1936 radical officers, mostly of the Kodoha faction assassinated politicians and military leaders trying to usher in a showa restoration. You might be led to believe this was in the interest of Hirohito, you would be mistaken. Hirohito did not want a military dictatorship at the whim of the cult of the emperor. Ironic to say, given how WW2 turns out mind you. This really would have been a hostage situation. Hirohito wanted to maintain the exact ambiguous situation that was Showa Era Japan pre 1945. He saw this as the most ideal structure to defend the kokutai, because blame could not be placed solely upon his shoulders. He always maintained a get out of jail free card one could say.    The February 26 incident of 1936, was the climax of the Kodoha faction. They performed a mutiny trying to usher in a SHowa restoration. They assumed when their messenger came to the emperor he would join them and take direct rule. Instead Hirohito was furious. His first thought was the mutineers were trying to enlist his brother Chichibu to overthrow him. He dragged his brother who was a fraternizer amongst the kodoha members mind you, into a meeting, demanding he never associate with them again nor attempt to challenge him. Then Hirohito furious demanded the mutineers be dealt with. At one point he even threatened to lead the imperial guards to put them down. The coup failed, the kodoha faction was destroyed. Ironically the toseiha faction were the ones to do it and thus they became the defacto ruling clique.    The military, especially the kwantung army did not stop with their insubordination.    On July 8th of 1937 the Kwangtung army performed the Marco Polo Bridge incident, ushering in the second sino-japanese war. This was one of many false flag operations they had pulled off over the years. Upon being told about this Hirohito's first response was whether the USSR would invade Manchukuo over the matter. This is what he said to Prime Minister Konoe and army minister Sugiyama “What will you do if the Soviets attack us from the rear?” he asked the prince. Kan'in answered, “I believe the army will rise to the occasion.” The emperor repeated his question: “That's no more than army dogma. What will you actually do in the unlikely event that Soviet [forces] attack?” The prince said only, “We will have no choice.” His Majesty seemed very dissatisfied. Hirohito furious demanded to know what contingency plans existed and his advisors told him before he gave his red seal of approval to invade northern china.   Henceforth he micromanaged a lot of the military decisions going forward and he oversaw the forming and dissolving of numerous cabinets and positions when things went his way or did not in the military and political scene.  Emperor Hirohito was presented with several opportunities to cause cease-fires or peace settlements during the war years. One of the best possible moments to end it all came during the attack on Nanking when Chiang Kai-sheks military were in disarray. On July 11 of 1938, the commander of the 19th division fought a border clash with the USSR known to us in the west as the battle of Lake Khasan. It was a costly defeat for Japan and in the diary of Harada Kumao he noted Hirohito scolded Army minister Itagaki “Hereafter not a single soldier is to be moved without my permission.” When it looked like the USSR would not press for a counter attack across the border, Hirohito gave the order for offensives in China to recommence, again an example of him deciding when to lay down the hammer.   By 1939 the US began threatening sanctions for what Japan was doing in China. Hirohito complained to his chief aide de camp Hata Shunroku on August 5th “It could be a great blow to scrap metal and oil”. Hirohito was livid and scolded many of his top officials and forced the appointment of General Abe to prime minister and demanded of him “to cooperate with the US and Britain and preserve internal order”.   Fast forward a bit, with war raging in Europe Hirohito, on June 19th of 1940 Hirohito asked if chief of staff Prince Kan'in and Army Minister Hata “At a time when peace will soon come in the European situation, will there be a deployment of troops to the Netherlands Indies and French Indochina?” This question highlighted Hirohito's belief at that time that Germany was close to achieving victory, which led him to gradually consider deploying troops to French Indochina and the Dutch East Indies since neither of those parent nations was in a position to protect their territories and vital resources. Regarding the war in China, the Japanese aimed to stop the flow of materials entering China from places like Hong Kong. Hirohito received reports indicating that Britain would not agree to block the shipment of materials into China via Hong Kong. The military recognized that an invasion of Hong Kong might be necessary, which would mean declaring war on Britain. When this was communicated to him, Hirohito responded, “If that occurs, I'm sure America will enforce an embargo, don't you think?” In response, Kido, the lord of the privy seal, reassured him by stating, “The nation must be fully prepared to resist, proceeding with caution and avoiding being drawn into events instigated by foreign interests.”   Hirohito went through countless meetings, but eventually signed order number 458 authorizing the invasion of French Indochina, knowing full well the consequences. The US,UK and Netherlands began embargoes of oil, rubber and iron. In the words of Admiral Takagai “As time passes and this situation continues, our empire will either be totally defeated or forced to fight a hopeless war. Therefore we should pursue war and diplomacy together. If there is no prospect of securing our final line of national survival by diplomatic negotiations, we must be resolved to fight.” Hirohito understood the predicament full well, that each day Japan was wasting its oil reserves, if they were to strike it had to be quickly.   On October 13th Hirohito told his closest advisor Koichi Kido “In the present situation there seems to be little hope for the Japan–U.S. negotiations. If hostilities erupt this time, I think I may have to issue a declaration of war.”   The reason I am bringing up all this stuff is to solidify, Hirohito had agency, he was micromanaging and forming decisions. After the war broke out with the west, Hirohito did have the ability to stamp his foot down. Of course there could have been wild repercussions, his military could have usurped him with Chichibu, it was definitely possible. But you need to keep this mind set, as far as why Hirohito acts or doesn't, its always to protect the Kokutai. Thus one of the levers for peace, solely rested on Hirohito's perception if the kokutai could be retained or not.    From the outset of the Pacific War, Hirohito believed Germany was going to defeat the USSR. In line with his military leaders, they all believed Japan had to seize everything they could in the asia-pacific and thwart off the US until a negotiated peace could be met. Hirohito committed himself to overseeing the war, determined to achieve victory at any cost. He was a very cautious leader, he meticulously analyzed each campaign, anticipating potential setbacks and crafting worst-case scenario predictions. He maintained a skeptical view of the reports from his senior officials and was often harshly critical of high commanders.   While he did not frequently visit the front lines like other commanders in chief, Hirohito wielded significant influence over theater operations, shaping both planning and execution whenever he deemed necessary. Similar to his approach during the war in China, he issued the highest military orders from the Imperial Headquarters, conducted audited conferences, and made decisions communicated under his name. He regularly welcomed generals and admirals to the imperial palace for detailed briefings on the battlefront and visited various military bases, battleships, and army and naval headquarters. His inspections encompassed military schools and other significant military institutions, adding to his comprehensive involvement in the war effort.   Now the war went extremely well for Japan until the battle of Midway. This was as major setback, but Japan retained the initiative. Then the Guadalcanal campaign saw Japan lose the initiative to the Americans. Upon receiving the initial report of the Ichiki detachment's destruction, Hirohito remarked, “I am sure it [Guadalcanal] can be held.” Despite the numerous reports detailing the devastating effects of tropical diseases and starvation on his troops, he persistently demanded greater efforts from them. Hirohito exerted continuous pressure on his naval and land commanders to retake the island. On September 15th, November 5th, and November 11th, he requested additional Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) troops and aircraft to be allocated to the cause.   General Sugiyama expressed concerns about dispatching more IJA pilots due to their inexperience in transoceanic combat, preferring to reinforce the North China Army for an attack on Chongqing instead. Hirohito pressed the issue again, but Sugiyama responded that the IJA had diverted its air resources to New Guinea and Rabaul. Undeterred by the objections from senior commanders, Hirohito persisted in his demands. By late November, it became evident that Guadalcanal was a lost cause.   At an Imperial Headquarters conference on December 31st, 1942, the chiefs of staff proposed canceling the attempts to recapture Guadalcanal. Hirohito sanctioned this decision but stated, “It is unacceptable to just give up on capturing Guadalcanal. We must launch an offensive elsewhere.” He insisted on this point, leading to the selection of new strategic targets in the Solomons, north of New Georgia, and in the Stanley Range on New Guinea. Hirohito even threatened to withhold authorization for withdrawing troops from Guadalcanal until a new plan was established. He later opposed the withdrawal from Munda Airfield, as it contradicted the newly defined defensive line.   As the defensive perimeter in the central and northern Solomons began to crumble, Hirohito continued to insist that the navy engage in decisive battles to regain the initiative, allowing for the transport of supplies to the many soldiers trapped on various islands. When he learned of the navy's failure to reinforce Lae on March 3rd, he asked, “Then why didn't you change plans immediately and land at Madan? This is a failure, but it can teach us a good lesson and become a source of future success. Do this for me so I can have peace of mind for a while.” The phrase “Do this for me” would come to be his signature rallying cry.   After Guadal canal, it was loss after loss for Japan. By February of 1944, Hirohito forced Sugiyama to resign so Hideki Tojo could take his position as chief of the general staff, note Tojo was prime minister and army minister at this point. Hirohito worked alongside Tojo to plan some last ditch efforts to change the war situation. The most significant one was Operation Ichi-Go. As much damage as they did to China with that, Chiang Kai-Shek's government survived. Hirohito watched as island by island fell to the Americans. When the Americans were poised to take Saipan he warned Tojo “If we ever lose Saipan, repeated air attacks on Tokyo will follow. No matter what it takes, we have to hold there.” Saipan fell, so Hirohito stopped supporting Tojo and allowed his rivals to take down his cabinet by june 18th of 1944.    Hirohito remained resolute in his determination to wrest victory from the Allies. On October 18th, the Imperial Headquarters ordered a decisive naval engagement, leading to the Battle of Leyte Gulf. After the war, Hirohito publicly stated, "Contrary to the views of the Army and Navy General Staffs, I consented to the showdown battle at Leyte, believing that if we launched an attack and America hesitated, we might find an opportunity to negotiate." Leyte Gulf didnt work. The military began the kamikaze program. On new years day of 1945 Hirohito inspected the special last meal rations given to departing kamikaze units. Iwo Jima fell. Okinawa remained, and Hirohito lashed out “Is it because we failed to sink enemy transports that we've let the enemy get ashore? Isn't there any way to defend Okinawa from the landing enemy forces?” On the second day of Okinawa's invasion Hirohito ordered a counter landing by the 32nd army and urged the navy to counterattack in every way possible. It was a horrible failure, it cost the lives of up to 120,000 Japanese combatants, 170,000 noncombatants. The Americans lost 12,500 killed and 33,000 wounded. An absolute bloodbath.    The Surrender time   Now we come to the time period where Japan seriously began looking for ways to surrender. In Europe Germany was heading to its defeat and Japan knew this. As for Japan, their army in Burma had been annihilated. Their forces in China were faring better after Operation Ichi-go, having opened up a land corridor along the main railway from Beiping to Wuhan and from throughout Guangdong but still stuck in a deadlock stalemate, facing a guerrilla war that was costing them 64% of their military expenditures. They deeply feared once the Soviets finished up with Germany, they would undoubtedly turn east against Manchuria. With the Soviets attacking from the north, the US would attack from the south, perhaps landing in Shanghai and the home islands. The Kamikaze tactics were proving formidable, but not nearly enough. By 1945, 43% of the IJA were now stationed in Japan, Korea and Formosa, bracing for the final stand. Former prime minister Reijiro Wakatsuki came out of retirement in may of 1945, having heard Germany collapsed, to urge Hirohito and the Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki to open negotiations with the US as soon as possible. However he also said “the enemy must first be made to see the disadvantages of continuing the war”. To this Hirohito's chief counselor Makino Nobuaki said that “the ultimate priority is to develop an advantageous war situation.” Advisor admiral Kesiuke Okada said Japan should wait for “a moment favorable for us,” then make peace. Advisors Kiichiro Hiranuma and Koki Hirota advised the emperor to fight on until the end.   Now I want to bring in a key player to the surrender decision, that of Prince Konoe. Konoe was very close to Hirohito and understood the emperors mentality, especially how he viewed things in relation to the kokutai.    The senior statesman Prince Konoe had been consulting with Hirohito for over 18 months at this point trying to convey the message that if the war continued it would threaten the kokutai. Many months prior, he confided in the emperor's brother, Prince Takamatsu, that the army was suffering from “a cancer” in the form of the Toseiha faction. However, he noted that “Kido and others” did not share his perspective, while “his Majesty is relatively unconcerned with ideological issues.” For the past four years, he continued, the emperor had been advised and still believed that “the true extremists are the Kodoha faction.” In reality, the greater threat to the kokutai arose from the Toseiha faction. Konoe further asserted that if the war escalated, they would attempt to alter the kokutai.   Konoe speculated that whether the threat originated from communists within the nation, primarily referring to left-wing radicals in the Toseiha faction, or from the “Anglo-American enemy,” both would seek to preserve the emperor while pushing towards the country's communization.In his written report to the emperor on February 14, which Kido listened to attentively, Konoe elaborated on his conspiracy theory. He asserted that the Soviet Union regarded Japan as its primary threat in East Asia. The Soviets had allied with the Chinese Communists, the largest and most formidable Communist party in Asia, and were collaborating with the United States and Britain to drive Japan out of China. He warned that they would enter the war when the opportunity arose.   Defeat, he cautioned the emperor, was inevitable if the conflict persisted. However, he emphasized that a far greater fear was the potential destruction of the kokutai. The ongoing war was eroding the domestic status quo, unleashing forces that threatened Japan and its imperial institution from within as much as from external adversaries. The real danger lay in the emperor's and Kido's trust in the generals of the Toseiha faction, who were unintentionally facilitating the communization of Japan. Konoe implored for a swift peace settlement before a Communist revolution emerged, making the preservation of the kokutai impossible. Hirohito agreed with Konoe but stated “ To end the war would be “very difficult unless we make one more military gain.” Konoe allegedly replied, “Is that possible? It must happen soon. If we have to wait much longer, . . . [a mere battle victory] will mean nothing.” Hirohito replied “If we hold out long enough in this war, we may be able to win, but what worries me is whether the nation will be able to endure it until then.”   On February 15th of 1945, Hirohito's intelligence warned the Soviet Union would likely abrogate its Neutrality Pact with Japan. Even Tojo conceded there was a 50/50 chance the USSR would invade Manchuria. In March, the US began B-29 incendiary bombing raids over Tokyo, turning 40% of the capital into ash. On March 18th, Hirohito with some aides drove around the capital to witness the devastation. The civilians looked exhausted and bewildered to Hirohito. Factory production was collapsing, absenteeism was rising, instances of lese majeste were running rampant. For the next 5 months imperial family members and senior statesmen all began speaking to Hirohito about the “crises of the kokutai”. The threat Konoe had warned about for months was becoming the main talking point. It seemed like the Japanese people within the countryside and urban areas remained steadfast in the resolve to obey their leaders, work and sacrifice for their nation, but for how long would they feel so?    It was only after the battle for Okinawa was lost and 60 Japanese cities had been leveled by American incendiary bombs that Hirohito openly indicated he wanted to negotiate a surrender.   Kido's diary reveals the first clear indication that the emperor might be urged to consider an early peace on June 8, 1945, when Kido drafted his “Draft Plan for Controlling the Crisis Situation.” This marked a pivotal moment. It followed the unintentional bombing of the Imperial Palace, the complete loss of hope for saving Okinawa, and coincided with the day the Supreme War Leadership Council adopted the “Basic Policy for the Future Direction of the War.” With the fighting in Europe concluded, Japan found itself entirely isolated. Kido's plan, although vague, proposed seeking the Soviet Union's assistance as an intermediary to help Japan gain leverage in negotiations with its adversaries. By drafting this plan, Kido signaled the end of his long alliance with the military hard-liners. Hirohito's acceptance of it indicated his readiness for an early peace.   Hirohito was moved to an underground bunker in the mountains of Matsushiro in Nagano prefecture where upon those around him noted he fell into a deep depression. On June 22nd  Hirohito informed the Supreme War Leadership Council he wanted them to open diplomatic maneuvers to end the war. In early July Soviet Ambassador Jacob Malik broke off inconclusive talks with Hirota. Hirohito stepped in immediately and ordered a new special envoy be sent to Moscow. However Hirohito nor the Suzuki government had concrete plans on how to mediate a surrender through the Soviets. The only things they did prioritize was a guarantee of the emperors political position and retainment of the imperial system, ie the kokutai. This was taken into consideration rather than ending the war as quickly as possible to save the lives of millions.    From April 8, 1945, until Japan's capitulation, the Suzuki government's chief war policy was “Ketsugo,” an advanced iteration of the “Shosango” (Victory Number 3) plan for defending the homeland. The hallmark of this strategy was a heavy reliance on suicide tactics, including deploying a massive number of kamikaze “special attack” planes, human torpedoes launched from submarines, dynamite-stuffed “crash boats” powered by truck engines, human rocket bombs carried by aircraft, and suicide assaults by specially trained ground units.   While preparations for Operation Ketsu progressed, the Imperial Diet convened on June 9 to pass a Wartime Emergency Measures Law, along with five additional measures aimed at mobilizing the entire nation for this final battle. On the same day, the emperor, who had yet to initiate efforts to end the war, issued another imperial rescript in conjunction with the Diet's convocation, instructing the nation to “smash the inordinate ambitions of the enemy nations” and “achieve the goals of the war.” Concurrently, the controlled press launched a daily die-for-the-emperor campaign to foster gratitude for the imperial benevolence and, from around mid-July onward, initiated a campaign to “protect the kokutai.”   The Americans countered with their own propaganda aimed at breaking Japan's will to fight. B-29 bombers dropped millions of leaflets written in Japanese, announcing the next scheduled targets for bombing raids and urging surrender, while using the emperor to challenge the militarists. Leaflets bearing the chrysanthemum crest criticized the “military cliques” for “forcing the entire nation to commit suicide” and called on “everyone” to “exercise their constitutional right to make direct appeals [for peace] to the Emperor.” They asserted that “even the powerful military cliques cannot stop the mighty march for peace of the Emperor and the people.” One notable batch of seven million leaflets conveyed the terms of the “joint declaration” issued by the United States, Great Britain, and China. “Today we come not to bomb you,” they stated. “We are dropping this leaflet to inform you of the response from the United States government to your government's request for conditions of surrender.... Whether the war stops immediately depends on your government. You will understand how to end the war if you read these two official notifications.”   Amid pressures from imperial edicts to continue preparations for a final battle and focus solely on victory, the Japanese people were also subjected to an intense American psychological warfare campaign in addition to aerial bombardment. During late July and August, prefectural governors, police chiefs, and officers of the “special higher police” submitted reports to the Home Ministry detailing the rapidly deteriorating national morale.    Now on the other side, Roosevelt made it known back in January of 1943 at the Casablanca conference, the allies would only accept unconditional surrender. By 1945, the allies understood the predicament this left Japan with. On May 8th of 1945, Truman added “Japan's surrender would not mean the extermination or enslavement of the Japanese people” trying to indicate a non vindictive spirit. However the Kokutai question always remained ambiguous. State Department Joseph Grew, the former ambassador to Japan, began arguing to Truman they needed to make public a clear definition of the terms to persuade Japan to surrender. As he argued to Truman: Emperor Hirohito was seen as the key figure in Japan's surrender, likened to a "queen bee in a hive... surrounded by the attentions of the hive." Throughout the war, he was characterized in various ways—as a “puppet” of the militarists, a constitutional monarch, and a pacifist. Grew had immense faith in the influence exerted by what he referred to as the “moderates” surrounding the Japanese throne.    However many of Grew's colleagues argued the future existence of the monarchy was intolerable as it was akin to fascism. Many wanted to punish the emperor. Truman was in a tug of war. The Potsdam declaration issued on July 26th of 1945 came in the form of a ultimatum aiming to quicken japans surrender. Truman clarified the terms for the unconditional surrender at the end of its terms: "We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction." Zero mention of the emperor. Grew had argued to add “this may include a constitutional monarchy under the present dynasty.” But it was deleted from the article. The status of the emperor was not guaranteed, the kokutai was thus up in the air.    The next day, the Suzuki cabinet rejected the terms. The Japanese leadership and Hirohito were still banking and awaiting Soviet replies to their terms.    Lets talk about the Soviet talks now   Back on July 12th ambassador Naotake Satō sent this message to the Soviets: “His Majesty the Emperor, mindful of the fact that the present war daily brings greater evil and sacrifice upon the peoples of all the belligerent powers, desires from his heart that it may be quickly terminated. But so long as England and the United States insist upon unconditional surrender, the Japanese Empire has no alternative but to fight on with all its strength for the honor and existence of the Motherland”.  However the Soviets had made commitments to their allies, promising in fact to invade Japan to aid them.    As for the Soviets their primary objective was to ensure unrestricted access to the Pacific Ocean. The year-round ice-free areas of the Soviet Pacific coastline, particularly Vladivostok, could be blockaded by air and sea from Sakhalin Island and the Kurile Islands. Securing these territories to guarantee free access to the Soya Strait was their main goal. Secondary objectives included acquiring leases for the Chinese Eastern Railway, the Southern Manchuria Railway, as well as gaining control over Dairen and Port Arthur.   To achieve these aims, Stalin and Molotov prolonged negotiations with the Japanese, creating a false sense of hope for a Soviet-mediated peace. Simultaneously, in their discussions with the United States and Britain, the Soviets insisted on strict adherence to the Cairo Declaration, which had been reaffirmed at the Yalta Conference. This declaration stipulated that the Allies would not accept a separate or conditional peace with Japan; thus, the Japanese would need to surrender unconditionally to all the Allies. The Soviets aimed to prolong the war by opposing any efforts to dilute this requirement. This approach would provide the Soviets with the necessary time to complete the transfer of their troops from the Western Front to the Far East and to conquer Manchuria, Inner Mongolia, northern Korea, South Sakhalin, the Kuriles, and potentially Hokkaidō, starting with an assault on Rumoi. AUGUST 1945   Thus we come to at last the critical point, August of 1945.    The Americans prepared for the deployment of atomic bombs and for an invasion of southern Kyushu, known as Operation Olympic, scheduled to commence on November 1. At 8:15 A.M. on August 6, a single B-29 bomber, the Enola Gay dropped little boy, devastating much of the undefended city of Hiroshima, instantly killing an estimated 100,000 to 140,000 people and leading to the deaths of possibly another 100,000 over the next five years. At the epicenter of the explosion, “a light appeared 3,000 times brighter than the sun,” creating a fireball that emitted thermal radiation capable of “instantly scorching humans, trees, and houses.” As the air heated and rushed upward, cold air surged in to ignite a firestorm. Hours later, a whirlwind escalated the flames to their peak until more than eight square miles were virtually reduced to cinders. Subsequently, black, muddy rain filled with radioactive fallout began to fall. Two days later, using Japan's rejection of the Potsdam Declaration as a pretext, the Soviet Union declared war on Japan. Then on August 9, the United States dropped a second atomic bomb on Nagasaki, resulting in the immediate deaths of approximately 35,000 to 40,000 people and injuring more than 60,000.   Meanwhile, in Tokyo, during the critical period between the Potsdam Declaration and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Emperor Hirohito remained silent about accepting the Potsdam terms. However, on July 25 and 31, he explicitly conveyed to Kido that the imperial regalia must be defended at all costs. The three sacred objects—a mirror, a curved jewel, and a sword—symbolized the legitimacy of his rule through the northern court and were integral to his identity as the divine sovereign. Hirohito's focus was on protecting these symbols of office, as he insisted on having them brought to the palace. This fixation on maintaining his symbols occurred during a pivotal moment when the pressing issue was whether to accept immediate capitulation. Reflecting on this, he was unprepared to seize the opportunity to end the war himself.   Prime Minister Suzuki, following his initial rejection of the Potsdam ultimatum, also saw no need for further action. His Cabinet Advisory Council, which included the president of Asano Cement, the founder of the Nissan consortium, the vice president of the Bank of Japan, and other representatives from the nation's leading business interests that had profited significantly from the war, convened on the morning of August 3. They recommended accepting the Potsdam terms, arguing that the United States would permit Japan to retain its non-military industries and continue participating in world trade.    Here are some reactions to the two bombs and invasion of Manchuria.    Yonai Mitsumasa said to admiral Takagi Sokichi, on August 12, that “I think the term is perhaps inappropriate, but the atomic bombs and the Soviet entry into the war are, in a sense, gifts from the gods [tenyu, also “heaven-sent blessings”]. This way we don't have to say that we quit the war because of domestic circumstances. I've long been advocating control of our crisis, but neither from fear of an enemy attack nor because of the atomic bombs and the Soviet entry into the war. The main reason is my anxiety over the domestic situation. So, it is rather fortunate that we can now control matters without revealing the domestic situation”.    Konoe's characterized the Soviet involvement in the war as “a godsend for controlling the army,”. Kido viewed of both the atomic bombings and the Soviet entry into the conflict as “useful” elements for ensuring a smooth transition. A nascent power struggle was unfolding, rendering the potential death toll—whether one hundred thousand or two hundred thousand—immaterial to those involved, as long as their desired outcome was achieved: an end to the war that would leave the monarchy intact and capable of managing the discontent that defeat would inevitably provoke. Throughout the final acts of this wartime drama, the Japanese “moderates” found it easier to capitulate to external pressures than to take decisive action on their own to conclude the war.   Another illuminating looks at Japan's elite's perspective on surrender terms was the document titled “Essentials of Peace Negotiations” (wahei kosho no yoryo). Drafted by Konoe and his adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Sakai Koji, after Konoe had reluctantly accepted a mission to Moscow, this document, stipulated the preservation of the emperor system, along with most of the imperial prerogatives, as the absolute minimum condition for peace. It defined the “original” or “essential homeland” as including the southern half of the Kurile Islands but showed a willingness to concede all overseas territories to the enemy, including Okinawa and the American-occupied Bonin Islands, as well as the southern half of Sakhalin. The “Essentials” also accepted complete disarmament for an unspecified period, thereby compromising on the issues of demobilizing and disarming the armed forces. More significantly, an “explanation” attached to the “Essentials” emphasized that “the main aim is to secure the imperial line and maintain the political role of the emperor.”    Why Japan surrendered   We come to it atleast after a long podcast. Why did Japan ultimately surrender?   The twin psychological shocks of the first atomic bomb and the Soviet entry into the war, combined with Kido's and the emperor's concern over escalating public criticism of the throne and its occupant, fueled an almost paranoid fear that, sooner or later, the populace would react violently against their leaders if the war persisted much longer. These factors ultimately led Hirohito to accept, in principle, the terms of the Potsdam Declaration.   At the first meeting of the six member constituents of the Supreme War Leadership Council, held from 10:30 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. on August 9, Army Minister Anami Korechika, Chiefs of Staff Umezu Yoshijiro, representing the army, and Yonai, representing the navy, along with Tōgō, from the Foreign Ministry, were expected to discuss the acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration. Instead, the conversation revolved around whether to attempt a conditional surrender—specifically, should they insist on one condition, the preservation of the kokutai, or four?   After Suzuki addressed the assembly regarding the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and the Soviet attack, Yonai, as recounted by Navy Chief of Staff Toyoda, was the first to speak, framing the issue in terms of four conditions. “Let's start to talk, Do we accept the Potsdam Declaration with no conditions? If not, and we wish to insist on attaching hopes and conditions, we may do so this way. First, preservation of the kokutai; then for the rest, the main items in the Potsdam Declaration: treatment of war criminals, method of disarmament, and the matter of sending in an army of occupation.” Thus, the participants identified what they perceived to be the ambiguous points within the Potsdam Declaration and used them as the foundation for their discussions.   The army insisted on four conditions: First, the preservation of the kokutai, which they considered distinct from the Potsdam Declaration itself. The other conditions proposed were, second, that the Imperial Headquarters assume responsibility for disarmament and demobilization; third, a prohibition on occupation; and fourth, the delegation of the punishment of war criminals to the Japanese government. The army equated the kokutai with the emperor's right of supreme command. Their self-serving desire for autonomous war crimes trials was based on the belief that the Allies would use such trials to politically indict the military. Consequently, army leaders aimed to preempt the activities of any international tribunal by conducting their own trials—similar to the approach taken by the uninvaded and unrepentant Germans after World War I.   Supporting the military's views during cabinet meetings that day were three civilian members of the Suzuki cabinet: Justice Minister Matsuzaka Hiromasa, Home Minister Yasui Toji, and Minister of Health Okada Tadahiko. At the imperial conference that night, which extended into the early hours of the tenth, Foreign Minister Tōgō's interpretation of the “preservation of the kokutai” referred solely to the safeguarding of the Imperial House or dynasty, rather than the continuation of Hirohito's reign.   Hiranuma, another advocate for the single condition, interpreted the kokutai as the “emperor's sovereign right to rule the state [not] deriving from national law. Even if the entire nation is sacrificed to the war, we must preserve both the kokutai and the security of the imperial house.” This discrepancy illustrated that there was no completely unified understanding of what the kokutai entailed; the debate over one condition versus four represented conflicting visions for the future of the Japanese state and masked the competition for political power that was already unfolding.   It remains doubtful whether the emperor and Kido initially sided with Tōgō against the four conditions proposed by the senior military leaders. A more likely inference is that both men retained sympathies for the hardliners, both military and civilian, who preferred to continue the futile war rather than surrender immediately and unconditionally. This may explain why, on August 9, Konoe had Hosokawa Morisada approach Navy General Headquarters to urge the emperor's brother, Prince Takamatsu, to pressure Hirohito (through Kido) to accept the Potsdam terms. Later that afternoon, Konoe enlisted the help of diplomat Shigemitsu Mamoru to persuade Kido to reconsider his stance on the four conditions. Ultimately, at the urging of Takamatsu and Shigemitsu, Kido did shift to support Tōgō's position.   At the end of the war, as at its beginning and throughout every stage of its progression, Emperor Hirohito played a highly active role in supporting the actions carried out in his name. From the very beginning of the Asia-Pacific war, the emperor played a significant role in the unfolding events around him. Prior to the Battle of Okinawa, he consistently advocated for a decisive victory. Afterward, he acknowledged the necessity of pursuing an early peace, although he did not favor an immediate cessation of hostilities. Instead, he wavered, steering Japan toward ongoing warfare rather than direct negotiations with the Allies. When the final crisis fully unfolded, the only option left was unconditional surrender. Even then, he continued to procrastinate until the atomic bomb was dropped and the Soviets launched their attack. The wartime emperor ideology that once sustained morale made it exceedingly difficult for Japan's leaders to accept the act of surrender. Aware of their objective defeat, yet indifferent to the suffering the war inflicted on their own people—as well as on the populations of Asia, the Pacific, and the West whose lives they had disrupted—the emperor and his military leaders sought a means to lose without appearing to lose. They aimed to mitigate domestic criticism following surrender while preserving their power structure.   Blinded by their fixation on the fate of the imperial house and committed to an overly optimistic diplomacy toward the Soviet Union, Japan's leaders missed several opportunities to end their lost war. Would Japan's leaders have surrendered more promptly if the Truman administration had “clarified” the status of the emperor before the cataclysmic double shocks of the atomic bomb and the Soviet entry into the war? Probably not. However, it is likely they would have surrendered to prevent the kokutai from being destroyed from within. The evidence suggests that the first atomic bomb and the Soviet declaration of war led Hirohito, Kido, and other members of the court to believe that continuing the war would inevitably result in that destruction. They recognized that the populace was war-weary and despondent, with rising hostility toward the military and the government, accompanied by increasing criticism of the emperor himself. More specifically, Kido and Hirohito were privy to Home Ministry reports, which contained information from governors and police chiefs nationwide. These reports indicated that citizens were beginning to label the emperor as an incompetent leader responsible for the deteriorating war situation.   This is the third variable, never spoken about. Many first look at the atomic bombs. Bigger brain people turn to the Soviet Invasion of Manchuria. But hardly anyone reads about how the collapse of Japan's social fabric, scared the shit out of the Emperor and his closest advisors. You can't have a kokutai, without a populace that worshiped you.    When the emperor expressed in February, “What worries me is whether the nation [could] endure” long enough to achieve victory, he was not merely voicing concern for the suffering of his subjects; rather, he feared that such suffering could lead to social upheaval—in short, revolution. At that time, he referred to the ordinary, war-related hardships of food shortages, air raids, devastated cities, destruction of homes, and the omnipresent grief from the loss of loved ones. The atomic bomb escalated death, pain, and suffering to unimaginably higher levels, intensifying the threat from within. After the bombings of Japan and two atomic bombs, Hirohito was in a dark way, given a golden get out of jail free card. Hirohito could now save his suffering people from further anguish by surrendering, allowing him to deflect responsibility for leading them into misery while adopting an air of benevolence and care. Indeed, Hirohito did care—though not primarily for the Japanese people, but rather for the survival of his own imperial house and throne.   After the bombing of Hiroshima, Hirohito delayed for a full two days before instructing Kido, shortly before 10 A.M. on August 9, to “quickly control the situation” because “the Soviet [Union]” had declared war. Kido immediately communicated with Prime Minister Suzuki, who began arrangements for an Imperial Conference scheduled for later that night. Following the seidan of August 10, Chief Cabinet Secretary Sakomizu took charge of drafting the “Imperial Rescript Ending the War” based on Hirohito's directives. Assisted by two scholars of the Chinese classics, Kawada Mizuho and Yasuoka Masahiro, Sakomizu worked tirelessly for over three days before submitting a version of the rescript to the Suzuki cabinet. After six hours of contentious discussion on the night of August 14, the cabinet modified and approved the document. Hirohito promptly signed it, and Shimomura and Kido persuaded him to record a suitably opaque final version for broadcast to the nation.   On the night of August 14, the Suzuki government notified the United States and other Allied nations that it had accepted both the Potsdam Declaration and the Byrnes letter of August 11. Accelerating the emperor's actions during this climactic moment of the unconditional surrender drama was the American psychological warfare campaign. When a leaflet dropped from B-29 bombers came into Kido's possession on the night of August 13 or the morning of the fourteenth, he conferred with the emperor and explained the gravity of the situation. The latest enemy leaflets were informing the Japanese people of the government's notification of surrender under one condition, along with the full text of Byrnes's response. If this continued, it would undermine the imperial government's reliance on secrecy to obscure the true nature of the lost war and the reasons for the prolonged surrender delay.   Given Kido's and the emperor's concerns about rising signs of defeatism, including criticism of the throne, immediate action was necessary to prevent the populace from acting on their own initiative. Thus, the second seidan was convened. At noon on August 15, the Japanese people gathered around their radio receivers and heard, for the first time, the high-pitched voice of their emperor telling them:    “After pondering deeply the general trends of the world and the actual conditions obtaining in Our Empire today, We have decided to effect a settlement of the present situation by resorting to an extraordinary measure. We have ordered Our Government to communicate to the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that Our Empire accepts the provisions of their Joint Declaration. To strive for the common prosperity and happiness of all nations as well as the security and well-being of Our subjects is the solemn obligation which has been handed down by Our Imperial Ancestors and which lies close to Our heart. Indeed, We declared war on America and Britain out of Our sincere desire to ensure Japan's self-preservation and the stabilization of East Asia, it being far from Our thought either to infringe upon the sovereignty of other nations or to embark upon territorial aggrandizement. But now the war has lasted for nearly four years. Despite the best that has been done by everyone—the gallant fighting of the military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of Our servants of the State, and the devoted service of Our one hundred million people—the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage, while the general trends of the world have all turned against her interest. Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization. Such being the case, how are We to save the millions of Our subjects, or to atone Ourselves before the hallowed spirits of Our Imperial Ancestors? This is the reason why We have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the Joint Declaration of the Powers... The hardships and sufferings to which Our nation is to be subjected hereafter will be certainly great. We are keenly aware of the inmost feelings of all of you, Our subjects. However, it is according to the dictates of time and fate that We have resolved to pave the way for a grand peace for all the generations to come by enduring the unendurable and suffering what is unsufferable”.   Clearly Hirohito sought to justify his decision to surrender by citing the dropping of the atomic bombs. He wanted to become the saviour of the Japanese people. Hirohito wanted to obfuscate the issue of accountability, to prevent expressions of strife and anger and to strengthen domestic unity around himself, to protect and raise the kokutai.  Interestingly, the surrender declaration to the civilian population was not the same one sent to the military. On August 17th Hirohito issued a second “rescript to soldiers and sailors” throughout the asia-pacific.   “ Now that the Soviet Union has entered the war against us, to continue . . . under the present conditions at home and abroad would only recklessly incur even more damage to ourselves and result in endangering the very foundation of the empire's existence. Therefore, even though enormous fighting spirit still exists in the Imperial Navy and Army, I am going to make peace with the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union, as well as with Chungking, in order to maintain our glorious national polity”.   The lesser-known August 17 rescript to the army and navy specified Soviet participation as the sole reason for surrender, while maintaining the kokutai as the primary aim. Dissembling until the end—and even beyond—it was noted that the emperor presented two different justifications for his delayed surrender. Both statements were likely true.   Months later Hirohito's said this about his decision to surrender “The main motive behind my decision at that time was that if we . . . did not act, the Japanese race would perish and I would be unable to protect my loyal subjects [sekishi—literally, “children”]. Second, Kido agreed with me on the matter of defending the kokutai. If the enemy landed near Ise Bay, both Ise and Atsuta Shrines would immediately come under their control. There would be no time to transfer the sacred treasures [regalia] of the imperial family and no hope of protecting them. Under these circumstances, protection of the kokutai would be difficult. For these reasons, I thought at the time that I must make peace even at the sacrifice of myself.”    There exists this sort of childish argument today whether it was the atomic bombs or the Soviet Invasion that caused Japan to surrender. However, this overlooks as I think I've explained in 9000 words jeez, the influence of the kokutai. Defending the kokutai was Hirohito's number one priority. The Soviets threatened it. Communism threatened it. What Japan perceived to be “democracy” threatened it. American victory threatened it. And the destruction of Japan's social fabric threatened it. I love this one piece of history, that I have only come across in one book, that being the main one I am using here.   On August 12th, Hirohito came to the imperial family to tell them he had made the decision to surrender. His uncle Prince Yasuhiko Asaka asked him whether the war would be continued if the kokutai could not be preserved. Hirohito replied “of course”.

David Pietrusza's book, Roosevelt Sweeps Nation: FDR's 1936 Landslide and the Triumph of the Liberal Ideal, chronicles Franklin Delano Roosevelt's pivotal re-election campaign in 1936, a moment that fundamentally reshaped American political demographics and solidified the New Deal as a national agenda. The campaign began under the shadow of the death of Louis Howe in April 1936, FDR's closest political strategist and confidant since 1912. Howe, despite his "unpleasant acerbic" nature and poor health, was an invaluable aide, worshiping FDR and actively pushing Eleanor Roosevelt into political activism following FDR's 1917 affair. His passing left Roosevelt to navigate a complex political landscape on his own. 1936LOWELL THOMAS & FDR Roosevelt faced significant opposition from both the political right and left. On the right, Al Smith, former Governor of New York and FDR's erstwhile mentor, emerged as a fierce critic. Disaffected since FDR's governorship, Smith believed Roosevelt's "forgotten man" speech and New Deal policies constituted "class warfare." Allied with wealthy individuals like the DuPonts and E.F. Hutton, Smith co-founded the American Liberty League, which lambasted the New Deal as unconstitutional and socialist, compelling Roosevelt to wage his own campaign of "class warfare" against these "rich guys in the Silk Hats." From the populist left, FDR contended with the legacy of Huey Long, the charismatic Louisiana senator assassinated in September 1935. Long's radical "Share Our Wealth" program, advocating for massive wealth redistribution and government provision of cars and radios to every family, garnered millions of followers and represented "the greatest force of the populist left." His strategy was to siphon votes in 1936 to ensure a Republican victory, creating a worse economic situation that would pave his way to the presidency in 1940. In Georgia, conservative populist Eugene Talmadge, while ideologically different from Long (being a "Jeffersonian conservative" who refused to fund welfare), also vigorously opposed the New Deal through "race baiting" and accusations of "communist influence," drawing some of Long's former supporters. A significant third-party challenge coalesced around Dr. Francis Everett Townsend, an elderly physician whose Townsend Plan proposed giving $200 a month to every person over 60, requiring them to spend it within 30 days to stimulate the economy. Though Roosevelt personally disliked "the dole," the plan's immense popularity and the formation of millions of Townsend clubs pushed FDR to swiftly introduce Social Security. Townsend later joined forces with Father Charles Edward Coughlin, an influential "radio priest" who initially supported FDR but turned against him over monetary policy, and Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith, a fiery orator akin to Long, along with Congressman William Lemke. This "amateur" coalition, however, failed to gain significant electoral traction, securing only 1.2% of the vote due to ballot access issues in major states and a lack of experienced political leadership. Coughlin, notably, was a more prominent radio figure than FDR for a period, influencing millions through his syndicated broadcasts. FDR's secret meeting with Coughlin at Hyde Park, orchestrated by Joseph Patrick Kennedy, famously ended in a rupture, leading to open political warfare. Ideological parties also presented concerns. The Socialist Party, led by Norman Thomas, consistently polled hundreds of thousands of votes, particularly in urban centers like New York City. The Communist Party USA, under Earl Browder (chosen by Stalin for his pliability and non-Jewish background), initially condemned the New Deal as "fascist." However, with the rise of Adolf Hitler and the global shift to a "popular front" strategy, the Communist Party covertly supported FDR to keep him in power against the looming international threats, while running their own candidate to avoid the "kiss of death" of an overt endorsement. Media mogul William Randolph Hearst, who controlled a vast empire of 28 newspapers and eight radio stations, also became a powerful opponent. Despite initially supporting FDR in 1932, Hearst grew increasingly disaffected by the New Deal's progressive policies and taxes on the wealthy, leading to a "long bumpy involved breakup." FDR even considered "throwing 46 men who make a million dollars a year to the wolves," a direct reference to Hearst and his wealthy allies. The Republican Party ultimately nominated Alf Landon, the Governor of Kansas, a "complete surprise" and "least interesting character." Landon, a progressive Republican favored by Hearst, was known for balancing Kansas's budget but was widely regarded as uncharismatic and a poor public speaker, especially on radio, a crucial medium of the era. His campaign message, promising only a more efficient implementation of New Deal programs he had largely supported, failed to energize the electorate. Earlier potential nominees included Herbert Hoover, William Borah, Frank Knox, and Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg. Roosevelt's campaign, in stark contrast, was dynamic. First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt played an indispensable role, defying initial party reluctance to campaign vigorously. She became a crucial link to the African-American vote in Northern cities, even though FDR, for political reasons, declined to support an anti-lynching law favored by Eleanor and the NAACP. Roosevelt himself delivered powerful, "frenzied and irate" speeches, most notably his Madison Square Garden address on Halloween night, where he famously embraced the "hatred" of "economic royalists" and promised accountability, a compelling message of "class warfare" that galvanized the electorate despite his own staff's initial horror at its perceived demagoguery. Despite initial polls, like the Literary Digest (which had predicted a Landon victory), suggesting a close race, Rooseveltachieved an unprecedented landslide. He won 46 of 48 states, secured overwhelming Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (74 senators, 334 representatives), and claimed 38 governorships. Crucially, FDR carried 104 of 106 major cities, solidifying the Democratic Party's urban strength and marking a profound political realignment in American history. This decisive victory was a clear mandate for the New Deal and established the foundation of the modern Democratic Party.

CONTINUED David Pietrusza's book, Roosevelt Sweeps Nation: FDR's 1936 Landslide and the Triumph of the Liberal Ideal, chronicles Franklin Delano Roosevelt's pivotal re-election campaign in 1936, a moment that fundamentally reshaped American political demographics and solidified the New Deal as a national agenda. The campaign began under the shadow of the death of Louis Howe in April 1936, FDR's closest political strategist and confidant since 1912. Howe, despite his "unpleasant acerbic" nature and poor health, was an invaluable aide, worshiping FDR and actively pushing Eleanor Roosevelt into political activism following FDR's 1917 affair. His passing left Roosevelt to navigate a complex political landscape on his own. 1944 FALAH Roosevelt faced significant orpposition from both the political right and left. On the right, Al Smith, former Governor of New York and FDR's erstwhile mentor, emerged as a fierce critic. Disaffected since FDR's governorship, Smith believed Roosevelt's "forgotten man" speech and New Deal policies constituted "class warfare." Allied with wealthy individuals like the DuPonts and E.F. Hutton, Smith co-founded the American Liberty League, which lambasted the New Deal as unconstitutional and socialist, compelling Roosevelt to wage his own campaign of "class warfare" against these "rich guys in the Silk Hats." From the populist left, FDR contended with the legacy of Huey Long, the charismatic Louisiana senator assassinated in September 1935. Long's radical "Share Our Wealth" program, advocating for massive wealth redistribution and government provision of cars and radios to every family, garnered millions of followers and represented "the greatest force of the populist left." His strategy was to siphon votes in 1936 to ensure a Republican victory, creating a worse economic situation that would pave his way to the presidency in 1940. In Georgia, conservative populist Eugene Talmadge, while ideologically different from Long (being a "Jeffersonian conservative" who refused to fund welfare), also vigorously opposed the New Deal through "race baiting" and accusations of "communist influence," drawing some of Long's former supporters. A significant third-party challenge coalesced around Dr. Francis Everett Townsend, an elderly physician whose Townsend Plan proposed giving $200 a month to every person over 60, requiring them to spend it within 30 days to stimulate the economy. Though Roosevelt personally disliked "the dole," the plan's immense popularity and the formation of millions of Townsend clubs pushed FDR to swiftly introduce Social Security. Townsend later joined forces with Father Charles Edward Coughlin, an influential "radio priest" who initially supported FDR but turned against him over monetary policy, and Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith, a fiery orator akin to Long, along with Congressman William Lemke. This "amateur" coalition, however, failed to gain significant electoral traction, securing only 1.2% of the vote due to ballot access issues in major states and a lack of experienced political leadership. Coughlin, notably, was a more prominent radio figure than FDR for a period, influencing millions through his syndicated broadcasts. FDR's secret meeting with Coughlin at Hyde Park, orchestrated by Joseph Patrick Kennedy, famously ended in a rupture, leading to open political warfare. Ideological parties also presented concerns. The Socialist Party, led by Norman Thomas, consistently polled hundreds of thousands of votes, particularly in urban centers like New York City. The Communist Party USA, under Earl Browder (chosen by Stalin for his pliability and non-Jewish background), initially condemned the New Deal as "fascist." However, with the rise of Adolf Hitler and the global shift to a "popular front" strategy, the Communist Party covertly supported FDR to keep him in power against the looming international threats, while running their own candidate to avoid the "kiss of death" of an overt endorsement. Media mogul William Randolph Hearst, who controlled a vast empire of 28 newspapers and eight radio stations, also became a powerful opponent. Despite initially supporting FDR in 1932, Hearst grew increasingly disaffected by the New Deal's progressive policies and taxes on the wealthy, leading to a "long bumpy involved breakup." FDR even considered "throwing 46 men who make a million dollars a year to the wolves," a direct reference to Hearst and his wealthy allies. The Republican Party ultimately nominated Alf Landon, the Governor of Kansas, a "complete surprise" and "least interesting character." Landon, a progressive Republican favored by Hearst, was known for balancing Kansas's budget but was widely regarded as uncharismatic and a poor public speaker, especially on radio, a crucial medium of the era. His campaign message, promising only a more efficient implementation of New Deal programs he had largely supported, failed to energize the electorate. Earlier potential nominees included Herbert Hoover, William Borah, Frank Knox, and Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg. Roosevelt's campaign, in stark contrast, was dynamic. First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt played an indispensable role, defying initial party reluctance to campaign vigorously. She became a crucial link to the African-American vote in Northern cities, even though FDR, for political reasons, declined to support an anti-lynching law favored by Eleanor and the NAACP. Roosevelt himself delivered powerful, "frenzied and irate" speeches, most notably his Madison Square Garden address on Halloween night, where he famously embraced the "hatred" of "economic royalists" and promised accountability, a compelling message of "class warfare" that galvanized the electorate despite his own staff's initial horror at its perceived demagoguery. Despite initial polls, like the Literary Digest (which had predicted a Landon victory), suggesting a close race, Rooseveltachieved an unprecedented landslide. He won 46 of 48 states, secured overwhelming Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (74 senators, 334 representatives), and claimed 38 governorships. Crucially, FDR carried 104 of 106 major cities, solidifying the Democratic Party's urban strength and marking a profound political realignment in American history. This decisive victory was a clear mandate for the New Deal and established the foundation of the modern Democratic Party.

CONTINUED David Pietrusza's book, Roosevelt Sweeps Nation: FDR's 1936 Landslide and the Triumph of the Liberal Ideal, chronicles Franklin Delano Roosevelt's pivotal re-election campaign in 1936, a moment that fundamentally reshaped American political demographics and solidified the New Deal as a national agenda. The campaign began under the shadow of the death of Louis Howe in April 1936, FDR's closest political strategist and confidant since 1912. Howe, despite his "unpleasant acerbic" nature and poor health, was an invaluable aide, worshiping FDR and actively pushing Eleanor Roosevelt into political activism following FDR's 1917 affair. His passing left Roosevelt to navigate a complex political landscape on his own. Roosevelt faced significant opposition from both the political right and left. On the right, Al Smith, former Governor of New York and FDR's erstwhile mentor, emerged as a fierce critic. Disaffected since FDR's governorship, Smith believed Roosevelt's "forgotten man" speech and New Deal policies constituted "class warfare." Allied with wealthy individuals like the DuPonts and E.F. Hutton, Smith co-founded the American Liberty League, which lambasted the New Deal as unconstitutional and socialist, compelling Roosevelt to wage his own campaign of "class warfare" against these "rich guys in the Silk Hats." From the populist left, FDR contended with the legacy of Huey Long, the charismatic Louisiana senator assassinated in September 1935. Long's radical "Share Our Wealth" program, advocating for massive wealth redistribution and government provision of cars and radios to every family, garnered millions of followers and represented "the greatest force of the populist left." His strategy was to siphon votes in 1936 to ensure a Republican victory, creating a worse economic situation that would pave his way to the presidency in 1940. In Georgia, conservative populist Eugene Talmadge, while ideologically different from Long (being a "Jeffersonian conservative" who refused to fund welfare), also vigorously opposed the New Deal through "race baiting" and accusations of "communist influence," drawing some of Long's former supporters. A significant third-party challenge coalesced around Dr. Francis Everett Townsend, an elderly physician whose Townsend Plan proposed giving $200 a month to every person over 60, requiring them to spend it within 30 days to stimulate the economy. Though Roosevelt personally disliked "the dole," the plan's immense popularity and the formation of millions of Townsend clubs pushed FDR to swiftly introduce Social Security. Townsend later joined forces with Father Charles Edward Coughlin, an influential "radio priest" who initially supported FDR but turned against him over monetary policy, and Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith, a fiery orator akin to Long, along with Congressman William Lemke. This "amateur" coalition, however, failed to gain significant electoral traction, securing only 1.2% of the vote due to ballot access issues in major states and a lack of experienced political leadership. Coughlin, notably, was a more prominent radio figure than FDR for a period, influencing millions through his syndicated broadcasts. FDR's secret meeting with Coughlin at Hyde Park, orchestrated by Joseph Patrick Kennedy, famously ended in a rupture, leading to open political warfare. Ideological parties also presented concerns. The Socialist Party, led by Norman Thomas, consistently polled hundreds of thousands of votes, particularly in urban centers like New York City. The Communist Party USA, under Earl Browder (chosen by Stalin for his pliability and non-Jewish background), initially condemned the New Deal as "fascist." However, with the rise of Adolf Hitler and the global shift to a "popular front" strategy, the Communist Party covertly supported FDR to keep him in power against the looming international threats, while running their own candidate to avoid the "kiss of death" of an overt endorsement. Media mogul William Randolph Hearst, who controlled a vast empire of 28 newspapers and eight radio stations, also became a powerful opponent. Despite initially supporting FDR in 1932, Hearst grew increasingly disaffected by the New Deal's progressive policies and taxes on the wealthy, leading to a "long bumpy involved breakup." FDR even considered "throwing 46 men who make a million dollars a year to the wolves," a direct reference to Hearst and his wealthy allies. The Republican Party ultimately nominated Alf Landon, the Governor of Kansas, a "complete surprise" and "least interesting character." Landon, a progressive Republican favored by Hearst, was known for balancing Kansas's budget but was widely regarded as uncharismatic and a poor public speaker, especially on radio, a crucial medium of the era. His campaign message, promising only a more efficient implementation of New Deal programs he had largely supported, failed to energize the electorate. Earlier potential nominees included Herbert Hoover, William Borah, Frank Knox, and Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg. Roosevelt's campaign, in stark contrast, was dynamic. First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt played an indispensable role, defying initial party reluctance to campaign vigorously. She became a crucial link to the African-American vote in Northern cities, even though FDR, for political reasons, declined to support an anti-lynching law favored by Eleanor and the NAACP. Roosevelt himself delivered powerful, "frenzied and irate" speeches, most notably his Madison Square Garden address on Halloween night, where he famously embraced the "hatred" of "economic royalists" and promised accountability, a compelling message of "class warfare" that galvanized the electorate despite his own staff's initial horror at its perceived demagoguery. Despite initial polls, like the Literary Digest (which had predicted a Landon victory), suggesting a close race, Rooseveltachieved an unprecedented landslide. He won 46 of 48 states, secured overwhelming Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (74 senators, 334 representatives), and claimed 38 governorships. Crucially, FDR carried 104 of 106 major cities, solidifying the Democratic Party's urban strength and marking a profound political realignment in American history. This decisive victory was a clear mandate for the New Deal and established the foundation of the modern Democratic Party.

CONTINUED David Pietrusza's book, Roosevelt Sweeps Nation: FDR's 1936 Landslide and the Triumph of the Liberal Ideal, chronicles Franklin Delano Roosevelt's pivotal re-election campaign in 1936, a moment that fundamentally reshaped American political demographics and solidified the New Deal as a national agenda. The campaign began under the shadow of the death of Louis Howe in April 1936, FDR's closest political strategist and confidant since 1912. Howe, despite his "unpleasant acerbic" nature and poor health, was an invaluable aide, worshiping FDR and actively pushing Eleanor Roosevelt into political activism following FDR's 1917 affair. His passing left Roosevelt to navigate a complex political landscape on his own. Roosevelt faced significant opposition from both the political right and left. On the right, Al Smith, former Governor of New York and FDR's erstwhile mentor, emerged as a fierce critic. Disaffected since FDR's governorship, Smith believed Roosevelt's "forgotten man" speech and New Deal policies constituted "class warfare." Allied with wealthy individuals like the DuPonts and E.F. Hutton, Smith co-founded the American Liberty League, which lambasted the New Deal as unconstitutional and socialist, compelling Roosevelt to wage his own campaign of "class warfare" against these "rich guys in the Silk Hats." From the populist left, FDR contended with the legacy of Huey Long, the charismatic Louisiana senator assassinated in September 1935. Long's radical "Share Our Wealth" program, advocating for massive wealth redistribution and government provision of cars and radios to every family, garnered millions of followers and represented "the greatest force of the populist left." His strategy was to siphon votes in 1936 to ensure a Republican victory, creating a worse economic situation that would pave his way to the presidency in 1940. In Georgia, conservative populist Eugene Talmadge, while ideologically different from Long (being a "Jeffersonian conservative" who refused to fund welfare), also vigorously opposed the New Deal through "race baiting" and accusations of "communist influence," drawing some of Long's former supporters. A significant third-party challenge coalesced around Dr. Francis Everett Townsend, an elderly physician whose Townsend Plan proposed giving $200 a month to every person over 60, requiring them to spend it within 30 days to stimulate the economy. Though Roosevelt personally disliked "the dole," the plan's immense popularity and the formation of millions of Townsend clubs pushed FDR to swiftly introduce Social Security. Townsend later joined forces with Father Charles Edward Coughlin, an influential "radio priest" who initially supported FDR but turned against him over monetary policy, and Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith, a fiery orator akin to Long, along with Congressman William Lemke. This "amateur" coalition, however, failed to gain significant electoral traction, securing only 1.2% of the vote due to ballot access issues in major states and a lack of experienced political leadership. Coughlin, notably, was a more prominent radio figure than FDR for a period, influencing millions through his syndicated broadcasts. FDR's secret meeting with Coughlin at Hyde Park, orchestrated by Joseph Patrick Kennedy, famously ended in a rupture, leading to open political warfare. Ideological parties also presented concerns. The Socialist Party, led by Norman Thomas, consistently polled hundreds of thousands of votes, particularly in urban centers like New York City. The Communist Party USA, under Earl Browder (chosen by Stalin for his pliability and non-Jewish background), initially condemned the New Deal as "fascist." However, with the rise of Adolf Hitler and the global shift to a "popular front" strategy, the Communist Party covertly supported FDR to keep him in power against the looming international threats, while running their own candidate to avoid the "kiss of death" of an overt endorsement. Media mogul William Randolph Hearst, who controlled a vast empire of 28 newspapers and eight radio stations, also became a powerful opponent. Despite initially supporting FDR in 1932, Hearst grew increasingly disaffected by the New Deal's progressive policies and taxes on the wealthy, leading to a "long bumpy involved breakup." FDR even considered "throwing 46 men who make a million dollars a year to the wolves," a direct reference to Hearst and his wealthy allies. The Republican Party ultimately nominated Alf Landon, the Governor of Kansas, a "complete surprise" and "least interesting character." Landon, a progressive Republican favored by Hearst, was known for balancing Kansas's budget but was widely regarded as uncharismatic and a poor public speaker, especially on radio, a crucial medium of the era. His campaign message, promising only a more efficient implementation of New Deal programs he had largely supported, failed to energize the electorate. Earlier potential nominees included Herbert Hoover, William Borah, Frank Knox, and Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg. Roosevelt's campaign, in stark contrast, was dynamic. First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt played an indispensable role, defying initial party reluctance to campaign vigorously. She became a crucial link to the African-American vote in Northern cities, even though FDR, for political reasons, declined to support an anti-lynching law favored by Eleanor and the NAACP. Roosevelt himself delivered powerful, "frenzied and irate" speeches, most notably his Madison Square Garden address on Halloween night, where he famously embraced the "hatred" of "economic royalists" and promised accountability, a compelling message of "class warfare" that galvanized the electorate despite his own staff's initial horror at its perceived demagoguery. Despite initial polls, like the Literary Digest (which had predicted a Landon victory), suggesting a close race, Rooseveltachieved an unprecedented landslide. He won 46 of 48 states, secured overwhelming Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (74 senators, 334 representatives), and claimed 38 governorships. Crucially, FDR carried 104 of 106 major cities, solidifying the Democratic Party's urban strength and marking a profound political realignment in American history. This decisive victory was a clear mandate for the New Deal and established the foundation of the modern Democratic Party.

CONTINUED David Pietrusza's book, Roosevelt Sweeps Nation: FDR's 1936 Landslide and the Triumph of the Liberal Ideal, chronicles Franklin Delano Roosevelt's pivotal re-election campaign in 1936, a moment that fundamentally reshaped American political demographics and solidified the New Deal as a national agenda. The campaign began under the shadow of the death of Louis Howe in April 1936, FDR's closest political strategist and confidant since 1912. Howe, despite his "unpleasant acerbic" nature and poor health, was an invaluable aide, worshiping FDR and actively pushing Eleanor Roosevelt into political activism following FDR's 1917 affair. His passing left Roosevelt to navigate a complex political landscape on his own. Roosevelt faced significant opposition from both the political right and left. On the right, Al Smith, former Governor of New York and FDR's erstwhile mentor, emerged as a fierce critic. Disaffected since FDR's governorship, Smith believed Roosevelt's "forgotten man" speech and New Deal policies constituted "class warfare." Allied with wealthy individuals like the DuPonts and E.F. Hutton, Smith co-founded the American Liberty League, which lambasted the New Deal as unconstitutional and socialist, compelling Roosevelt to wage his own campaign of "class warfare" against these "rich guys in the Silk Hats." From the populist left, FDR contended with the legacy of Huey Long, the charismatic Louisiana senator assassinated in September 1935. Long's radical "Share Our Wealth" program, advocating for massive wealth redistribution and government provision of cars and radios to every family, garnered millions of followers and represented "the greatest force of the populist left." His strategy was to siphon votes in 1936 to ensure a Republican victory, creating a worse economic situation that would pave his way to the presidency in 1940. In Georgia, conservative populist Eugene Talmadge, while ideologically different from Long (being a "Jeffersonian conservative" who refused to fund welfare), also vigorously opposed the New Deal through "race baiting" and accusations of "communist influence," drawing some of Long's former supporters. A significant third-party challenge coalesced around Dr. Francis Everett Townsend, an elderly physician whose Townsend Plan proposed giving $200 a month to every person over 60, requiring them to spend it within 30 days to stimulate the economy. Though Roosevelt personally disliked "the dole," the plan's immense popularity and the formation of millions of Townsend clubs pushed FDR to swiftly introduce Social Security. Townsend later joined forces with Father Charles Edward Coughlin, an influential "radio priest" who initially supported FDR but turned against him over monetary policy, and Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith, a fiery orator akin to Long, along with Congressman William Lemke. This "amateur" coalition, however, failed to gain significant electoral traction, securing only 1.2% of the vote due to ballot access issues in major states and a lack of experienced political leadership. Coughlin, notably, was a more prominent radio figure than FDR for a period, influencing millions through his syndicated broadcasts. FDR's secret meeting with Coughlin at Hyde Park, orchestrated by Joseph Patrick Kennedy, famously ended in a rupture, leading to open political warfare. Ideological parties also presented concerns. The Socialist Party, led by Norman Thomas, consistently polled hundreds of thousands of votes, particularly in urban centers like New York City. The Communist Party USA, under Earl Browder (chosen by Stalin for his pliability and non-Jewish background), initially condemned the New Deal as "fascist." However, with the rise of Adolf Hitler and the global shift to a "popular front" strategy, the Communist Party covertly supported FDR to keep him in power against the looming international threats, while running their own candidate to avoid the "kiss of death" of an overt endorsement. Media mogul William Randolph Hearst, who controlled a vast empire of 28 newspapers and eight radio stations, also became a powerful opponent. Despite initially supporting FDR in 1932, Hearst grew increasingly disaffected by the New Deal's progressive policies and taxes on the wealthy, leading to a "long bumpy involved breakup." FDR even considered "throwing 46 men who make a million dollars a year to the wolves," a direct reference to Hearst and his wealthy allies. The Republican Party ultimately nominated Alf Landon, the Governor of Kansas, a "complete surprise" and "least interesting character." Landon, a progressive Republican favored by Hearst, was known for balancing Kansas's budget but was widely regarded as uncharismatic and a poor public speaker, especially on radio, a crucial medium of the era. His campaign message, promising only a more efficient implementation of New Deal programs he had largely supported, failed to energize the electorate. Earlier potential nominees included Herbert Hoover, William Borah, Frank Knox, and Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg. Roosevelt's campaign, in stark contrast, was dynamic. First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt played an indispensable role, defying initial party reluctance to campaign vigorously. She became a crucial link to the African-American vote in Northern cities, even though FDR, for political reasons, declined to support an anti-lynching law favored by Eleanor and the NAACP. Roosevelt himself delivered powerful, "frenzied and irate" speeches, most notably his Madison Square Garden address on Halloween night, where he famously embraced the "hatred" of "economic royalists" and promised accountability, a compelling message of "class warfare" that galvanized the electorate despite his own staff's initial horror at its perceived demagoguery. Despite initial polls, like the Literary Digest (which had predicted a Landon victory), suggesting a close race, Rooseveltachieved an unprecedented landslide. He won 46 of 48 states, secured overwhelming Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (74 senators, 334 representatives), and claimed 38 governorships. Crucially, FDR carried 104 of 106 major cities, solidifying the Democratic Party's urban strength and marking a profound political realignment in American history. This decisive victory was a clear mandate for the New Deal and established the foundation of the modern Democratic Party.

CONTINUED David Pietrusza's book, Roosevelt Sweeps Nation: FDR's 1936 Landslide and the Triumph of the Liberal Ideal, chronicles Franklin Delano Roosevelt's pivotal re-election campaign in 1936, a moment that fundamentally reshaped American political demographics and solidified the New Deal as a national agenda. The campaign began under the shadow of the death of Louis Howe in April 1936, FDR's closest political strategist and confidant since 1912. Howe, despite his "unpleasant acerbic" nature and poor health, was an invaluable aide, worshiping FDR and actively pushing Eleanor Roosevelt into political activism following FDR's 1917 affair. His passing left Roosevelt to navigate a complex political landscape on his own. Roosevelt faced significant opposition from both the political right and left. On the right, Al Smith, former Governor of New York and FDR's erstwhile mentor, emerged as a fierce critic. Disaffected since FDR's governorship, Smith believed Roosevelt's "forgotten man" speech and New Deal policies constituted "class warfare." Allied with wealthy individuals like the DuPonts and E.F. Hutton, Smith co-founded the American Liberty League, which lambasted the New Deal as unconstitutional and socialist, compelling Roosevelt to wage his own campaign of "class warfare" against these "rich guys in the Silk Hats." From the populist left, FDR contended with the legacy of Huey Long, the charismatic Louisiana senator assassinated in September 1935. Long's radical "Share Our Wealth" program, advocating for massive wealth redistribution and government provision of cars and radios to every family, garnered millions of followers and represented "the greatest force of the populist left." His strategy was to siphon votes in 1936 to ensure a Republican victory, creating a worse economic situation that would pave his way to the presidency in 1940. In Georgia, conservative populist Eugene Talmadge, while ideologically different from Long (being a "Jeffersonian conservative" who refused to fund welfare), also vigorously opposed the New Deal through "race baiting" and accusations of "communist influence," drawing some of Long's former supporters. A significant third-party challenge coalesced around Dr. Francis Everett Townsend, an elderly physician whose Townsend Plan proposed giving $200 a month to every person over 60, requiring them to spend it within 30 days to stimulate the economy. Though Roosevelt personally disliked "the dole," the plan's immense popularity and the formation of millions of Townsend clubs pushed FDR to swiftly introduce Social Security. Townsend later joined forces with Father Charles Edward Coughlin, an influential "radio priest" who initially supported FDR but turned against him over monetary policy, and Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith, a fiery orator akin to Long, along with Congressman William Lemke. This "amateur" coalition, however, failed to gain significant electoral traction, securing only 1.2% of the vote due to ballot access issues in major states and a lack of experienced political leadership. Coughlin, notably, was a more prominent radio figure than FDR for a period, influencing millions through his syndicated broadcasts. FDR's secret meeting with Coughlin at Hyde Park, orchestrated by Joseph Patrick Kennedy, famously ended in a rupture, leading to open political warfare. Ideological parties also presented concerns. The Socialist Party, led by Norman Thomas, consistently polled hundreds of thousands of votes, particularly in urban centers like New York City. The Communist Party USA, under Earl Browder (chosen by Stalin for his pliability and non-Jewish background), initially condemned the New Deal as "fascist." However, with the rise of Adolf Hitler and the global shift to a "popular front" strategy, the Communist Party covertly supported FDR to keep him in power against the looming international threats, while running their own candidate to avoid the "kiss of death" of an overt endorsement. Media mogul William Randolph Hearst, who controlled a vast empire of 28 newspapers and eight radio stations, also became a powerful opponent. Despite initially supporting FDR in 1932, Hearst grew increasingly disaffected by the New Deal's progressive policies and taxes on the wealthy, leading to a "long bumpy involved breakup." FDR even considered "throwing 46 men who make a million dollars a year to the wolves," a direct reference to Hearst and his wealthy allies. The Republican Party ultimately nominated Alf Landon, the Governor of Kansas, a "complete surprise" and "least interesting character." Landon, a progressive Republican favored by Hearst, was known for balancing Kansas's budget but was widely regarded as uncharismatic and a poor public speaker, especially on radio, a crucial medium of the era. His campaign message, promising only a more efficient implementation of New Deal programs he had largely supported, failed to energize the electorate. Earlier potential nominees included Herbert Hoover, William Borah, Frank Knox, and Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg. Roosevelt's campaign, in stark contrast, was dynamic. First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt played an indispensable role, defying initial party reluctance to campaign vigorously. She became a crucial link to the African-American vote in Northern cities, even though FDR, for political reasons, declined to support an anti-lynching law favored by Eleanor and the NAACP. Roosevelt himself delivered powerful, "frenzied and irate" speeches, most notably his Madison Square Garden address on Halloween night, where he famously embraced the "hatred" of "economic royalists" and promised accountability, a compelling message of "class warfare" that galvanized the electorate despite his own staff's initial horror at its perceived demagoguery. Despite initial polls, like the Literary Digest (which had predicted a Landon victory), suggesting a close race, Rooseveltachieved an unprecedented landslide. He won 46 of 48 states, secured overwhelming Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (74 senators, 334 representatives), and claimed 38 governorships. Crucially, FDR carried 104 of 106 major cities, solidifying the Democratic Party's urban strength and marking a profound political realignment in American history. This decisive victory was a clear mandate for the New Deal and established the foundation of the modern Democratic Party.

CONTINUED David Pietrusza's book, Roosevelt Sweeps Nation: FDR's 1936 Landslide and the Triumph of the Liberal Ideal, chronicles Franklin Delano Roosevelt's pivotal re-election campaign in 1936, a moment that fundamentally reshaped American political demographics and solidified the New Deal as a national agenda. The campaign began under the shadow of the death of Louis Howe in April 1936, FDR's closest political strategist and confidant since 1912. Howe, despite his "unpleasant acerbic" nature and poor health, was an invaluable aide, worshiping FDR and actively pushing Eleanor Roosevelt into political activism following FDR's 1917 affair. His passing left Roosevelt to navigate a complex political landscape on his own. Roosevelt faced significant opposition from both the political right and left. On the right, Al Smith, former Governor of New York and FDR's erstwhile mentor, emerged as a fierce critic. Disaffected since FDR's governorship, Smith believed Roosevelt's "forgotten man" speech and New Deal policies constituted "class warfare." Allied with wealthy individuals like the DuPonts and E.F. Hutton, Smith co-founded the American Liberty League, which lambasted the New Deal as unconstitutional and socialist, compelling Roosevelt to wage his own campaign of "class warfare" against these "rich guys in the Silk Hats." From the populist left, FDR contended with the legacy of Huey Long, the charismatic Louisiana senator assassinated in September 1935. Long's radical "Share Our Wealth" program, advocating for massive wealth redistribution and government provision of cars and radios to every family, garnered millions of followers and represented "the greatest force of the populist left." His strategy was to siphon votes in 1936 to ensure a Republican victory, creating a worse economic situation that would pave his way to the presidency in 1940. In Georgia, conservative populist Eugene Talmadge, while ideologically different from Long (being a "Jeffersonian conservative" who refused to fund welfare), also vigorously opposed the New Deal through "race baiting" and accusations of "communist influence," drawing some of Long's former supporters. A significant third-party challenge coalesced around Dr. Francis Everett Townsend, an elderly physician whose Townsend Plan proposed giving $200 a month to every person over 60, requiring them to spend it within 30 days to stimulate the economy. Though Roosevelt personally disliked "the dole," the plan's immense popularity and the formation of millions of Townsend clubs pushed FDR to swiftly introduce Social Security. Townsend later joined forces with Father Charles Edward Coughlin, an influential "radio priest" who initially supported FDR but turned against him over monetary policy, and Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith, a fiery orator akin to Long, along with Congressman William Lemke. This "amateur" coalition, however, failed to gain significant electoral traction, securing only 1.2% of the vote due to ballot access issues in major states and a lack of experienced political leadership. Coughlin, notably, was a more prominent radio figure than FDR for a period, influencing millions through his syndicated broadcasts. FDR's secret meeting with Coughlin at Hyde Park, orchestrated by Joseph Patrick Kennedy, famously ended in a rupture, leading to open political warfare. Ideological parties also presented concerns. The Socialist Party, led by Norman Thomas, consistently polled hundreds of thousands of votes, particularly in urban centers like New York City. The Communist Party USA, under Earl Browder (chosen by Stalin for his pliability and non-Jewish background), initially condemned the New Deal as "fascist." However, with the rise of Adolf Hitler and the global shift to a "popular front" strategy, the Communist Party covertly supported FDR to keep him in power against the looming international threats, while running their own candidate to avoid the "kiss of death" of an overt endorsement. Media mogul William Randolph Hearst, who controlled a vast empire of 28 newspapers and eight radio stations, also became a powerful opponent. Despite initially supporting FDR in 1932, Hearst grew increasingly disaffected by the New Deal's progressive policies and taxes on the wealthy, leading to a "long bumpy involved breakup." FDR even considered "throwing 46 men who make a million dollars a year to the wolves," a direct reference to Hearst and his wealthy allies. The Republican Party ultimately nominated Alf Landon, the Governor of Kansas, a "complete surprise" and "least interesting character." Landon, a progressive Republican favored by Hearst, was known for balancing Kansas's budget but was widely regarded as uncharismatic and a poor public speaker, especially on radio, a crucial medium of the era. His campaign message, promising only a more efficient implementation of New Deal programs he had largely supported, failed to energize the electorate. Earlier potential nominees included Herbert Hoover, William Borah, Frank Knox, and Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg. Roosevelt's campaign, in stark contrast, was dynamic. First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt played an indispensable role, defying initial party reluctance to campaign vigorously. She became a crucial link to the African-American vote in Northern cities, even though FDR, for political reasons, declined to support an anti-lynching law favored by Eleanor and the NAACP. Roosevelt himself delivered powerful, "frenzied and irate" speeches, most notably his Madison Square Garden address on Halloween night, where he famously embraced the "hatred" of "economic royalists" and promised accountability, a compelling message of "class warfare" that galvanized the electorate despite his own staff's initial horror at its perceived demagoguery. Despite initial polls, like the Literary Digest (which had predicted a Landon victory), suggesting a close race, Rooseveltachieved an unprecedented landslide. He won 46 of 48 states, secured overwhelming Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (74 senators, 334 representatives), and claimed 38 governorships. Crucially, FDR carried 104 of 106 major cities, solidifying the Democratic Party's urban strength and marking a profound political realignment in American history. This decisive victory was a clear mandate for the New Deal and established the foundation of the modern Democratic Party.

CONTINUED David Pietrusza's book, Roosevelt Sweeps Nation: FDR's 1936 Landslide and the Triumph of the Liberal Ideal, chronicles Franklin Delano Roosevelt's pivotal re-election campaign in 1936, a moment that fundamentally reshaped American political demographics and solidified the New Deal as a national agenda. The campaign began under the shadow of the death of Louis Howe in April 1936, FDR's closest political strategist and confidant since 1912. Howe, despite his "unpleasant acerbic" nature and poor health, was an invaluable aide, worshiping FDR and actively pushing Eleanor Roosevelt into political activism following FDR's 1917 affair. His passing left Roosevelt to navigate a complex political landscape on his own. Roosevelt faced significant opposition from both the political right and left. On the right, Al Smith, former Governor of New York and FDR's erstwhile mentor, emerged as a fierce critic. Disaffected since FDR's governorship, Smith believed Roosevelt's "forgotten man" speech and New Deal policies constituted "class warfare." Allied with wealthy individuals like the DuPonts and E.F. Hutton, Smith co-founded the American Liberty League, which lambasted the New Deal as unconstitutional and socialist, compelling Roosevelt to wage his own campaign of "class warfare" against these "rich guys in the Silk Hats." From the populist left, FDR contended with the legacy of Huey Long, the charismatic Louisiana senator assassinated in September 1935. Long's radical "Share Our Wealth" program, advocating for massive wealth redistribution and government provision of cars and radios to every family, garnered millions of followers and represented "the greatest force of the populist left." His strategy was to siphon votes in 1936 to ensure a Republican victory, creating a worse economic situation that would pave his way to the presidency in 1940. In Georgia, conservative populist Eugene Talmadge, while ideologically different from Long (being a "Jeffersonian conservative" who refused to fund welfare), also vigorously opposed the New Deal through "race baiting" and accusations of "communist influence," drawing some of Long's former supporters. A significant third-party challenge coalesced around Dr. Francis Everett Townsend, an elderly physician whose Townsend Plan proposed giving $200 a month to every person over 60, requiring them to spend it within 30 days to stimulate the economy. Though Roosevelt personally disliked "the dole," the plan's immense popularity and the formation of millions of Townsend clubs pushed FDR to swiftly introduce Social Security. Townsend later joined forces with Father Charles Edward Coughlin, an influential "radio priest" who initially supported FDR but turned against him over monetary policy, and Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith, a fiery orator akin to Long, along with Congressman William Lemke. This "amateur" coalition, however, failed to gain significant electoral traction, securing only 1.2% of the vote due to ballot access issues in major states and a lack of experienced political leadership. Coughlin, notably, was a more prominent radio figure than FDR for a period, influencing millions through his syndicated broadcasts. FDR's secret meeting with Coughlin at Hyde Park, orchestrated by Joseph Patrick Kennedy, famously ended in a rupture, leading to open political warfare. Ideological parties also presented concerns. The Socialist Party, led by Norman Thomas, consistently polled hundreds of thousands of votes, particularly in urban centers like New York City. The Communist Party USA, under Earl Browder (chosen by Stalin for his pliability and non-Jewish background), initially condemned the New Deal as "fascist." However, with the rise of Adolf Hitler and the global shift to a "popular front" strategy, the Communist Party covertly supported FDR to keep him in power against the looming international threats, while running their own candidate to avoid the "kiss of death" of an overt endorsement. Media mogul William Randolph Hearst, who controlled a vast empire of 28 newspapers and eight radio stations, also became a powerful opponent. Despite initially supporting FDR in 1932, Hearst grew increasingly disaffected by the New Deal's progressive policies and taxes on the wealthy, leading to a "long bumpy involved breakup." FDR even considered "throwing 46 men who make a million dollars a year to the wolves," a direct reference to Hearst and his wealthy allies. The Republican Party ultimately nominated Alf Landon, the Governor of Kansas, a "complete surprise" and "least interesting character." Landon, a progressive Republican favored by Hearst, was known for balancing Kansas's budget but was widely regarded as uncharismatic and a poor public speaker, especially on radio, a crucial medium of the era. His campaign message, promising only a more efficient implementation of New Deal programs he had largely supported, failed to energize the electorate. Earlier potential nominees included Herbert Hoover, William Borah, Frank Knox, and Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg. Roosevelt's campaign, in stark contrast, was dynamic. First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt played an indispensable role, defying initial party reluctance to campaign vigorously. She became a crucial link to the African-American vote in Northern cities, even though FDR, for political reasons, declined to support an anti-lynching law favored by Eleanor and the NAACP. Roosevelt himself delivered powerful, "frenzied and irate" speeches, most notably his Madison Square Garden address on Halloween night, where he famously embraced the "hatred" of "economic royalists" and promised accountability, a compelling message of "class warfare" that galvanized the electorate despite his own staff's initial horror at its perceived demagoguery. Despite initial polls, like the Literary Digest (which had predicted a Landon victory), suggesting a close race, Rooseveltachieved an unprecedented landslide. He won 46 of 48 states, secured overwhelming Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (74 senators, 334 representatives), and claimed 38 governorships. Crucially, FDR carried 104 of 106 major cities, solidifying the Democratic Party's urban strength and marking a profound political realignment in American history. This decisive victory was a clear mandate for the New Deal and established the foundation of the modern Democratic Party.

Conrad Black offers an insider's view of the Trump White House, describing a very positive, informal, and busy atmosphere. He notes the president's decisiveness, courtesy to subordinates, and long workdays, with constant activity in the Oval Office. Black contrasts this informal style with Roosevelt and Nixon, suggesting it's a "three-ring circus" that nonetheless works due to Trump's methods. He also touches on Canadian perceptions, acknowledging Trump's work ethic despite political differences.EV 1937 FDR

CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW SCHEDULE  9-12-25 GOOD EVENING. THE SHOW BEGINS IN GAZA WITH THE GOAL OF DEHAMASIFICATION.. FIRST HOUR 9-915 John Bolton criticizes the "two-state solution" as a dead idea post-October 7th, proposing a "three-state solution" where Gaza returns to Egypt or is divided, and the West Bank is managed by Israel and Jordan. He emphasizes "De-Hamasification" as crucial and humanitarian, arguing that Arab nations, particularly Egypt, resist taking Gazan refugees due to fears of importing Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood influence. Bolton believes this is necessary for a stable future in the region. 915-930 Lorenzo Fiori shares a traditional Milanese recipe for "rice with saffron" (risotto alla Milanese), often served at La Scalagala dinners, describing it as delicious and creamy with parmesan cheese. He recommends pairing it with Italian wines like Barolo or Barbaresco from Piedmont. Fiori also discusses Italy's economic concerns regarding political instability in France and Germany, and the ongoing international interest in NATO events. 930-945 Gene Marks describes a mixed economic picture, noting that a national "slowdown" isn't universally felt, with many small businesses thriving. He highlights challenges like rising healthcare costs, spurring interest in self-insurance and health reimbursement arrangements. Marks discusses AI's impact on the workforce, specifically reducing sales and tech roles in large companies like Salesforce, but predicts a surge in demand for skilled trades not easily replaced by AI. 945-1000 CONTINUED Gene Marks describes a mixed economic picture, noting that a national "slowdown" isn't universally felt, with many small businesses thriving. He highlights challenges like rising healthcare costs, spurring interest in self-insurance and health reimbursement arrangements. Marks discusses AI's impact on the workforce, specifically reducing sales and tech roles in large companies like Salesforce, but predicts a surge in demand for skilled trades not easily replaced by AI. SECOND HOUR 10-1015 Jim McTague reports from Lancaster County, PA, challenging the narrative of an economic slowdown. He shares examples of busy local businesses like "Phil the painter" who has never been busier. McTague observes a trend of housing price cuts, but notes vibrant local tourism and events. He highlights the significant economic boost from two new data centers, creating 600-1000 construction jobs and 150 permanent positions, bringing the county into the 21st century. 1015-1030 Max Meizlish, a senior research analyst, highlights how Chinese money laundering networks are fueling America's fentanyl epidemic by cleaning drug proceeds for Mexican cartels. These networks also enable wealthy Chinese nationals to bypass capital control 1030-1045 Richard Epstein discusses federal district court judges defying presidential orders, attributing it to a breakdown of trust and the president's "robust view of executive power" that disregards established procedures and precedents. He explains that judges may engage in "passive resistance" or "cheating in self-defense" when they perceive the president acting for political reasons or abusing power, such as in budget cuts or dismissals. Epstein also links this distrust to gerrymandering and increasing political polarization1045-1100 Richard Epstein discusses federal district court judges defying presidential orders, attributing it to a breakdown of trust and the president's "robust view of executive power" that disregards established procedures and precedents. He explains that judges may engage in "passive resistance" or "cheating in self-defense" when they perceive the president acting for political reasons or abusing power, such as in budget cuts or dismissals. Epstein also links this distrust to gerrymandering and increasing political polarization. THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 Henry Sokolski addresses the critical challenge of the US power grid meeting AI data center demands, which are projected to require gigawatt-scale facilities and vastly increased electricity by 2030. He questions who bears the risk and cost of this buildout, advocating for AI companies to fund their own power generation. Sokolski also discusses the debate around nuclear power as a solution and Iran's suspect nuclear weapons program, highlighting the complexities of snapback sanctions and accounting for uranium. 1115-1130 CONTINUED Henry Sokolski addresses the critical challenge of the US power grid meeting AI data center demands, which are projected to require gigawatt-scale facilities and vastly increased electricity by 2030. He questions who bears the risk and cost of this buildout, advocating for AI companies to fund their own power generation. Sokolski also discusses the debate around nuclear power as a solution and Iran's suspect nuclear weapons program, highlighting the complexities of snapback sanctions and accounting for uranium.1130-1145 Professor John Cochrane of the Hoover Institution attributes current inflation to the fiscal theory of the price level. He explains that massive government spending, such as the $5 trillion borrowed during COVID-19 with $3 trillion printed by the Fed, combined with no credible plan for repayment, directly causes inflation. Cochrane differentiates this from monetarism, noting that quantitative easing (printing money and taking back bonds) did not lead to inflation. He emphasizes that the 2022 inflation spike was a loss of confidence in the government's ability to pay its debts. Successful disinflations, he argues, require a combination of monetary, fiscal, and microeconomic reforms. 1145-1200 Professor John Cochrane of the Hoover Institution attributes current inflation to the fiscal theory of the price level. He explains that massive government spending, such as the $5 trillion borrowed during COVID-19 with $3 trillion printed by the Fed, combined with no credible plan for repayment, directly causes inflation. Cochrane differentiates this from monetarism, noting that quantitative easing (printing money and taking back bonds) did not lead to inflation. He emphasizes that the 2022 inflation spike was a loss of confidence in the government's ability to pay its debts. Successful disinflations, he argues, require a combination of monetary, fiscal, and microeconomic reforms.FOURTH HOUR 12-1215 Conrad Black offers an insider's view of the Trump White House, describing a very positive, informal, and busy atmosphere. He notes the president's decisiveness, courtesy to subordinates, and long workdays, with constant activity in the Oval Office. Black contrasts this informal style with Roosevelt and Nixon, suggesting it's a "three-ring circus" that nonetheless works due to Trump's methods. He also touches on Canadian perceptions, acknowledging Trump's work ethic despite political differences.EV1215-1230 Brandon Weichert highlights the immense power demands of AI and AGI data centers, requiring gigawatts of electricity and facing significant regulatory hurdles. He discusses the potential weaponization of AI, noting human nature's tendency to weaponize new technologies. Weichert shares personal experiences with AI tools like Grok, Gemini, and Claude, including instances of AI "diversion" rather than hallucination. He emphasizes the need to master this technology, as the substantial investment ensures its permanence.1230-1245 Bob Zimmerman details SpaceX's expanding Starlink reach, including a $17 billion deal to acquire Echostar's FCCspectrum licenses, ensuring Echostar's survival by partnering rather than competing. He also reports on Starship Super Heavy's 10th test flight, where metal thermal tiles failed but significant lessons were learned, with plans for an 11th flight and version three development. NASA's Dragonfly mission to Titan is vastly over budget and behind schedule, risking failure. China's technological exports, including drones and EVs, pose surveillance risks due to government control.1245-100 AM CONTINUED Bob Zimmerman details SpaceX's expanding Starlink reach, including a $17 billion deal to acquire Echostar's FCCspectrum licenses, ensuring Echostar's survival by partnering rather than competing. He also reports on Starship Super Heavy's 10th test flight, where metal thermal tiles failed but significant lessons were learned, with plans for an 11th flight and version three development. NASA's Dragonfly mission to Titan is vastly over budget and behind schedule, risking failure. China's technological exports, including drones and EVs, pose surveillance risks due to government control.

Japan devastated the United States' fleet with a surprise attack at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on December 7th, 1941.  The Japanese followed up on their Pearl Harbor attack by seizing Guam, Wake Island, Hong Kong, Singapore, and the Philippines.  The Japanese seemed almost unstoppable while the United States asked itself, “What are we going to do, or what can we do, now?”  With direction from President Roosevelt to strike Japan, the United States came up with a plan.   On April 18, 1942, sixteen U.S. Army bombers took off from the USS Hornet on a one-way mission to bomb Japan.  James Scott explains how this raid was planned and executed in “Target Tokyo: Jimmy Doolittle and the Raid that Avenged Pearl Harbor.”  Equally important, Scott explains the outsized impact of the raid on United States' morale and Japan's sense of security.

A spellbinding look at the history of the world through the stories of twelve carpets Beautiful, sensuous, and enigmatic, great carpets follow power. Emperors, shahs, sultans and samurai crave them as symbols of earthly domination. Shamans and priests desire them to evoke the spiritual realm. The world's 1% hunger after them as displays of extreme status. And yet these seductive objects are made by poor and illiterate weavers, using the most basic materials and crafts; hedgerow plants for dyes, fibres from domestic animals, and the millennia-old skills of interweaving warps, wefts and knots. In Threads of Empire: A History of the World in Twelve Carpets (St. Martin's Press, 2025), Dorothy Armstrong tells the histories of some of the world's most fascinating carpets, exploring how these textiles came into being then were transformed as they moved across geography and time in the slipstream of the great. She shows why the world's powerful were drawn to them, but also asks what was happening in the weavers' lives, and how they were affected by events in the world outside their tent, village or workshop. In its wide-ranging examination of these dazzling objects, from the 5th century BCE contents of the tombs of Scythian chieftains, to the carpets under the boots of Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill at the 1945 Yalta Peace Conference, Threads of Empire uncovers a new, hitherto hidden past right beneath our feet. Dorothy Armstrong is a historian of the material culture of South, Central and West Asia. She has taught at the Royal College of Art, Edinburgh College of Art and the University of Oxford. She was the Beattie Fellow in Carpet Studies at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, where she is now honorary research fellow. Threads of Empire is her first book. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel here 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

A spellbinding look at the history of the world through the stories of twelve carpets Beautiful, sensuous, and enigmatic, great carpets follow power. Emperors, shahs, sultans and samurai crave them as symbols of earthly domination. Shamans and priests desire them to evoke the spiritual realm. The world's 1% hunger after them as displays of extreme status. And yet these seductive objects are made by poor and illiterate weavers, using the most basic materials and crafts; hedgerow plants for dyes, fibres from domestic animals, and the millennia-old skills of interweaving warps, wefts and knots. In Threads of Empire: A History of the World in Twelve Carpets (St. Martin's Press, 2025), Dorothy Armstrong tells the histories of some of the world's most fascinating carpets, exploring how these textiles came into being then were transformed as they moved across geography and time in the slipstream of the great. She shows why the world's powerful were drawn to them, but also asks what was happening in the weavers' lives, and how they were affected by events in the world outside their tent, village or workshop. In its wide-ranging examination of these dazzling objects, from the 5th century BCE contents of the tombs of Scythian chieftains, to the carpets under the boots of Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill at the 1945 Yalta Peace Conference, Threads of Empire uncovers a new, hitherto hidden past right beneath our feet. Dorothy Armstrong is a historian of the material culture of South, Central and West Asia. She has taught at the Royal College of Art, Edinburgh College of Art and the University of Oxford. She was the Beattie Fellow in Carpet Studies at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, where she is now honorary research fellow. Threads of Empire is her first book. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

A spellbinding look at the history of the world through the stories of twelve carpets Beautiful, sensuous, and enigmatic, great carpets follow power. Emperors, shahs, sultans and samurai crave them as symbols of earthly domination. Shamans and priests desire them to evoke the spiritual realm. The world's 1% hunger after them as displays of extreme status. And yet these seductive objects are made by poor and illiterate weavers, using the most basic materials and crafts; hedgerow plants for dyes, fibres from domestic animals, and the millennia-old skills of interweaving warps, wefts and knots. In Threads of Empire: A History of the World in Twelve Carpets (St. Martin's Press, 2025), Dorothy Armstrong tells the histories of some of the world's most fascinating carpets, exploring how these textiles came into being then were transformed as they moved across geography and time in the slipstream of the great. She shows why the world's powerful were drawn to them, but also asks what was happening in the weavers' lives, and how they were affected by events in the world outside their tent, village or workshop. In its wide-ranging examination of these dazzling objects, from the 5th century BCE contents of the tombs of Scythian chieftains, to the carpets under the boots of Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill at the 1945 Yalta Peace Conference, Threads of Empire uncovers a new, hitherto hidden past right beneath our feet. Dorothy Armstrong is a historian of the material culture of South, Central and West Asia. She has taught at the Royal College of Art, Edinburgh College of Art and the University of Oxford. She was the Beattie Fellow in Carpet Studies at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, where she is now honorary research fellow. Threads of Empire is her first book. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/middle-eastern-studies

A spellbinding look at the history of the world through the stories of twelve carpets Beautiful, sensuous, and enigmatic, great carpets follow power. Emperors, shahs, sultans and samurai crave them as symbols of earthly domination. Shamans and priests desire them to evoke the spiritual realm. The world's 1% hunger after them as displays of extreme status. And yet these seductive objects are made by poor and illiterate weavers, using the most basic materials and crafts; hedgerow plants for dyes, fibres from domestic animals, and the millennia-old skills of interweaving warps, wefts and knots. In Threads of Empire: A History of the World in Twelve Carpets (St. Martin's Press, 2025), Dorothy Armstrong tells the histories of some of the world's most fascinating carpets, exploring how these textiles came into being then were transformed as they moved across geography and time in the slipstream of the great. She shows why the world's powerful were drawn to them, but also asks what was happening in the weavers' lives, and how they were affected by events in the world outside their tent, village or workshop. In its wide-ranging examination of these dazzling objects, from the 5th century BCE contents of the tombs of Scythian chieftains, to the carpets under the boots of Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill at the 1945 Yalta Peace Conference, Threads of Empire uncovers a new, hitherto hidden past right beneath our feet. Dorothy Armstrong is a historian of the material culture of South, Central and West Asia. She has taught at the Royal College of Art, Edinburgh College of Art and the University of Oxford. She was the Beattie Fellow in Carpet Studies at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, where she is now honorary research fellow. Threads of Empire is her first book. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube Channel here Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

On today's episode, we talk about a little-remembered presidential visit in the wake of Pearl Harbor - Christmas, 1941, when Winston Churchill risked the U-boats of the Atlantic to visit his new allies in the White House.

Author, comedian, and economic commentator Dominic Frisby joins The Winston Marshall Show for a sweeping conversation on money, empire, and the collapse of the postwar consensus.Frisby, whose viral songs made him an unlikely folk hero, turns here to the themes of his new book The Secret History of Gold. He explains why money is the “blood of society,” how Nixon's 1971 decision to abandon the gold standard set the stage for endless inflation, and why fiat money is driving inequality, debt, and the anger fuelling populist revolts from Trump's Rust Belt to Javier Milei in ArgentinaThey trace the story back to Bretton Woods, Roosevelt's gold confiscation, and the technocrats who used paper money to expand the modern state. Frisby warns that today's bloated governments, trapped in debt and endless money-printing. But can gold or Bitcoin restore trust and prosperity?All this—the golden age of Britain, the fiat fraud of the 20th century, Javier Milei's revolution, and why fixing money is the key to fixing the West…-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------To see more exclusive content and interviews consider subscribing to my substack here: https://www.winstonmarshall.co.uk/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:Substack: https://www.winstonmarshall.co.uk/X: https://twitter.com/mrwinmarshallInsta: https://www.instagram.com/winstonmarshallLinktree: https://linktr.ee/winstonmarshall----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Chapters 0:00 Dominic Frisbee's Introduction and Background 3:12 The Role of Money in Society7:12 Historical Context of Money Systems 11:59 The Impact of the New Deal and World Wars 16:10 The Role of Austrian Economists and Neoliberalism 29:03 The Globalisation Debate35:41 The Success of Javier Milei in Argentina44:20 The Role of Cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin1:01:14 The Success of Trump's Tariffs 1:06:54 Lincoln's Revenue Protection and the American Civil War 1:10:28 The Role of Prohibition and Income Tax 1:13:41 Critique of Income Tax and Wealth Inequality1:19:52 The Pursuit of Wealth and Higher Goals1:20:42 Conclusion and Future Discussion Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Steven Rinella talks with author Nathalia Holt, Randall Williams, Phil Taylor, and Corinne Schneider. Topics discussed: Nathalia's new book, "The Beast In The Clouds: The Roosevelt Brothers' Deadly Quest to Find the Mythical Giant Panda" is out!; get presale tickets for MeatEater's Christmas Tour 2025 starting 9/22; the epitome of the bear to find; Roosevelt as a good dad; an expedition to China by foot in an area of no roads; museums and zoos; finding prints in the snow; simultaneous shooting; the gentle giant; collection is paramount; and more. Connect with Steve and The MeatEater Podcast Network Steve on Instagram and Twitter MeatEater on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTubeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Was the Grand Alliance simply a partnership born of necessity? Or was it also a missed opportunity for post-war civilizational cooperation among the United Kingdom, the United States and the Soviet Union? Once it became clear that the Allies would eventually defeat Hitler's Germany, the varying post-war ambitions and political goals of Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt quickly brought cooperation to an end. Humanities West asks on the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II: What were Stalin's strategic goals for Russia's and its neighbors' futures as victory became assured? How did Churchill's strategies to retain as much as possible of the British Empire interfere with those goals? And was an aging Roosevelt capable of thwarting both those strategies and imposing, however inadequately and insincerely, a vision of Pax Americana on the globe? "From Their Archives" Norman Naimark will attempt to untangle what Stalin was thinking about how he wanted to shape the future once it was clear that the Allies would win the war. There is much we still do not know about Stalin's “real” intentions, but the opening of the Soviet archives for research in the 1990s offer important insights into the way the Soviet dictator thought about the world. "In Their Own Words" Ian Morris will convey, in their own words, Churchill's and Roosevelt's perspectives on the Grand Alliance and the post-war world order. Churchill: I can never trust Stalin but can in the fullness of time talk around Roosevelt; and even without India, we can rebuild the world with the British Empire at its core. Roosevelt: I can usually handle Stalin and can always flatter Churchill; it's the Republicans I can't abide. But even without them, we can rebuild the world with democracy and American money at its core. "Walking in a Father's WWII Footsteps" Bill Hammond will describe walking in a father's WWII footsteps, an October 2023 trip to Europe he took with two of his brothers, where they traced their father's path from his landing at Salerno, Italy, through Avellino, Monte Cassino and Rome, to his landing on the French Riviera at St. Raphael, and then up through Draguignan, Remiremont and the Foret Domaniale du Champ du Feu, earning two silver stars and two purple hearts before crossing the Rhine in a dash through southern Germany to finish the war near Kufstein, Austria. A Humanities Member-led Forum program. Forums at the Club are organized and run by volunteer programmers who are members of The Commonwealth Club, and they cover a diverse range of topics. Learn more about our Forums. In association with Humanities West. Organizer: George Hammond  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices