Podcasts about Woodrow Wilson

The first movie ever screened in the White House wasn't Casablanca or Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. It was The Birth of a Nation: a Ku Klux Klan recruitment ad that glorified white rage bloodlust. A century later, Trump's White House is the sequel: staged propaganda to glorify lies, violence, and hate against freedom fighters–otherwise known as antifa–otherwise known as World War II veterans who won the war against tyranny. Because if you're not antifa, you're pro-fascism.  Trump is the Frankenstein monster of America's darkest chapters: Jim Crow, McCarthyism, Watergate, and reality-TV nihilism. But the heroes who stormed Normandy didn't die for us to cower before a spray-tanned con man. Which brings us to the Epstein Files: the panic button of MAGA-land. If the Epstein Files were nothing, Trump and Mike Johnson wouldn't be working so hard to shut down our government and prevent a vote. “Teflon Don” has gotten away with years of crimes, including inciting a violent attempted overthrow of our democracy, which led to several deaths, including of law enforcement. So why is he so panicked about the Epstein Files? The truth will come out, as it always does. And remember: bullies only understand strength. So keep pushing, keep shouting, and for the love of democracy: Release. The. Epstein. Files. This week's bonus show continues our conversation with Zerlina Maxwell, host of Mornings with Zerlina on SiriusXM's Progress Channel and author of The End of White Politics: How to Heal Our Liberal Divide. Find her weekday mornings, 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. ET, on SiriusXM Progress, channel 127. For our Patreon supporters at the Truth-teller tier ($5/month) and higher, we have an exclusive for you: an odd development that hit our inbox. We'd love to get your thoughts on it over on Patreon. To hear this full bonus show, be sure to subscribe at Patreon.com/Gaslit for all bonus shows, all shows ad-free, invites to exclusive events, and more! Discounted annual memberships are available, and you can even give the gift of membership. Thank you to everyone who supports the show–we could not make Gaslit Nation without you!    Show Notes: Top House Democrat seeks Jeffrey Epstein financial records from Dimon, other bank CEOs https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/09/bank-records-epstein-dimon-raskin.html?taid=68e78b8c80da070001f243a1&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_content=main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter   Trump's NSPM-7 Labels Common Beliefs As Terrorism “Indicators” https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/trumps-nspm-7-labels-common-beliefs   Florida Lawmaker to Meet With Putin Envoy Dmitriev This Month https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/10/09/florida-lawmaker-to-meet-with-putin-envoy-dmitriev-this-month-a90763   We Are Elated by the Gaza Ceasefire News. Now, the World Must Hold Israel to Account for 2 Years of Genocide https://open.substack.com/pub/zeteo/p/gaza-ceasefire-hold-israel-accountable-genocide?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email   Listen To The Jeffrey Epstein Tapes: ‘I Was Donald Trump's Closest Friend' https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU08/20250227/117951/HHRG-119-JU08-20250227-SD006-U6.pdf   Trump Has Second 'Yearly' Check-Up In Just Six Months: He's going to "stop by" the doctor's office while he's at Walter Reed Medical Center for another event, the White House said. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-yearly-doctors-appointment_n_68e7007be4b0b4458cb6da16   Publisher Removes Melania Trump Claims From Book, Issues Apology https://www.newsweek.com/publisher-harpercollins-uk-removes-melania-trump-claims-book-issues-apology-10844442   Racist KKK glorifying film Birth of a Nation became the first film shown in the White House under Woodrow Wilson: https://woodrowwilsonhouse.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/WWH-SCHOLAR-SPRING-2023-Hashimoto-Elizabeth-FINAL-PROJECT-BIRTH-OF-A-NATION.pdf   Shadow Network: The Anne Nelson Interview - Part II https://www.gaslitnationpod.com/episodes-transcripts-20/2022/5/11/anne-nelson-part-02?rq=Focus%20on%20the%20family

This Day in Legal History: Woodrow Wilson Supports Women's SuffrageOn September 30, 1918, President Woodrow Wilson took the unprecedented step of addressing the U.S. Senate directly to urge passage of a constitutional amendment guaranteeing women the right to vote. The House of Representatives had already approved the amendment earlier that year, but the measure had stalled in the Senate. Wilson's speech came during the final months of World War I, a context he used strategically—arguing that women had proven their patriotism and value to the nation through their labor, sacrifice, and civic contributions during wartime.Framing suffrage as a war measure and an issue of national unity, Wilson stated that denying women the vote was an injustice that undermined American democratic ideals. He contended that the world was watching and that the U.S. could not claim to fight for democracy abroad while denying it to half its citizens at home. The speech was notable both for its timing and for the fact that it came from a president who had previously been lukewarm on the issue.Wilson's appeal was a calculated political move, reflecting both the growing power of the women's suffrage movement and the need to maintain national morale. Though his speech failed to immediately sway enough senators—the amendment would not pass the Senate until June 1919—it marked a pivotal shift in executive support. Wilson's endorsement helped legitimize the movement and apply pressure on reluctant lawmakers.The Nineteenth Amendment, which prohibited the denial of the right to vote on the basis of sex, was finally ratified in August 1920. Wilson's 1918 address thus stands as a key moment in the long legal and political battle for women's suffrage in the United States, symbolizing the growing alignment of public sentiment, executive advocacy, and legislative momentum that would eventually culminate in constitutional change.In an exclusive from Reuters, federal drug prosecutions in the United States have dropped to their lowest level in decades, as the Trump administration shifts law enforcement priorities toward immigration enforcement. A Reuters analysis of nearly 2 million federal court records reveals that prosecutions for drug offenses are down 10% from the same period in 2024, with money laundering charges—often linked to high-level traffickers—dropping by 24%. These declines mark the slowest rate of federal drug enforcement activity since at least the late 1990s.The shift stems from President Trump's directive shortly after taking office to reallocate thousands of federal agents toward immigration-related efforts, including assisting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in daily raids. This redirection of resources has disrupted traditional drug enforcement operations, with agents reporting that long-term investigations have stalled and critical cases are going “stagnant.” Even fentanyl-related investigations have been sidelined due to agents being pulled into immigration duties.Despite promises of a tough-on-drugs approach—including calls for the death penalty for some dealers—the administration's actions have hollowed out the Justice Department's Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force and rerouted DEA and ATF agents to support deportation operations. These agents, often unfamiliar with immigration law, are now tasked with support roles such as transportation and crowd control during raids, sometimes simply for the sake of producing social media-friendly imagery.Meanwhile, prosecutions tied to drug importation and conspiracies have declined 6% and 15%, respectively, and gun charges associated with drug crimes have also fallen. Officials warn that the impact of this reprioritization could deepen over time, as investigations delayed today will not yield prosecutions for months or years. Nearly half of all federal criminal charges this year involve immigration violations, and over 700 federal prosecutors have been reassigned to immigration matters.While the White House defends the shift as a successful effort to reduce the flow of drugs by targeting violent criminals and cartels, law enforcement officials describe a chaotic, politically driven enforcement regime that sacrifices complex criminal investigations for visible, short-term wins. The resulting system raises concerns not only about public safety but about the long-term effectiveness of federal law enforcement priorities.Exclusive: Federal drug prosecutions fall to lowest level in decades as Trump shifts focus to deportations | ReutersThe Pentagon has deployed 200 Oregon National Guard troops under federal authority after President Donald Trump announced plans to send military forces into Portland, Oregon. The move, aimed at protecting federal immigration facilities from what Trump called “domestic terrorists,” immediately triggered a legal challenge from the state. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield filed a federal lawsuit against Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, arguing that the federal deployment infringes on the state's sovereign authority over its own law enforcement and National Guard.The lawsuit describes Trump's justification as exaggerated and unsupported, noting that protests against ICE in Portland have remained relatively small and peaceful since June. It also highlights a sharp decline in violent crime in the city—homicides are reportedly down 51% compared to the same time last year—raising further questions about the necessity of military intervention.The deployment order took even top Pentagon officials by surprise, with several describing it as a “bolt from the blue.” Defense Secretary Hegseth's memo authorizing the deployment was later attached as evidence in Oregon's lawsuit. Portland officials, including Mayor Keith Wilson, were not informed of the plan in advance and reportedly learned about it via social media.Trump's rhetoric about using “full force” remains ambiguous, with no clarification on whether that includes authorization of lethal force or under what conditions it could be used. Historically, U.S. troops deployed domestically are only permitted to use force in self-defense. The sudden move has heightened tensions, particularly following a recent shooting at an ICE facility in Dallas that left one detainee dead and two others injured. Critics argue the administration's increasingly aggressive immigration enforcement risks politicizing the military and provoking unnecessary conflict in U.S. cities.Pentagon calls up 200 National Guard troops after Trump Portland announcement | ReutersIn my column for Bloomberg this week, I explore a recent tariff investigation. The investigation into computer peripheral manufacturer Anker Innovations' alleged tariff evasion highlights how modern tariff enforcement has evolved into a sprawling, bureaucratic effort that diverts taxpayer resources toward compliance rather than bolstering domestic industry. Rather than serving as effective tools of economic nationalism, tariffs often end up creating work for customs officials, trade lawyers, and compliance consultants. Each adjustment to tariff classifications triggers complex administrative networks that contradict the ideal of limited government.This system's irony deepens when considering that agencies like the IRS are underfunded, even as policymakers lean more on tariffs—a less efficient and more easily manipulated revenue source. The result is a compliance-heavy environment that benefits well-resourced firms while leaving smaller importers at a disadvantage. Investigating potential violations can be costly and time-consuming, encouraging selective enforcement and fostering a procedural limbo where discretion and inefficiency thrive.The current approach, which places tariff power largely in the executive branch, introduces volatility and undermines predictability in trade policy. Companies may invest heavily in litigation over classification issues, only to see the rules change mid-process. This undermines confidence in the system and raises the risk of corruption and favoritism. I argue that returning tariff authority to Congress and reinvigorating corporate tax enforcement would make the system more equitable and effective. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

October 4, 1915. President Woodrow Wilson designates Dinosaur National Monument as a national historic site. That's a big deal, right? There must've been a grand ribbon-cutting ceremony, maybe even a parade. But no. In 1915, nobody really cares about dinosaurs. But that is all about to change. And when it does, it is largely because of two paleontologists. Two guys who started off as best friends … until their growing obsession with unearthing and cataloging dinosaur bones would turn them into rivals. Then enemies. How did the competition between a pair of paleontologists lead to unprecedented dinosaur discoveries? And how did their rivalry unhinge them both?  Special thanks to guest Dr. Hans Sues, curator of vertebrate paleontology at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History. ** This episode originally aired October 3, 2022. Get in touch: historythisweekpodcast@history.com  Follow on Instagram: @historythisweek Follow on Facebook: ⁠HISTORY This Week Podcast⁠ To stay updated: http://historythisweekpodcast.com To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Subscribe now to get skip the ads and get more content! Danny and Derek once again speak with historian Greg Grandin about his recent book, America, América: A New History of the New World. In this second part of the conversation, they follow US–Latin American relations from the American Civil War through the present. The discussion covers the Spanish-American War of 1898 and the contradictions of U.S. expansion cloaked in the language of human rights, the Mexican Revolution as a defining challenge to US power, Woodrow Wilson's and FDR's occupations and the Good Neighbor Policy, the Cold War, the neoliberal turn, the endurance of social movements in the face of American-backed violence, and why contemporary Latin American politics still display revolutionary undercurrents. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Danny and Derek once again speak with historian Greg Grandin about his recent book, America, América: A New History of the New World. In this second part of the conversation, they follow US–Latin American relations from the American Civil War through the present. The discussion covers the Spanish-American War of 1898 and the contradictions of U.S. expansion cloaked in the language of human rights, the Mexican Revolution as a defining challenge to US power, Woodrow Wilson's and FDR's occupations and the Good Neighbor Policy, the Cold War, the neoliberal turn, the endurance of social movements in the face of American-backed violence, and why contemporary Latin American politics still display revolutionary undercurrents.Our Sponsors:* Check out BetterHelp: https://betterhelp.com/THENATIONAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

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.   Hey before I begin I just want to thank all of you who have joined the patreon, you guys are awesome. Please let me know what other figures, events or other things you want to hear about in the future and I will try to make it happen.   So as you can see the title of this episode is, Why did the Japanese perform so many Atrocities during the Pacific War. Phewww, its honestly a difficult one to tackle, for there are countless reasons. I had a university professor who taught; ancient and modern Japanese history, history of the Japanese empire and the Pacific War. He actually answered this very question in a single lecture and in many ways I found it to be one of the most illuminating things I ever learnt about the Pacific War. To truly understand the reasons why they did such horrible things, you actually need to learn the general history of Japan, particularly the changes from Tokugawa, to Meiji, to Showa. I am going to do my very best, but I know many of you might be asking “what were the worst things they did?”, not everyone takes a special interest into such a niche part of history. May I recommend for those with strong stomachs “the knights of Bushido” by Edward Russel that covers pretty much all the atrocities of the Asia-Pacific War. For those of you who like darker things, check out Unit 731: Japan's Secret Biological Warfare in World War II by David Wallace and Peter Williams, absolute nightmare fuel.   I can't go through the entire history of Japan, but I think it's important to start off with the first Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. This was the first time the Empire of Japan fought a true war with a foreign nation, that being the Qing dynasty. At this point in time, there really emerged a sort of, to be blunt, race war. The Chinese had historically referred to the Japanese as “woren”, a racist term meaning dwarf. Now historically the Japanese had always revered the Chinese, kind of like in the way a little brother looks up to his big brother. In tokugawa Japan they would learn from the Chinese, but as the Meiji restoration began this dramatically changed. Japan watched as the Chinese were humiliating and abused by the western powers and failed to modernize. Meanwhile Japan emulated the best of the west, to modernize and become a great power themselves. In many ways, Japan saw itself become big brother and now China was little brother. The Meiji restoration had an element of nationalism built into it that would explode come the Show era. Japan for its entire history had this belief they were the “Yamato Race” dating back to the 6th century. Now while the Meiji restoration sought to emulate the west, they also emulated racism and propaganda, which in the 19th century was kind of a big deal. The Japanese government gradually began a long term campaign promoting the idea the Japanese, or Yamato people were superior to that of the other asian races. Who was the next big asian boy on the block? China, so it was inevitable they would direct a lot of racist attitudes towards the Chinese. During the first sino-japanese war, the Chinese, particularly Manchu had a habit of performing atrocities upon the Japanese. They would often cut off body parts of Japanese soldiers in grotesque manners and leave them to be found by their comrades. This was honestly a pretty typical thing of war in the region, but it did also have a racist element to it, the Chinese certainly saw the Japanese as lesser people. Just before the battle of Port Arthur, the Japanese found mutilated remains of the comrades, here is a passage from Makio Okabe who was there:   As we entered the town of Port Arthur, we saw the head of a Japanese soldier displayed on a wooden stake. This filled us with rage and a desire to crush any Chinese soldier. Anyone we saw in the town, we killed. The streets were filled with corpses, so many they blocked our way. We killed people in their homes; by and large, there wasn't a single house without from three to six dead. Blood was flowing and the smell was awful. We sent out search parties. We shot some, hacked at others. The Chinese troops just dropped their arms and fled. Firing and slashing, it was unbounded joy. At this time, our artillery troops were at the rear, giving three cheers [banzai] for the emperor.   The Japanese performed a massacre at Port Arthur, butchering perhaps up to 3000 Chinese civilians, some claim 10's of thousands and in full few of western war correspondents. It became a huge controversy that destroyed the image of the IJA internationally and hurt the Japanese governments efforts at riding themselves of unequal treaties with the western powers. The Japanese learnt a hell of a lesson and an Imperial Proclamation was made in 1894 stating that Japanese soldiers should make every effort to win the war without violating international laws. According to Japanese historian Yuki Tanaka, Japanese forces during the First Sino-Japanese War released 1,790 Chinese prisoners without harm, once they signed an agreement not to take up arms against Japan if they were released.   During the next major war the Japanese performed a dramatic 180, well at least to their enemy. During the Russo-Japanese War, over 80,000 Russian POWs were held by the IJA who were treated in accordance with the Hague conventions of 1899. The Japanese paid them for labor, housed them in conventional POW camps, made sure they received good medical treatment, ironically better than the Russians were capable of. The Japanese did all of this, making sure the foreign war correspondents wrote about it. It was a massive PR stunt in many ways. The Japanese were emulating how a world power should act, because they sought to be one. Meanwhile the Japanese swallowed their pride at being called yellow monkeys, as the prevalent Yellow Peril ideology was being pushed by Kaiser Wilhehelm and Tsar Nicholas II heavily. The Japanese treated the entire war like gentlemen and suffered horrific higher casualties than necessary because of it. But something many people don't take much notice of, because the IJA made sure of it, was they horrible treatment of the Chinese during the war.   Now the Russians in Manchuria looted, killed and raped many Chinese, pushed quite a bit by the Yellow Peril. The Chinese, certainly the Honghuzi bandits were working for the Japanese to attack them, so its not like they had no reasons. The IJA was more professional and had orders not to molest the Chinese, as they were helping the war effort, but this did not prevent it. The Japanese also looted, killed and raped Chinese. The Japanese would often wave it off as reprisals against potential spies. I only bring this up as it was very apparent, the Japanese treated the Russians much different than the chinese.   Fast forward to WW1, the Japanese had a battle against the Germans and Austro-Hungarians known in the west as the Siege of Tsingtau. The Japanese took up an identical methodology to the Russo-Japanese war with their approach to the Germans, but even took it a step further. After winning the siege, the Japanese seized nearly 5000 German POW's who were treated with a surreal amount of respect. They were brought back to Japan and housed for the rest of the war in 12 cities around Tokyo and Kumamoto. The POW's enjoyed humane treatment and a rather famous event occurred at the Bando camp where a large orchestra was formed of German POW's who toured the nation performing 100 concerts, lectures and plays. Evidence the Germans were treated well can be seen in the fact 170 prisoners never left Japan and sought wives and lives there. Now is this all a feel good love story, no, just like during the Russo-Japanese War, Japan was playing up the PR, for during WW1 they wanted official recognition as a world power and that of being racially equal to the whites.    Japan was officially recognized as a world power during the treaty of Versailles, but when Japan gave its racial equality proposal, President Woodrow Wilson of the US and Australian Prime Minister Billy Hughes refused to allow it to pass, even though they received majority votes. Now The Japanese had been for a lack of better words, fucked over, during the first sino-japanese war when the triple intervention of France, Germany and Russia stole away their war earning of the Liaodong peninsula. During the Russo-Japanese war, Theodore Roosevelt limited the Japanese war gains and now here after WW1 the Japanese received another humiliation. To the Japanese, it was the last straw and it was a major reason they went to war with the west, who they viewed, and honestly rightfully so, would never see them as equals.   Ompf, lot of history there, but now we come to the Showa era, which was molded by the feelings of the past decades.   In 1937 Japan and China enter an unofficial war that saw one of the worst wartime atrocities in human history, the rape of Nanjing. It began on December 13th of 1937, lasting 6 or so weeks seeing the murder of possibly 300,000 civilians and pows, the mass rape of 20,000 and untold hardship upon the Chinese people. The Japanese followed this up with numerous other massacres in China such as the Changjiao Massacre claiming possibly 30,000 Chinese civilian lives, the Alexandra Hospital Massacre killing 200 patients and medical staff in Hong Kong, the Laha Massacre on Ambon island where 300 members of the Gull force were executed, the Bangka island massacre where 60 Australian and British soldiers and 22 Australian nurses were murdered, the Parit Sulong massacre in Malay where 150 wounded Australian and Indian POW's were executed, the Bataan Death march where negligence and brutality took the lives of 650 Americans and perhaps a possible 18,000 Filipinos, the Manila massacres claiming the lives of perhaps 54,000 filipinos including women and children in the Philippines, the Balikpapan massacre in the dutch east indies taking the lives of 78 Dutch Civilians, I can keep going and going. Where the Japanese went, massacres and horrors occurred.    Again if you really want to delve into these stories check out “the knights of Bushido”.   The Japanese also had the infamous special units like 731, who conducted horrifying experiments on civilians and POWs like vivisectioning live people without anesthesia, testing biological and chemical weapons on live people, the freezing peoples to study frostbite treatment and giving people sexually transmitted diseases to study. Lt General Shiro Ishii's unit 731 deployed plague infested fleas, cholera, bubonic plague and other nasty weapons upon Chinese civilians killing perhaps up to 500,000. This was seen during the battle of Changde and famously during operation Sei-go also known as the Zhejiang-Jiangxi campaign.    The Japanese also enacted the infamous “Sanko Sakusen / three all's policy : kill all, urn all, loot all” in retaliation to the Chinese communists Hundred regiments offensive in December of 1940. Sanctioned by Hirohito personally, it is thought this act resulted in the death of 2.7 million Chinese civilians. According to author Werner Gruhl 8 million Chinese civilian deaths could be attributable to the Japanese.     So then we come back to the big question, why? So now that I've covered the loose history for coherency sake I want to list here the largest reasons for the atrocities and by no means is this official categories or even all of them, I am simply stating kind of my top ones I guess you can say:   Treaties signed or not signed War strategy and indoctrination  Ultra-Nationalism and Racism Surrender & the Bastardization of the Bushido code The Brutality of the Japanese military Treaties signed or not signed   Yes its time to talk about treaties, yawn. Now I said previously Japan did sign the Hague Conventions of 1899 and would ratify them in 1907. The Hague conventions did contain laws for prisoners of war, protection of civilians. Alongside this, in 1894 an imperial proclamation was made stating Japanese soldiers should make every effort to win a war without violating international laws. More significantly Japan “signed” but unlike the majority of other world powers did not ratify the Geneva convention of 1929. Why? To be blunt, the geneva conventions did not really benefit the Japanese military from their point of view.   First the Japanese had a very specific perspective on surrendering, they simply did not do it, so they did not expect many of their soldiers to ever become POW's, so how would it benefit them to ratify such a thing? If they are not going to have many POW's, why would they burden themselves with upholding all the conventional laws for POW's they would obtain during war?  Another glaring reason involved aerial bombing. Many Japanese leaders, like Kanji Ishiwara, believed the home islands would be subjected to massive aerial bombing if a global war broke out. If Japan was subjected to aerial bombing and ratified the geneva convention, this meant they would have to take the pilots who were caught prisoner. The Japanese believed this would encourage further bombing. Lastly the convention had rules for POW treatment that literally contradicted how Japanese soldiers were treated by their own superiors. More about that in the last part about the military's brutality, but summarized, the Japanese army were abusive as hell and to sign such a thing would literally contradict how they did things.   Emperor Hirohito personally ratified a decision to remove certain constraints of the Hague Conventions when it came to the treatment of Chinese POW's in the directive of 5 August 1937. This notification advised staff officers to simply stop using the term "prisoners of war". They would refer to their enemy as bandits, guerillas and such, anything but soldiers so they would not have to take any prisoners, though they typically did not leave anyone alive in China regardless. The Geneva Convention exempted POWs of sergeant rank or higher from manual labor, and stipulated that prisoners performing work should be provided with extra rations and other essentials. The Japanese in the later half of the war would be starved of provisions and resources, thus its to no surprise they could not meet these demands, even if they sought to uphold them. I will note in 1942, Japan indicated they would “follow” the Geneva rules and would observe the Hague Convention of 1907 outlining the laws and customs of war. Yet this is like a verbal confirmation, it had no legal basis, something the Japanese particularly loved to do during the war.   According to Dr. William Skelton III, who produced a document entitled American Ex Prisoners of War for the U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs, more POWs died at the hands of the Japanese in the Pacific theater and specifically in the Philippines than in any other conflict to date. For example in Germany, POWs died at a rate 1.2%. In the Pacific theater the rate was 37%. In the Philippines, POWs died at a rate of 40%.    Now these pieces of paper that were signed or not signed, what does this really matter when it comes to war, its obvious they were not upholding certain rules, but how did this quote en quote make them more brutal and perform more atrocities? Well here is the sticky thing, if you are part of the Japanese military and you know your nation did not ratify certain rules of war, this meant your enemy had no supposed legal basis to follow said rules against you either.    So I want you to think of two aspects of this. If your nation did not sign or ratify certain treaties, then you could not expect the enemy to respect such rules when it comes to you. But more importantly, what if the leader of your nation…just told you to believe that?    In early 1942, Great Britain, the United States of America and other great powers did officially let the Japanese know that they would, on their  part, observe all the provisions of the Convention and requested reciprocity. Japanese foreign minister at the time, Hideki Tojo gave a formal assurance that although Japan was not bound by the Geneva convention, the Japanese would apply it “mutatis mutandis” towards the Americans, British, Canadians, Australians and New Zealander POW's, note he most definitely did not extend this to the asiatic groups, nor the Dutch whom I guess he just forgot about. But this did morally bind Japan to comply with the convention. However the top brass of the Japanese military, notably Hideki Tojo in these cases, went out of his way to instill beliefs within the military as to what they should expect from the enemy. As you will see in the next points, this was basically a type of indoctrination.   War strategy and indoctrination    The leaders of Japan knew full well how unmatched they were in terms of resources and productivity before they began the war with the west. How could they possibly win the war? The IJN was dead set on a decisive naval battle, but for the IJA to compensate for their lack of resources, they believed their “spirit” would overcome the enemy. In many ways this spirit meant going above and beyond normal human endurance, to literally outperform the allies and notably to conduct the war with absolutely zero mercy. Once Japan lost the initiative in the war, after Guadalcanal, the IJA were forced to fight a war of attrition. Now they would prolong and exact maximum casualties upon the allies hoping to force them to the peace table. The idea was quite simple, the IJA would do everything possible to make the allies believe they would never give up and it would far too costly to defeat them. How does one go about achieving these aims? Well the IJA officers would tell you “by steeling your hearts”. To achieve all of this required extreme indoctrination.    Japanese children grew up in regimentation, they were desensitized to violence through tales of martial glory, and were taught that their purpose in life was to serve the emperor. Upon entering  military service, they were trained out of any individualistic spirit, and taught that compassion was a weakness and had no place in the field of war. The soldier's motto was faith equaled strength.  Faith being devotion to duty and service to the Divine Emperor. Apart from ideology and spiritual toughening, training in the Japanese Imperial Army was also extremely harsh and violent. This was not even particularly a special aspect of Showa Japan, it went all the way back to the Meiji era. From a young age children's education directed them, like a pipeline for military duty.   Now at the offset of the war, Hideki Tojo released the “Senjinkun” “instructions for the battlefield”. This was basically a manual for soldiers on how to conduct war. The document was used to establish standards of behavior for Japanese troops and improve discipline and morale within the Army, it also included things like a prohibition against being taken prisoner. It stated if you were captured by the enemy, because Japan did not sign or ratify certain treaties, you would be killed or tortured by the allies, and if you survived you and your family would face shame back home, and punishment resulting typically in 6 months of prison.   Here is a small excerpt from the document Those who know shame are weak. Always think of [preserving] the honor of your community and be a credit to yourself and your family. Redouble your efforts and respond to their expectations. Never live to experience shame as a prisoner. By dying you will avoid leaving a stain on your honor.   The purpose was basically psychological warfare, against their own army. Those like Hideki Tojo believed Japan could only defeat the resource rich Americans with spirit. Thus the manuals like Senjinkun demanded the forces not ever surrender, because the allies would do horrible things, it was shameful to do so and there were disciplinary actions for any who did. In 1942 the Army amended its criminal code to specify that officers who surrendered soldiers under their command faced at least six months imprisonment, regardless of the circumstances in which the surrender took place. This change attracted little attention, however, as the Senjinkun imposed more severe consequences and had greater moral force.   In a report dated June 1945, the U.S. Office of War Information noted that 84 percent of one group of interrogated Japanese prisoners, many of whom had been injured or unconscious when captured stated that they had expected to be killed or tortured by the Allies if taken prisoner. The OWI analysts described this as being typical, and concluded that fear of the consequences of surrender, “rather than Bushido,” was the motivation for many Japanese battle deaths in hopeless circumstances–as much as, and probably more than, the other two major considerations: fear of disgrace at home, and “the positive desire to die for one's nation, ancestors, and god-emperor.”   Something barely talked about in the west, was during the Pacific War, the Americans had a habit of taking human trophies. Human trophies were Japanese skulls, gold teeth, finger bones and such. The famous novel “With the Old Breed” by Eugene Sledge spoke of his personal accounts of these actions, its a rather gruesome and dark part of the war. Now some of these actions were publicized, despite the US military's efforts to quell and hush it down. Time magazine famously had an iconic photo of a woman whose enlisted boyfriend sent her home a Japanese skull. FDR also famously was given a letter opener carved out of Japanese bones. These stories were seized up greedily by the Japanese government who used them as propaganda to prove to their soldiers what would happen if they were captured. It had a profound effect as you can imagine. And this was not limited to Japanese soldiers. The propaganda machine would contribute at the end of the war to mass civilian suicides on Okinawa and Saipan.   Back to the POW subject. When it came to the treatment of POW's, Hideki Tojo began submitting in May of 1942 a series of memorandum, basic orders as to how POW's should be treated. “Prisoners of war can be used for the enlargement of our production and as military labor, white prisoners of war will be confined successively in Korea, Formosa and Manchuria. Superior technicians and high ranking officers -- Colonels and above -- will be included among the prisoners of war confined in Formosa. Those who are not suitable for use in enlargement of our production will be confined in prisoner of war camps which will be built immediately on the spot.Although the working of prisoner of war officers and warrant officers is forbidden by the Regulations of 1903, the policy of the control authorities is that under the situation of our country where not one person now eats without working they want them to set to work. It is desired that you give proper orders on this.The present situation of affairs in this country does not permit anyone to lie idle doing nothing but eating freely. With that in view, in dealing with prisoners of war, I hope you will see that they may be usefully employed. In Japan, we have our own ideology concerning prisoners of war, which should naturally make their treatment more or less different from that in Europe and America. In dealing with them, you should, of course, observe the various Regulations concerned, aim at an adequate application of them . . . At the same time, you must not allow them to lie idle doing nothing but eating freely for even a single day. Their labor and technical skill should be fully utilized for the replenishment of production, and contribution rendered toward the prosecution of the Greater East Asiatic War for which no effort ought to be spared."   Thus in the end as a grunt in the IJA you were led to believe: if I am captured I will be tortured, killed maybe turned into a letter opener, or someone will place my skull on their mantle. If I surrender and survive and make it back home, I will be severely punished and worst of all me and my family will be shamed. I could not expect any humanity from the enemy, because my nation did not sign or ratify treaties like the Geneva convention. More so, because my armies conduct was so unbelievably barbaric, I could only expect the very same from my enemy. It was a vicious cycle. You perform atrocities, expecting the enemy to do the same, and thus it just keeps perpetuating itself. Ultra-Nationalism and Racism   Now we spoke a little bit about the concept of the Yamato race, the Japanese were indoctrinated to believe they were a superior race and that their emperor was something akin to a living god. Until this war, the Japanese empire was on a hell of a winning streak going all the way back to the Meiji Era. For the first half of the Pacific war, the Japanese won nearly every battle. This led to something historians called “victory disease” that made them become somewhat arrogant and cocky, but it also made them feel “superhuman”. The allies' news reporting at the beginning of the war began to frantically refer to the Japanese as “supermen”or  “super jungle fighters”. Particularly because of the Malay campaign, the Japanese soldier just seemed to be tougher, could survive harsher jungle climates, even doing so with less food or war materials. The Japanese read the allied news reports and came to the conclusion that had been driven down their throats by their government, indeed the Japanese spirit was winning the war. The Japanese public ate this up in their propaganda and it perpetuated their ultra-nationalistic beliefs. The Japanese truly came to believe they were destined to rule the asia-pacific. Look at the results in China for example. Within a short amount of time they conquered much of China, though the public really had no idea how bad the China was bottled down by 1940. Then came the greater east asia co-prosperity sphere propaganda, which is an excellent example of their megalomania.    Yet alongside their ultra-nationalism, seen more strongly perpetuated against other Asian groups, the Japanese also indoctrinated their public with racism against them. The Yellow Peril of the 19th century and anti-japanese or anti-asian racism fueled the Japanese soldiers. The Japanese as a people had faced brutal racist hardships historically at the hands of the west, particularly from their point of view from America. There was the slights against them during the first sino-japanese war, the infamous triple intervention of france, germany and Russia stealing away their prize that was the liaodong peninsula. Then during the Boxer rebellion they faced racism, not being allowed to lead mutli national army formations, despite them being the lionshare of said military force. The Russo-Japanese war saw from their point of view, America stealing their war prizes. Last but not least, after WW1 they were told to their faces that they were a world power, but not racially equal. The Japanese faced anti-Japanese and anti-asian immigration laws when it came to America in the form of the gentleman's agreement and Australia's “great white Australia policy”. During the war, the American propaganda machine began pumping out racist caricatures of Japanese as rats, goggle eyed  bucktooth people, literal yellow monkey's.   For the IJA the pacific war in many was a holy war directed at the arrogant whites who had abused them for so long. This will probably sound controversial, but indeed, the pacific war was very much a race war. If you are not convinced of that, I recommend reading “War without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War” by John Dower. The human trophy taking, anti-japanese bucktooth, rat people cartoon propaganda, history of racial abuse like the japanese concentration camps, the gentleman's agreement, the stealing of victories during the first sino-japanese war, russo-japanese war and ww1 all plagued the mind of a Japanese soldier. To them in many ways, the “whites had it coming”. Which is rather ironic given how the Japanese would treat the other asian racial groups they came into contact with. But such is the contradictory nature of the Imperial Japanese military.    The Japanese also held racist beliefs about the westerners. The Japanese soldiers were taught the allies were akin to demons or beasts. They were described often as “the hairy ones” or “anglo-American demons”. Taught these men would rape women and girls, stample upon the civilians they captured with the treads of their tanks. The marines were especially dreaded.  According to a story circulated widely among the Japanese on Saipan, all Marine Corps recruits were compelled to murder their own parents before being inducted into service. It was said that Japanese soldiers taken prisoner would suffer hideous tortures—their ears, noses, and limbs would be cut off; they would be blinded and castrated; they could also be cooked and fed to dogs. As silly as this may sound, do remember the Americans were taking human trophies so the Japanese propaganda machine had its evidence. Tons of photos of skulls atop american tanks for example were displayed to the Japanese public. Another famous one was the cartoon appearing in an American servicemen's magazine, which was later reproduced and translated in the Japanese press. It suggested the existence of “Japanese hunting licenses, promising open season on the enemy, complete with free ammunition and equipment—with pay!    In terms of how the Japanese exacted their own racism towards their fellow asians. During the War the Japanese dragged into forced labor, Koreans, Chinese and southeast asians. 670,000 Koreans were brought to Japan to work mines and heavy industry, around 60,000 of them died to harsh conditions. Between April 1943 to May 1945, 41,862 Chinese were sent to Japan to work, 2800 died before even reaching the home islands. 6872 died in the work sites again from brutal conditions. When it comes to southeast asian numbers are hard to pinpoint but its safe to say at least 300,000 Javanese, Malay, Burmese, Tamil and other groups were mobilized to construct the Burma-Siam railroad between October 1942 to november 1943 and 60,000 perished. This all went for the men, for the women, all those racial groups would face the horrors of becoming comfort women, historians estimate there could have been 50-200,000 pressed into it. But for the Japanese, believing their were superior to these other asiatic groups, groups whom they would publicly say were like children, they as the father figure would guide, well they simply abused them.   So in a contradictive fashion, the Japanese believed they were superior and could do horrible things to their Asian neighbors while simultaneously decrying the racism cast towards them by western powers as justification for their brutal actions against them. These types of feelings and perspectives molded the mind of the average Japanese soldier, dehumanizing others has always been a standard military practice afterall.    Surrender & the Bastardization of the Bushido code   I think this is one the vast majority of WW2 history buffs know, the Japanese perspective on surrender and the bushido code. In the book “military trials of war criminals in the Netherlands east indies 1946-1949” Fred Borch had this to say about the variable of bushido for the brutality   As Japan continued its modernization in the early 20th century, her armed forces became convinced that success in battle would be assured if Japanese soldiers, sailors, and airmen had the "spirit" of Bushido. ... The result was that the Bushido code of behavior "was inculcated into the Japanese soldier as part of his basic training." Each soldier was indoctrinated to accept that it was the greatest honor to die for the Emperor and it was cowardly to surrender to the enemy. ... Bushido therefore explains why the Japanese soldiers who were stationed in the NEI so mistreated POWs in their custody. Those who had surrendered to the Japanese—regardless of how courageously or honorably they had fought—merited nothing but contempt; they had forfeited all honor and literally deserved nothing. Consequently, when the Japanese murdered POWs by shooting, beheading, and drowning, these acts were excused since they involved the killing of men who had forfeited all rights to be treated with dignity or respect. While civilian internees were certainly in a different category from POWs, it is reasonable to think that there was a "spill-over" effect from the tenets of Bushido.   It is very true, the Japanese soldiers and sailors were taught Japan was a sacred nation. Traditional samurai values of bushido were merged with modern training and weaponry. The government propagandized the figure of the Emperor as a living god who embodied the Japanese state, the Kokutai. Emperor Hirohito and his family were the spiritual essence of Japan. To even show your back to the enemy let alone surrender was deemed cowardly and brought dishonor upon your family. As written by Inouye Jukichi in 1910, something read by many Japanese “The Japanese warriors looked upon it as shame to themselves not to die when their Lord was hard pressed . . . their own shame was the shame upon their parents, their family, their house and their whole clan, and with this idea deeply impressed upon their minds, the Samurai, no matter of what rank, held their lives light as feathers when compared with the weight they attached to the maintenance of a spotless name”.    Young men of Japan were taught that "The greatest honor is to die for the Emperor" Additionally precept the Japanese were taught that it is an ignominy to surrender to the enemy. The combined effect of these two precepts was to inculcate in the Japanese soldier a spirit of contempt for Allied soldiers who surrendered, which, in defiance of the rules of war, was demonstrated in their ill-treatment of prisoners. They made no distinction between the soldier who fought honorably and courageously up to an inevitable surrender, and the soldier who surrendered without a fight. All enemy soldiers who surrendered under any circumstance were to be regarded as being disgraced and entitled to live only by the tolerance of their captors.   Surrender was unforgivable under their code, drilled into them through the Imperial Japanese education system and military. When the Japanese would come across vast swathes of the enemy surrendering, particularly if the enemy used up all their ammunition killing their comrades and then surrendered, well it added fuel to their brutality. One only needs to look at the deaths due to Banzai charges, take for example the incredibly massive one at the battle of Saipan seeing around 4000 dead Japanese. IJA officers brought ancestral katana's to the war, the Japanese cut off the heads of the enemies as it was seen to be honorable. When faced with death, many chose to commit seppuku, the bushido propaganda was intense.    A brutal practice emerged in the Pacific island hopping campaign, whereupon wounded Japanese would pretend to be dead or surrender only to explode grenades upon allied forces coming closer. This began to be noticed by US marines during the battle of Guadalcanal and Australians in New Guinea. This began a vicious cycle . There were of course Japanese who would surrender. Hell the Koreans forced into service often did try to surrender, but they would all be hampered by something. Because of the actions of those Japanese feinted death and taking down allied soldiers with them, the allied soldiers gradually began a practice of not bothering to accept surrender. It became a self fulfilling prophecy. Many Japanese made the allies believe all they could expect was a grenade death, thus the allies became more brutal to them. This simply led the Japanese to conclude their government was accurate about how the allies would treat them, so more and more did not surrender. An absolutely horrible cycle that went on to the very end of the war, though the allies did figure out means to get Japanese to surrender more in the last year.    The Brutality of the Japanese military   I think this is probably one of the most important factors, and its also one the “normies” would not know as much about. The Imperial Japanese military, more so the Army, had what I can only describe as a built in system of abuse. As described to me by the same university professor I keep bringing up in podcasts, picture a literal pecking order. Going from the highest ranked general to the very bottom grunt. Imagine each one who is higher than the other, routinely physically abuses them. For example, it was very typical for a colonel to slap a major across the face, the major would then strike one of his captains, and the abuse would continue through the ranks to the grunts who would have no one to abuse, thus they turned to POW's or civilian populations. This was not just an accepted part of the Japanese Imperial Army it was indoctrinated.    From day one of basic training, IJA officers taught their men, races like the Chinese were their blood enemies and racially inferior. These were people the Japanese would rule over one day. The trainers would toss the boys into rigorous training activities involving physical violence towards another alongside the notion any orders given by a higher ranking officer was infallible and to be treated as if the divine emperor himself, the living god was giving it.    The Japanese army even taught methods of torture that would be employed in all areas they occupied. Among these tortures were the water treatment, burning, electric shocks, the knee spread, suspension, kneeling on sharp instruments and flogging. The Kempetai, were the ones doing the lionshare of these tortures. Other Army and Navy units, however, used the same methods as the Kempetai. Camp guards performed similar methods, local police forces organized by the Kempetai in the occupied territories also applied the same methods of torture. The Kempetai were administered by the War Ministry, trained at specialized schools who were maintained and operated by the War Ministry in Japan. Thus the conduct of Kempetai and the camp guards directly reflected the policy of the War Ministry.    The Japanese army leadership made sure recruits were physically and mentally abused, they were given strenuously duty tasks and pushed to their absolute limit. During the war given where they were deployed, take guadalcanal for example, the Japanese soldiers would be facing starvation as well. Being half starved, beaten and suffering the effects of war would drive anyone to perform horrifying acts. The life of a Japanese solider was simply at the whims of an extremely toxic management culture. The lowest ranking echelons received the lionshare of abuse and they took out their frustration with whomever they could find deemed lower than them, ie: POW's, civilians, etc.   All of these variables combined contributed to the creation of a military willing to perform just about any atrocity they thought necessary to win the war. It was a war they could not hope to win, but many of them went to their deaths trying to defeat the hands of fate. There are countless other reasons of course for the atrocities committed in cold or hot blood. Countless books have been written on this subject, please do check out the few I mentioned. With that again, a big thanks to you patreons, you guys are awesome. Please let me know what you think in the comments, and what you want to hear more about in the future. This has been the pacific war channel over and out.

Het Verdrag van Versailles is ondertekend, maar de strijd om de vrede is nog niet voorbij. In de Verenigde Staten barst een fel debat los tussen president Wilson en senator Lodge. Moet Amerika zich aansluiten bij de Volkenbond, of juist afstand bewaren om de eigen vrijheid te beschermen? In deze derde aflevering van onze serie over Versailles volgen we de discussies in Washington, de spanning in de Senaat en de gevolgen voor de nieuwe wereldorde. Zend een leuk bericht (reactie niet mogelijk). Op zoek naar een makelaar? Vergelijk tarieven, prestaties en reviews eenvoudig via Krib.nl – Independer, maar dan voor makelaars. Support the showAanmelding Kornwerderzand Rondleiding - 4 oktober Via deze link kan je je aanmelden. De informatie voor de rondleiding is daar ook te vinden: https://forms.gle/hnKTKoGP6hEytrMx7Word Historicus lid van De Geschiedenisreis!Heb je genoten van deze aflevering? Als Historicus lid krijg je nog veel meer! Ontvang exclusieve toegang tot extra afleveringen, diepgaande analyses en verhalen die je nergens anders hoort. Tegenwoordig via Petje.Af en daarmee is iDeal betaling mogelijk. Klik hier om naar onze Petje Af website te gaan! Social Media Facebookgroep: Groep van geschiedenis enthousiastelingen Substack: Nieuwsbrief met kaarten, foto's en artikelen als ondersteuning bij iedere aflevering. Instagram: Blijf op de hoogte van alle nieuwtjes Adverteren in onze podcast? Mail naar leethijsgeschiedenisreis@gmail.com

The Aldrich Plan, drafted in secrecy at Jekyll Island, faced fierce criticism as a banker's scheme that gave Wall Street too much control. But with the election of President Woodrow Wilson in 1912, the push for reform found new life. Wilson and Congress reshaped the Aldrich blueprint into the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, balancing private banking interests with government oversight. This episode explores the political battles, the compromises, and the transformation of a secret bankers' plan into America's central bank — the Federal Reserve.#FederalReserveAct #AldrichPlan #WoodrowWilson #GlassOwenBill #BankingHistory #USHistory #AmericanHistory #FinanceHistory #CentralBank #MonetaryPolicy #TheFed #CongressDebate #EconomicControl #BankingReform #HistoryMatters #PoliticalHistory #HiddenHistory #CurrencyControl #EconomicPower #SystemOfPower #WallStreetHistory #ProgressiveEra #1913 #FederalReserve #BankingDynasties #FinanceReform #NationalPolitics #BehindTheScenes #HistoryUncovered #TruthRevealed #MoneyAndPower #EconomicHistory #BankingElite #RoadToJekyllIsland #ReformEra #AmericanFinance #WallStreet #EconomicReform #BankingSecrets #TruthAndMyths

1919. Na maanden van onderhandelen in Parijs komt het Verdrag van Versailles eindelijk in zicht. In deze tweede aflevering kijken we naar de uitkomsten: de oprichting van de Volkenbond, de harde bepalingen voor Duitsland en de vraag wie er eigenlijk tevreden terugkeerde uit Versailles. Was dit vrede, of vooral wraak? Zend een leuk bericht (reactie niet mogelijk). Support the showAanmelding Kornwerderzand Rondleiding - 4 oktober Via deze link kan je je aanmelden. De informatie voor de rondleiding is daar ook te vinden: https://forms.gle/hnKTKoGP6hEytrMx7Word Historicus lid van De Geschiedenisreis!Heb je genoten van deze aflevering? Als Historicus lid krijg je nog veel meer! Ontvang exclusieve toegang tot extra afleveringen, diepgaande analyses en verhalen die je nergens anders hoort. Tegenwoordig via Petje.Af en daarmee is iDeal betaling mogelijk. Klik hier om naar onze Petje Af website te gaan! Social Media Facebookgroep: Groep van geschiedenis enthousiastelingen Substack: Nieuwsbrief met kaarten, foto's en artikelen als ondersteuning bij iedere aflevering. Instagram: Blijf op de hoogte van alle nieuwtjes Adverteren in onze podcast? Mail naar leethijsgeschiedenisreis@gmail.com

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comJill is a writer and scholar. She's a professor of American history at Harvard, a professor of law at Harvard Law, and a staff writer at The New Yorker. She's also the host of the podcast “X-Man: The Elon Musk Origin Story.” Her many books include These Truths: A History of the United States (which I reviewed for the NYT in 2017) and her new one, We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution — out in a few days; pre-order now.For two clips of our convo — on FDR's efforts to bypass the Constitution, and the worst amendment we've had — head to our YouTube page.Other topics: raised by public school teachers near Worcester; dad a WWII vet; her struggles with Catholicism as a teen (and my fundamentalism then); joining ROTC; the origins of the Constitution; the Enlightenment; Locke; Montesquieu; the lame Articles of Confederation; the 1776 declaration; Paine's Common Sense; Madison; Jefferson; Hamilton; Adams; New England town meetings; state constitutional conventions; little known conventions by women and blacks; the big convention in Philly and its secrecy; the slave trade; the Three-Fifths Clause; amendment provisions; worries over mob rule; the Electoral College; jury duty; property requirements for voting; the Jacksonian Era; Tocqueville; the Civil War; Woodrow Wilson; the direct election of senators; James Montgomery Beck (“Mr Constitution”); FDR's court-packing plan; Eleanor's activism; Prohibition and its repeal; the Warren Court; Scalia; executive orders under Trump; and gauging the intent of the Founders.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy. Coming up: John Ellis on Trump's mental health, Michael Wolff on Epstein, Karen Hao on artificial intelligence, Katie Herzog on drinking your way sober, Michel Paradis on Eisenhower, Charles Murray on religion, David Ignatius on the Trump effect globally, and Arthur Brooks on the science of happiness. As always, please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

Woodrow Wilson's hidden stroke. Franklin Roosevelt's hidden wheelchair. John F. Kennedy's chronic back pain. There is a historical tendency to obscure the health problems of American presidents from public view.But justifiable question surrounding how far loyal aides and the White House will go to conceal the full picture of the president's health – and the media's role in uncovering it – are increasingly being raised following President Joe Biden's medical decline.Washington journalists find themselves grappling yet again with the fair, but sensitive issue, after unfounded speculation about Donald Trump's health – and impending death – recently spread online.Host Caryn Ceolin is joined by American author, presidential historian and journalist Garrett Graff to discuss how the president's health should be covered in an age as volatile as now. We love feedback at The Big Story, as well as suggestions for future episodes. You can find us:Through email at hello@thebigstorypodcast.ca Or @thebigstoryfpn on Twitter

It's the Daily 304's presentation of famous people, places and events that shaped West Virginia. Welcome to The History Project.  Today, we take look at… Anna Jarvis – Creator of Mother's Day Only a tiny handful of places in the world are the birthplace of an international holiday, and thanks to Grafton resident, Anna Jarvis's creation of Mother's Day, West Virginia is on that list. The idea was started by her own mother, Anne Reeves Jarvis, who first created Mother's Day Work Clubs, to teach mothers about health and sanitary conditions. And after the Civil War had divide Western Virginia into West Virginia, she created Mother's Friendship Day, engaging soldiers and their mother from both sides of the war in an act of reconciliation.  Anne died on May 10th, 1905.  Her daughter, Anna, by now a successful advertising copywriter in Philadelphia, honored Anne and her ideas by creating Mother's Day at Andrews Methodist Episcopal Church in Grafton. Honoring all mothers, Anna chose the day of her mother's passing—the second Sunday of May—to be the official recurring day of observance for the new holiday.   West Virginia's governor made Mother's Day an official holiday in 1910 and other states followed suit. Philadelphia department store titan, John Wanamaker, helped convince Congress to make Mother's Day a national holiday, which it became with a stroke of Woodrow Wilson's pen in 1914.  However, over the years Jarvis became dismayed with the merchandising of the holiday.  She felt it had become crass and commercialized and far removed from her intentions. Nonetheless, Mother's Day grew from an American holiday into one celebrated around the globe.  Its birthplace, Andrews Church in Grafton, was made into the International Mother's Day Shrine, known around the world thanks to a woman who ironically had no children of her own, but who made herself the beloved daughter of all the mothers of the world.  

1919. De Eerste Wereldoorlog is voorbij, maar de vrede moet nog worden gesloten. In Parijs komen de overwinnaars bijeen om een nieuw Europa vorm te geven. Frankrijk wil veiligheid en herstel, Groot-Brittannië zoekt een machtsbalans, en president Wilson droomt van een betere wereld. In deze eerste aflevering van onze serie over het Verdrag van Versailles kijken we naar de wereld van 1919, de chaos van schulden, wraak en hoop, en de vraag: hoe maak je vrede na een oorlog die miljoenen heeft gekost? Zend een leuk bericht (reactie niet mogelijk).Support the showUnlock AdventuresMeer weten of zelf ontsnappen? Kijk op www.unlockadventures.nlMeld je hier aan voor de luisteraar rondleiding op de Grebbeberg van 31 augustus:https://forms.gle/FdN3oiQVgRvqz7JZAWord Historicus lid van De Geschiedenisreis!Heb je genoten van deze aflevering? Als Historicus lid krijg je nog veel meer! Ontvang exclusieve toegang tot extra afleveringen, diepgaande analyses en verhalen die je nergens anders hoort. Tegenwoordig via Petje.Af en daarmee is iDeal betaling mogelijk. Klik hier om naar onze Petje Af website te gaan! Social Media Facebookgroep: Groep van geschiedenis enthousiastelingen Substack: Nieuwsbrief met kaarten, foto's en artikelen als ondersteuning bij iedere aflevering. Instagram: Blijf op de hoogte van alle nieuwtjes Adverteren in onze podcast? Mail naar leethijsgeschiedenisreis@gmail.com

On Thursday's Mark Levin Show, it's shocking that Sen Tim Kaine's said that our rights come from government, which is a Marxist and buffoonish view. The Declaration of Independence's concept of unalienable rights from God is rooted in eternal truths and the Judeo-Christian tradition. Kaine rejects the American founding, which is based on divine sovereignty bestowed on individuals. Kaine's view is emblematic of the Democratic Party, which rejects America, embraces Marxism and Islamism, and supports initiatives like the 1619 Project. Chapter 5 of On Power says that human rights, liberty, and equality are inherent, God-given through natural law, predating and transcending governments, as affirmed in the Declaration of Independence and echoed in state declarations like Virginia's. These views, shared by Founders such as Jefferson, Mason, Franklin, and Adams, emphasize governments' role in securing these unalienable rights via consent of the governed. In contrast, 19th-century philosophers like Hegel and Marx—influencing modern progressives, American Marxists, and figures like Woodrow Wilson—reject these principles, creating an irreconcilable clash of worldviews at the core of ongoing power struggles, where liberty depends on rights preceding government. Also, anonymous judges are complaining about the Supreme Court to NBC News. They say that the Court overturns lower rulings on Trump administration cases with insufficient explanations, undermining judicial integrity amid rising threats and criticisms from Trump allies. These judges are cowards and activists, and the NBC article is propaganda.  Later, Robert Kennedy Jr. fought back in the latest hearing. Democrat Senators refused to let him answer a question. They hate him because he rejected them.  Finally, Trey Gowdy calls in to discuss his new book, The Color of Death: A Novel. The story follows assistant DA Colm Truesdale, who, after losing his wife and daughter, becomes apathetic about life but excels in his prosecutorial role. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

José Santos Chocano (14 mayo 1875, Lima – 13 diciembre 1934, Santiago) fue un destacado poeta peruano conocido como “El Cantor de América” y considerado uno de los más importantes en el modernismo hispanoamericano. Nació en Lima en plena ocupación chilena y, a los 20 años, fue encarcelado por participar en movimientos subversivos contra Andrés A. Cáceres. Tras ser liberado en 1895, publicó obras como Iras santas, En la aldea, Azahares, Selva virgen y La epopeya del Morro, destacando por su virtuosismo formal. Su colección Alma América (1906), con prólogo de Unamuno, buscaba retratar el “alma” de América para distinguirla del afinesamiento de Rubén Darío. Su estética, rica en color, ritmo y referencias al paisaje americano lo define como un mundonovista. Trabajó como diplomático en Colombia, España, Guatemala y México, y fue consejero de líderes como Pancho Villa, Estrada Cabrera y amistó con Woodrow Wilson. En 1922 fue nombrado “Poeta de América” y recibió una corona de laureles de oro de manos del presidente Augusto B. Leguía. En 1925, luego de un altercado con el periodista Edwin Elmore, Chocano le disparó en el diario El Comercio, provocando su muerte; fue sentenciado, pero pasó solo dos o tres años en prisión. En 1934, fue apuñalado en un tranvía por un hombre que afirmaba buscar un tesoro con él. El agresor, diagnosticado con esquizofrenia paranoide, fue internado en un manicomio, mientras Chocano murió casi al instante de la herida. En 1965, sus restos fueron repatriados a Lima y enterrados “de pie en un metro cuadrado”, como había solicitado poéticamente. Obras representativas: Iras santas, En la aldea 1895. Debut lírico. Azahares 1896. Poesía amatoria. La epopeya del Morro 1899. Poema histórico sobre la batalla de Arica. Alma América 1906. Declaración de identidad americana, prólogo de Unamuno.Fiat Lux! 1908. Recopilación acompañada por Rubén Darío.Primicias de Oro de Indias 1934. Última obra póstuma. Fue un pionero del modernismo americano, privilegiando temas nacionales frente al parnasianismo europeo. Su poesía, marcada por la grandilocuencia y el color, influenció a figuras como Pablo Neruda (Canto General) y poetas nicaragüenses. Su fama popular llegó a igualar la de Ricardo Palma en su época, aunque críticas posteriores destacaron la evolución hacia César Vallejo. José Santos Chocano fue un poeta magnífico y complejo: su lírica épica definió una voz nueva para América Latina, pero su vida estuvo marcada por la pasión, el poder y la violencia. Hoy perdura como una figura imprescindible del modernismo, testimonio de la ambición y los conflictos del continente.

Nombreux sont ceux qui n'aiment pas le changement. L'ancien président américain Woodrow Wilson a dit : «Si vous voulez vous faire des ennemis, essayez de changer quelque chose. » Souvent, quand nous en avons assez d'une certaine situation, nous nous impatientons et nous prions : « Seigneur, il faut que ça change ! » Et quand Dieu essaie d'amener du changement dans nos vies, nous nous écrions : « Seigneur, que fais-tu ? Je ne pense pas pouvoir faire face à ce changement ! » Nous sommes tiraillés entre le désir et la peur du changement. Dieu merci, lui ne change jamais. Parce qu'il est toujours le même, nous pouvons nous appuyer sur lui dans toutes les périodes de changement (voir Hébreux 13:8, Malachie 3:6). Cette assurance devrait nous encourager et nous réconforter. Nous n'avons pas à craindre le changement ; nous sommes capables d'y faire face, parce que Dieu demeure le même. Père, je suis vraiment reconnaissant de ne pas avoir à appréhender le changement. Toi tu restes toujours le même et tu es ma haute tour. Je me tiens sur le fondement solide de ta Parole et je demeurerai dans la paix, même si tout change autour de moi. — Êtes-vous prêt à aller plus loin ?

Varieties of Abundance: https://www.niskanencenter.org/abundance-varieties/PDF Version: https://www.niskanencenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Varieties-of-Abundance.pdfRealignment Newsletter: https://therealignment.substack.com/Realignment Bookshop: https://bookshop.org/shop/therealignmentEmail the Show: realignmentpod@gmail.comSteve Teles, Senior Fellow at the Niskanen Center, returns to The Realignment. Ahead of next week's 2025 Abundance in DC, Marshall and Steve discuss his new Niskanen Center paper on "The Varieties of Abundance." In Steve's telling, despite broad agreement within the Abundance movement on the need to increase supply, challenge existing incumbents who benefit from scarcity, and the critical role of enhanced state capacity in addressing America's challenges, there are existing and potential varieties of Abundance across the ideological and geographic spectrums. Just as the late 19th- and early 20th-century Progressive Movement held a shared critique of the industrial-era American state, different actors took the project in different directions. Theodore Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, and Woodrow Wilson were all progressives, but operated in separate camps. In Steve's telling, abundance is already operating accordingly. In the paper, he identifies six varieties of Abundance: Red Plenty, Cascadian Abundance, Liberal Abundance, Moderate-Abundance Synthesis, Abundance Dynamism, and Dark Abundance. The aim of the paper is not to be overly inside-baseball, but to offer readers and listeners a framework for understanding the diversity of actors, institutions, and ideologies that have positively engaged with the Abundance framework. 

This Day in Legal History: Organic Act Establishes the National Park ServiceOn August 25, 1916, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Organic Act, formally establishing the National Park Service (NPS) as a federal bureau within the Department of the Interior. This act marked a foundational moment in U.S. environmental and administrative law, as it created a centralized agency responsible for protecting and managing the country's growing number of national parks and monuments. Prior to this, national parks were overseen in a disjointed manner by various federal departments, often with limited resources or clear guidance. The Organic Act provided legal authority for the NPS to “conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein,” while ensuring they remained “unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.”This statutory language introduced a lasting legal standard—the dual mandate of conservation and public enjoyment—that has guided U.S. park policy ever since. The law empowered the federal government to enforce regulations, manage visitor access, and develop infrastructure while preserving natural and cultural resources. Over time, this act laid the groundwork for the modern administrative state's role in environmental regulation. It also reflected an early recognition that public land could and should serve both ecological and civic functions.The NPS Organic Act helped inspire future legislation, including the Wilderness Act of 1964 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. It also fueled legal debates around resource extraction, tribal land claims, and federalism. With the stroke of Wilson's pen, the United States committed itself to a legal philosophy of stewardship, enshrining the idea that public lands are a shared national trust. This day in legal history commemorates the birth of a legal and cultural institution that continues to shape American land use and environmental governance.Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom advised Intel Corp. in securing an $8.9 billion government investment deal, which includes granting the U.S. a 10% equity stake in the chipmaker. The agreement, announced by President Trump, comes months after Skadden and eight other major law firms pledged nearly $1 billion in free legal services in coordination with the White House. These services support causes such as veterans' advocacy, fighting antisemitism, and promoting justice system fairness. The firms reportedly entered the arrangement, in part, to avoid being targeted by executive orders that had been used against competitors.Skadden's role reflects its ongoing alignment with the administration's industrial and legal policy efforts, particularly as Intel seeks revitalization. The Federal Circuit also recently ruled that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) wrongly dismissed one of Intel's patent invalidity arguments against a competitor, bolstering Intel's broader legal position. Separately, Kirkland & Ellis, another participating firm, has been involved in U.S. trade negotiations with Japan and Korea, facilitated by Trump adviser Boris Epshteyn. The president has indicated he may rely further on these firms for legal matters related to tariffs, coal, and defense of law enforcement. Skadden's leadership emphasized internally that the firm retains full autonomy in client and case decisions.Skadden Steers Intel in Deal With Trump to Boost ChipmakerKilmar Abrego, a 30-year-old migrant whose wrongful deportation to El Salvador had made national headlines, was detained again by U.S. immigration authorities in Baltimore just days after being released from criminal custody in Tennessee. His 2019 asylum protections had barred deportation to El Salvador due to threats from gangs, but he was nonetheless removed in March in what officials later admitted was an “administrative error.” After months in a harsh Salvadoran prison, he was brought back to the U.S. in June to face criminal charges for transporting undocumented migrants, to which he has pleaded not guilty.Upon checking in with ICE in Baltimore, Abrego was arrested again and is now facing possible deportation—this time to Uganda, a country with no connection to him. U.S. officials have reportedly offered Costa Rica as a destination if he agrees to a guilty plea, but without that, Uganda remains the likely alternative, a move his legal team argues is unconstitutional and coercive. His lawyer described the tactic as the government using “Costa Rica as a carrot and Uganda as a stick.”Abrego has filed a federal lawsuit to prevent deportation without judicial review and is currently protected by a Maryland court order requiring 72-hour notice before any removal to a third country. His legal team is also seeking to dismiss the federal charges, alleging selective and retaliatory prosecution tied to his earlier challenge of the unlawful deportation. A Tennessee federal judge previously found him neither a flight risk nor a public threat, supporting his release. The case continues to spotlight the legal complexities and rights violations emerging under the Trump administration's immigration policies.Wrongly deported migrant Abrego again detained by US immigration officials | ReutersA U.S. federal judge has blocked President Donald Trump's administration from withholding federal funds from over 30 sanctuary cities and counties, including Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago, and Baltimore. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge William Orrick, expands a previous injunction from April that protected 16 jurisdictions. These cities had challenged two executive orders signed by Trump earlier in the year, arguing they unlawfully threatened to strip funding unless local authorities cooperated with federal immigration enforcement.Sanctuary jurisdictions typically limit how much local police assist with federal civil immigration arrests. Judge Orrick ruled that the executive orders posed an unconstitutional, coercive threat by conditioning federal funding on compliance with federal immigration preferences. His new order extends protections to additional cities that recently joined the lawsuit. He emphasized that any further actions or executive orders pursuing the same goal are likewise blocked under his injunction.The Trump administration had already appealed the earlier ruling, and the White House has not commented on the latest expansion. Separately, California Governor Gavin Newsom is suing over Trump's deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles following protests related to federal immigration enforcement.Judge blocks Trump from withholding funds from Los Angeles, other sanctuary cities | ReutersA recent legal dispute between Apple and medical device maker Masimo is testing the boundaries of U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) authority in enforcing patent-related import bans. The case began when CBP seized five Apple Watches in Chicago due to an International Trade Commission (ITC) exclusion order, issued after Masimo successfully argued that Apple's blood-oxygen sensor infringed its patents. However, CBP later approved Apple's software workaround—which shifts blood-oxygen processing to a paired iPhone—without notifying Masimo, prompting the company to sue.Masimo argues CBP overstepped its enforcement role by effectively ruling on a patent dispute without an adversarial process, thereby undermining the ITC's authority. The lawsuit claims the workaround still infringes under the "doctrine of equivalents," which treats minor design changes as infringing if they achieve substantially the same result. Legal experts note that CBP is not equipped to handle complex questions of indirect or contributory infringement, which could occur when a product only violates a patent when used in combination with another device.The case raises due process concerns, especially as CBP's later ruling was issued ex parte—without Masimo's input—despite an earlier inter partes process. Legal observers see this as part of a larger structural flaw in how CBP and the ITC coordinate enforcement of exclusion orders. The ITC has acknowledged the lawsuit and may intervene, signaling that the dispute could influence broader agency practices. If successful, Masimo could seek enforcement penalties from the ITC, potentially up to $100,000 per day. This litigation follows a rare legal path similar to a 2013 Microsoft case against CBP that ended in settlement.Apple Watch Import Ban Work-Around Suit Tests Customs' IP Role This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Tom Cock interviews Megan Gorman, author of All the President's Money, exploring how U.S. presidents have handled their personal finances and the lessons investors can take from their successes and failures. Gorman shares stories of leaders from George Washington to Ronald Reagan, Eisenhower, Nixon, and Clinton, illustrating how factors like marriage, frugality, grit, emotional control, and adaptability shaped their financial outcomes. She notes that while the basic principles of money management haven't changed since Washington's time, achieving the American dream has become harder. The conversation touches on how some presidents leveraged post-office opportunities, the ethics of political financial activity, and the importance of aligned values in relationships for financial success. 0:05 Tom introduces Megan Gorman and her book All the President's Money 1:16 Is there a link between being a good president and good with money? 2:16 Warren G. Harding as a bad president but skilled entrepreneur 3:22 Biggest lessons from presidents' finances—marrying up and aligning values 5:56 Trump marriages and shared transactional values 6:15 How presidents historically made their money—land speculation, inheritance, entrepreneurship 8:40 Nixon's failed frozen juice business and debt repayment 10:43 Eisenhower's emotional control, poker skills, and marrying up 12:43 Gerald Ford as the master of the post-presidency pivot into celebrity and corporate roles 15:12 Debate over financial conflicts for presidents and members of Congress 17:13 Clinton financial evolution from poor money management to high net worth 19:38 The role of grit—Herbert Hoover's rise from orphan to wealthy mining engineer 21:39 Woodrow Wilson's lack of hustle contrasted with other hard-working presidents 22:30 Biggest takeaway—financial principles haven't changed, but the American dream is harder to achieve today Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Brad Zerbo presents his 2020 documentary on Edward Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud and the architect of modern propaganda. The episode traces Bernays' influence on everything from breakfast culture to political manipulation, showing how his tactics, like using trusted professionals to sell ideas, still shape society today. Viewers learn how Bernays applied group psychology, staged public spectacles, and even advised U.S. presidents to sway public opinion, including his role on Woodrow Wilson's Committee on Public Information during WWI. Brad connects these historical strategies to present-day media manipulation, political division, and social engineering, arguing that understanding Bernays' blueprint is key to dismantling the propaganda machine controlling public perception.

Was Woodrow Wilson a visionary statesman—or a reactionary bigot? Peter Robinson sits down with historian and former SEC Chairman Christopher Cox to discuss his latest book, Woodrow Wilson: The Light Withdrawn, Cox's meticulously researched biography of the 28th president of the United States. Together, they explore Wilson's complicated legacy: his towering achievements as a reformer and wartime leader and his deeply troubling record on race, gender, and civil rights. From his opposition to women's suffrage and his resegregation of the federal government to his embrace of the film, The Birth of a Nation, Cox reveals how Wilson's Southern upbringing and elitist worldview shaped both his presidency and progressivism itself. This conversation offers a sobering reappraisal of one of America's most consequential and controversial leaders—and asks what it means to judge historical figures by the standards of both their time and ours.

En el verano de 1916, la costa de Nueva Jersey se convirtió en escenario de un serial de ataque de tiburones que sembraron el pánico, no solo en el este del país, sino en todo Estados Unidos. Fueron 12 días continuados donde murieron cuatro personas y una resultó gravemente herida. Incluso en aguas dulces como las del tío Matawan, donde no se esperaba presencia de estos depredadores, sucedieron estos ataques. El siguiente paso fue una caza masiva de tiburones bajo el respaldo del presidente Woodrow Wilson. Esa historia colectiva y los ataques, derivaron en la enorme producción cultural posterior en blockbusters como “Tiburón” de Steven Spielberg. Y descubre más historias curiosas en el canal National Geographic y en Disney +. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In our second hour, we reflect on the historical "autopen" example of Woodrow Wilson, and we talk to our own Jeff Katz about local news stories. . . .

In Part 2 of our special series Outrage on the Mic, we go back in time to explore how public outrage has shaped societies long before the digital age. David Beckemeyer is joined by Outrageous History! host Ernest Granson, who brings his journalist's eye to scandals, uprisings, and media-fueled conflicts from the French Revolution to the Spanish-American War.Whether you're a history nerd, media critic, or just trying to make sense of today's outrage culture, this episode is for you.Text me your feedback and leave your contact info if you'd like a reply (this is a one-way text). Thanks, DavidSupport the showShow Notes:https://outrageoverload.net/ Follow me, David Beckemeyer, on Twitter @mrblog or email outrageoverload@gmail.com. Follow the show on Twitter @OutrageOverload or Instagram @OutrageOverload. We are also on Facebook /OutrageOverload.HOTLINE: 925-552-7885Got a Question, comment or just thoughts you'd like to share? Call the O2 hotline and leave a message and you could be featured in an upcoming episodeIf you would like to help the show, you can contribute here. Tell everyone you know about the show. That's the best way to support it.Rate and Review the show on Podchaser: https://www.podchaser.com/OutrageOverload Intro music and outro music by Michael Ramir C.Many thanks to my co-editor and co-director, Austin Chen.

The United States and the Origins of World War II in Europe (Taylor & Francis, 2025), spans 1914–1939 to provide a concise interpretation of the role the United States played in the origins of the Second World War. It synthesizes recent scholarship about interwar international politics while also presenting an original interpretation of the sources of American policy. The book shows how the drive for international reform, beginning with Woodrow Wilson, reflected both America's unusual power and its fears about maintaining its domestic freedoms in a world dominated by arms races and the threat of war. The American desire to reform or to escape from the existing international system reshaped Europe's balance of power from 1914 to 1929, leaving it precarious and unlikely to produce lasting stability. America's power continued to loom globally in the 1930s, as first its isolationism and, after 1938, its open hostility toward Germany and Japan influenced the policies of the West and of Hitler. The coda at the end of the volume analyzes how the United States affected the strategic choices made by Great Britain, Nazi Germany, and Japan from 1939 to 1941 that globalized the conflict. This book will appeal to undergraduate and graduate students in history and political science, especially courses focused on World War II and the history of U.S. foreign relations. Guest: Ross A. Kennedy (he/him), is a Professor of History and Chair at Illinois State University. He is the author of The Will to Believe: Woodrow Wilson, World War I, and America's Strategy for Peace and Security (2009) as well as numerous other publications on the First World War. Host: Jenna Pittman (she/her), a Ph.D. student in the Department of History at Duke University. She studies modern European history, political economy, and Germany from 1945-1990. Scholars@Duke: https://scholars.duke.edu/pers... Linktree: https://linktr.ee/jennapittman 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

The United States and the Origins of World War II in Europe (Taylor & Francis, 2025), spans 1914–1939 to provide a concise interpretation of the role the United States played in the origins of the Second World War. It synthesizes recent scholarship about interwar international politics while also presenting an original interpretation of the sources of American policy. The book shows how the drive for international reform, beginning with Woodrow Wilson, reflected both America's unusual power and its fears about maintaining its domestic freedoms in a world dominated by arms races and the threat of war. The American desire to reform or to escape from the existing international system reshaped Europe's balance of power from 1914 to 1929, leaving it precarious and unlikely to produce lasting stability. America's power continued to loom globally in the 1930s, as first its isolationism and, after 1938, its open hostility toward Germany and Japan influenced the policies of the West and of Hitler. The coda at the end of the volume analyzes how the United States affected the strategic choices made by Great Britain, Nazi Germany, and Japan from 1939 to 1941 that globalized the conflict. This book will appeal to undergraduate and graduate students in history and political science, especially courses focused on World War II and the history of U.S. foreign relations. Guest: Ross A. Kennedy (he/him), is a Professor of History and Chair at Illinois State University. He is the author of The Will to Believe: Woodrow Wilson, World War I, and America's Strategy for Peace and Security (2009) as well as numerous other publications on the First World War. Host: Jenna Pittman (she/her), a Ph.D. student in the Department of History at Duke University. She studies modern European history, political economy, and Germany from 1945-1990. Scholars@Duke: https://scholars.duke.edu/pers... Linktree: https://linktr.ee/jennapittman Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

The United States and the Origins of World War II in Europe (Taylor & Francis, 2025), spans 1914–1939 to provide a concise interpretation of the role the United States played in the origins of the Second World War. It synthesizes recent scholarship about interwar international politics while also presenting an original interpretation of the sources of American policy. The book shows how the drive for international reform, beginning with Woodrow Wilson, reflected both America's unusual power and its fears about maintaining its domestic freedoms in a world dominated by arms races and the threat of war. The American desire to reform or to escape from the existing international system reshaped Europe's balance of power from 1914 to 1929, leaving it precarious and unlikely to produce lasting stability. America's power continued to loom globally in the 1930s, as first its isolationism and, after 1938, its open hostility toward Germany and Japan influenced the policies of the West and of Hitler. The coda at the end of the volume analyzes how the United States affected the strategic choices made by Great Britain, Nazi Germany, and Japan from 1939 to 1941 that globalized the conflict. This book will appeal to undergraduate and graduate students in history and political science, especially courses focused on World War II and the history of U.S. foreign relations. Guest: Ross A. Kennedy (he/him), is a Professor of History and Chair at Illinois State University. He is the author of The Will to Believe: Woodrow Wilson, World War I, and America's Strategy for Peace and Security (2009) as well as numerous other publications on the First World War. Host: Jenna Pittman (she/her), a Ph.D. student in the Department of History at Duke University. She studies modern European history, political economy, and Germany from 1945-1990. Scholars@Duke: https://scholars.duke.edu/pers... Linktree: https://linktr.ee/jennapittman Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

The United States and the Origins of World War II in Europe (Taylor & Francis, 2025), spans 1914–1939 to provide a concise interpretation of the role the United States played in the origins of the Second World War. It synthesizes recent scholarship about interwar international politics while also presenting an original interpretation of the sources of American policy. The book shows how the drive for international reform, beginning with Woodrow Wilson, reflected both America's unusual power and its fears about maintaining its domestic freedoms in a world dominated by arms races and the threat of war. The American desire to reform or to escape from the existing international system reshaped Europe's balance of power from 1914 to 1929, leaving it precarious and unlikely to produce lasting stability. America's power continued to loom globally in the 1930s, as first its isolationism and, after 1938, its open hostility toward Germany and Japan influenced the policies of the West and of Hitler. The coda at the end of the volume analyzes how the United States affected the strategic choices made by Great Britain, Nazi Germany, and Japan from 1939 to 1941 that globalized the conflict. This book will appeal to undergraduate and graduate students in history and political science, especially courses focused on World War II and the history of U.S. foreign relations. Guest: Ross A. Kennedy (he/him), is a Professor of History and Chair at Illinois State University. He is the author of The Will to Believe: Woodrow Wilson, World War I, and America's Strategy for Peace and Security (2009) as well as numerous other publications on the First World War. Host: Jenna Pittman (she/her), a Ph.D. student in the Department of History at Duke University. She studies modern European history, political economy, and Germany from 1945-1990. Scholars@Duke: https://scholars.duke.edu/pers... Linktree: https://linktr.ee/jennapittman Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

In this episode – recorded prior to Trump's announcement of a ceasefire between Iran and Israel – Calvin and Alex unpack the alarming reality of US strikes on Iran, recently announced by President Trump on June 21, and the ensuing escalation of tensions between the US, Israel, and Iran. We situate these recent events within decades of neoconservative influence and prior escalations, including the 2020 assassination of Qasem Soleimani by US Forces (which we covered back in Episode 31), as well as Israel's “pre-emptive” strikes against Iran in 2024 and earlier in June 2025.We historicize the current conflict by highlighting the success of the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal (JCPOA) in preventing escalation, contrasting it with Trump's abandonment and the Democrats' failure to defend it, and debunk media narratives about Iran's nuclear ambitions, confirming Iran's compliance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). We then dissect the propagandistic pro-war rhetoric that has been employed most recently, such as Trump's bizarre Truth Social posts announcing the "very successful attack," and exposing the dangerous slippages between US and Israeli foreign policy, evidenced by Senator Ted Cruz's admissions on a recent episode of Tucker Carlson's show.Finally, drawing on rhetorical scholars such as Jeffrey Tulis and Gordon Mitchell, we explore the libidinal urges driving contemporary presidential rhetoric and US war policy, and how intelligence is manipulated through "Team B intelligence coups," raising concerns about reliance on foreign intelligence like the Mossad. We conclude with a resolute call (echoing our earlier episode) for "No war with Iran," urging public dissent against these increasingly reckless and dangerous decisions.Works and concepts cited in this episode:Curtis, A. (2002). The Century of the Self. London, UK: BBC Four.Daly, C. (2017). How Woodrow Wilson's Propaganda Machine Changed American Journalism. Smithsonian Magazine. Esfandiari, S. (2020, 6 Jan.). Iran can't hit back over Soleimani's killing because America has only fictional heroes like SpongeBob SquarePants, a prominent cleric said. Business Insider.Flanagan, J. C. (2004). Woodrow Wilson's" Rhetorical Restructuring": The Transformation of the American Self and the Construction of the German Enemy. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 7(2), 115-148.Haar, R. (2010). Explaining George W. Bush's adoption of the Neoconservative agenda after 9/11. Politics & Policy, 38(5), 965-990.IAEA Director General. (2024, 19 Nov.). Verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015). [IAEA report raising concerns about Iran's stockpile of “60% enriched” uranium]Mitchell, G. R. (2006). Team B intelligence coups. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 92(2), 144-173.Oddo, J. (2014). Intertextuality and the 24-hour news cycle: A day in the rhetorical life of Colin Powell's UN address. Michigan State University Press.Perelman, C. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Trans. John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver. University of Notre Dame Press.Porter, G. (2014, 16 Oct.). When the Ayatollah said no to nukes. Foreign Policy.Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon.Tulis, J. K. (1987, 2017). The Rhetorical Presidency. Princeton University Press.

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for June 14, 2025 is: vexillology • vek-suh-LAH-luh-jee • noun Vexillology is the study of flags. // An expert in vexillology, Cynthia has an impressive collection of flags displayed in her home. See the entry > Examples: "... flags should have simple elements, a limited number of colors, and no words. One of the tenets of vexillology is that the elements of the flag should be simple enough to be easily drawn by a child." — The Toledo (Ohio) Blade, 9 Jan. 2025 Did you know? "The flag is the embodiment, not of sentiment, but of history." Woodrow Wilson was speaking of the U.S. flag when he made that statement in an address in June of 1915, but those who engage in vexillology—that is, vexillologists—would likely find the comment applicable to any national banner. Vexillologists undertake scholarly investigations of flags, producing papers with titles such as "A Review of the Changing Proportions of Rectangular Flags since Medieval Times, and Some Suggestions for the Future." In the late 1950s, they coined vexillology as a name for their field of research, basing it on vexillum, the Latin term for a square flag or banner of the ancient Roman cavalry. The adjectives vexillologic and vexillological and the noun vexillologist followed soon thereafter.

Father's Day, as celebrated in the United States, largely originated from the efforts of Sonora Smart Dodd of Spokane, Washington. Inspired by a Mother's Day sermon in 1909 and wanting to honor her own father, a Civil War veteran who raised six children as a single parent, Dodd campaigned for a similar observance for fathers. The first Father's Day celebration was held on June 19, 1910, in Spokane. While it gained some momentum and presidential support over the years from figures like Woodrow Wilson and Calvin Coolidge, it wasn't until 1972 that President Richard Nixon officially signed it into law, designating the third Sunday in June as a permanent national holiday.We are just three guys with three different takes on life, love, business, sex, and politics. We have different nuanced thoughts and opinions about anything you can think of. But what about you?Apple ✅ Spotify ✅ Pandora ✅ Audible ✅ Wherever you want to listen, we are probably there.Join our TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube Pages below ⬇️⬇️⬇️TikTokFacebookInstagramYouTubeDonate to the Podcast! Click the link for more info! https://bit.ly/3i6mGAJMusic by Wataboi from Pixabay Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/kingly-conversations/donations

Una presidencia sin presidente. Un suicidio sin verdugo. Un sistema que gobierna sin rostro… y ejecuta sin dejar huella.(Primer Tema – Minuto 00:00)

It's Thursday, June 5th, A.D. 2025. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 140 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Jonathan Clark and Adam McManus Christian groups in India to speak out against persecution June 9 Christian groups across India are organizing a protest against persecution of Christians on Monday, June 9. The National Christian Front noted, “Our Christian brothers and sisters are enduring brutal attacks and growing intolerance from anti-social elements. This is not merely a Christian issue — it is a grave concern for humanity, for peace, and for the values enshrined in our Constitution.” Christians suffered over 600 incidents of violence and discrimination in India last year. The country is ranked 11th on the Open Doors' World Watch List of most difficult places to be a Christian. U.K. Christian groups calling for prayer on June 11 In the United the Kingdom, Christian groups are calling for a day of prayer on Wednesday, June 11 for protecting human life. This comes as lawmakers are considering bills to legalize assisted suicide.  Listen to comments from Ciarán Kelly, director of The Christian Institute.  KELLY: “This is a crucial time for our country. So, it's vital that Christians are asking the God, Who made Heaven and Earth, that He would overrule in all these things, to protect vulnerable people from this careless and callous bill.” In 1 Timothy 1:1-2, the Apostle Paul wrote, “I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence.” Trump overturns pro-abortion Biden rule In the United States, the Trump administration rescinded a pro-abortion rule on Tuesday that came from the Biden administration.  The rule tried to force hospital emergency rooms to offer abortions even if the state restricted them.  Matt Bowman, Senior Counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom, said, “Doctors—especially in emergency rooms—are tasked with preserving life. The Trump administration has rolled back a harmful Biden-era mandate that compelled doctors to end unborn lives, in violation of their deeply held beliefs.” Trump raises tariffs on steel imports President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday to raise tariffs on steel imports. The order doubles tariffs on steel and aluminum coming into the country from 25% to 50%. The levy will affect steel exporters in Canada, Mexico, and many countries in Europe. However, the tariff on steel from the United Kingdom remains at 25% as the U.S. and U.K. work out a trade deal.  Dust from Africa's Saharan Desert hits America Over the weekend, a massive plume of dust made its way to Florida all the way from the Saharan Desert in Africa.  Such dust plumes are known as the Saharan Air Layer and typically cross the Atlantic each year. The current plume is the biggest one to reach the U.S. so far this season. It measures nearly 2,000 miles wide and 750 miles from north to south.  The dust can diminish air quality but also creates spectacular sunrises and sunsets.  Only 1 in 100 Evangelical pastors leave ministry annually A report from Lifeway Research found that only 1 out of 100 Evangelical pastors leave the ministry each year.  This low rate has remained steady for the last 10 years despite many pastors acknowledging their work is very demanding and even overwhelming.  Scott McConnell with Lifeway Research said, “The rate of pastors departing the pastorate is steady and quite low given the demands of the role. Many of those leaving the pastorate feel they are moving at God's direction to another role of ministry.” In 2 Timothy 4:2, the Apostle Paul wrote, “Preach the Word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.” The American Miracle movie shows God's intervention in U.S. The Left insists that there's nothing special about America. But a new docudrama contends that God inspired its founding.  The American Miracle – Our Nation is No Accident hits the silver screen in 1,000 theaters nationwide for 3 days only -- Monday, June 9th through Wednesday, June 11th. Inspired by Michael Medved's bestseller, this exciting, entertaining, and edifying motion picture experience was created in anticipation of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.  ‘ Medved appeared on The 700 Club. MEDVED: “America is no accident. All of our most important leaders, from Washington to Lincoln to Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt -- all of our leaders have understood that America has a divine purpose.” Consider God's protection of George Washington – the Father of our Country -- in a ferocious battle in 1755 during the French and Indian War. During the Battle of Monongahela, 69 of 70 officers were either killed or wounded. Washington was the only officer who was not shot off his horse.  In fact, two horses were shot from underneath him. Yet he lived. Even a Native American chief later said they couldn't touch Washington. Shockingly, after the battle, he found numerous bullet holes in his jacket and bullet fragments in his hair, but he was miraculously unscathed. No wonder they called him “Bulletproof.”  Visit the website https://americanmiraclemovie.com/, watch the trailer, click on Tickets, and type in your zipcode to get tickets for next week at a theater near you. Watch the trailer. Worldview listener in Florida speaks up On Wednesday, I was delighted to receive 23 emails at Adam@TheWorldview.com about what listeners enjoy about this newscast. Amy Cool from St. Cloud, Florida wrote, “I like that I can trust The Worldview newscast to report the truth from a Biblical perspective. I like the Scriptures referenced as they pertain to a particular story because it shows the relevance of the Bible to our life today. That's often hard for people to see when they haven't grown up in a home where the Bible was read or explained.” 14 Worldview listeners gave $1,420 to fund our $123,500 annual budget Toward this week's $30,875 goal to fund one-fourth of The Worldview newscast's annual budget by this Friday, June 6th, 14 listeners stepped up to the plate on Wednesday by 7:15pm Central last night.  Our thanks to Grace in Duncanville, Texas, Greg in Rochester, New Hampshire, Andy in Santa Barbara, California, and George in Carrollton, Missouri – each of whom gave $25. We also appreciate Jalynn in Sapulpa, Oklahoma, Jon in Granger, Indiana, and Steven in Jacksonville, Florida – each of whom gave $50. We're grateful to God for Nancy in Peabody, Massachusetts, Kevin in North Bend, Oregon, and Robert in Plano, Texas – each of whom gave $100. And we appreciate the generosity of Paula in Breaux Bridge, Louisiana who pledged $10/month for 12 months for a gift of $120, Dawn in Troy, Montana who gave $150, Amy in Seminole, Texas who gave $300, and Dawn in Smithville, Texas who pledged $25/month for 12 months for a gift of $300. Those 14 listeners gave a total of $1,420. Ready for our new grand total? Drum roll please.  (Drum roll sound effect) $6,352 (People clapping sound effect)  We missed our goal of 20 donors by just 6 donors. That means by this Friday, we still need to raise $24,523.    Whether it's Thanksgiving or Christmas, we churn out a weekday broadcast 52 weeks per year. It's a commitment we're glad to make, but we need help to cover the cost. Would you prayerfully consider investing $100 per month for 12 months into this ministry, helping to pay for the work of the six-member Worldview team?  If 20 of you made that pledge we would hit our Friday, June 6th goal one day early. Just go to TheWorldview.com and click on Give on the top right.   And click on the button that indicates a recurring donation if you want to give monthly. Thanks for investing your resources into this media ministry that champions the truth.  Our plumbline is Jesus Christ Himself. Close And that's The Worldview on this Thursday, June 5th, in the year of our Lord 2025. Subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

In 1913, Woodrow Wilson entered the White House, ready to fulfill his promise of a “New Freedom.” It was a vision of domestic reform that aimed to wrest power away from special interests and expand economic opportunities to all. Over the next two years, he fought for lower tariffs, banking reform, and antitrust laws.But the outbreak of war in Europe threatened to derail his agenda. As America moved closer to the brink of intervention, Progressives wondered whether war would reenergize their movement, or destroy it once and for all.Be the first to know about Wondery's newest podcasts, curated recommendations, and more! Sign up now at https://wondery.fm/wonderynewsletterListen to American History Tellers on the Wondery App or wherever you get your podcasts. Experience all episodes ad-free and be the first to binge the newest season. Unlock exclusive early access by joining Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Start your free trial today by visiting wondery.com/links/american-history-tellers/ now.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This Day in Legal History: National Defense ActOn June 3, 1916, President Woodrow Wilson signed the National Defense Act into law, marking a major shift in American military and legal policy. Passed amid growing tensions related to World War I, the Act dramatically expanded the U.S. Army and strengthened the National Guard, officially integrating it as the Army's primary reserve force. It increased the size of the Regular Army to over 175,000 soldiers and provided for a National Guard force of over 400,000 when fully mobilized. The law also created the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC), formalizing military education at civilian colleges and universities across the country.Crucially, the Act clarified federal authority over the National Guard, requiring units to conform to federal training standards and granting the president the power to mobilize them for national emergencies. This federalization of a traditionally state-controlled force marked a significant legal development in the balance between state and federal military power. It addressed long-standing constitutional ambiguities surrounding the militia clauses and reflected evolving views of national defense in a modern industrial society.The Act emerged from broader preparedness debates within the U.S. political and legal spheres, balancing isolationist tendencies with the perceived need for greater military readiness. Though the U.S. would not enter World War I until 1917, the National Defense Act of 1916 laid essential legal groundwork for rapid mobilization. It remains a foundational statute for the structure of the modern U.S. military.The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear two significant Second Amendment challenges involving bans on assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines in Maryland and Rhode Island. By refusing the appeals, the Court left in place lower court rulings upholding the restrictions. Maryland's law, enacted after the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting, bans certain semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15, while Rhode Island's 2022 law prohibits magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Plaintiffs in both cases argued that these weapons and accessories are commonly owned by law-abiding citizens and thus protected by the Constitution.The Court's conservative bloc showed signs of division. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissented, indicating they would have reviewed the bans. Justice Kavanaugh did not dissent but issued a statement expressing openness to hearing similar cases in the future, suggesting that the Court would eventually need to rule on whether AR-15s are constitutionally protected.Lower courts rejected the challenges based on the weapons' military-style design and their use in mass killings, reasoning that they are not suitable for self-defense and thus fall outside Second Amendment protection. The challengers contended that these laws ignore the Court's prior rulings on weapons in “common use.” Despite recent decisions expanding gun rights, the justices allowed these bans to stand for now.US Supreme Court won't review assault weapon, high-capacity magazine bans | ReutersThree federal lawsuits filed on June 2, 2025, allege that major class action settlement administrators and two banks engaged in a kickback scheme that siphoned funds away from class members. The suits, brought in New York, Florida, and California, accuse Epiq Solutions, Angeion Group, and JND Legal Administration of securing illicit payments from Huntington National Bank and Western Alliance Bank in exchange for directing large volumes of settlement deposits to them. In return, the administrators allegedly received a share of the banks' profits.Plaintiffs claim the scheme dates back years and coincided with rising interest rates in 2021, which increased the potential value of settlement fund deposits. According to the lawsuits, administrators threatened to stop using the banks unless they shared profits. As a result, class members allegedly received lower payouts due to below-market interest rates on their settlement funds.Together, the defendant banks are said to control over 80% of the U.S. settlement fund market, while the administrators manage over 65% of class action services. The plaintiffs argue this arrangement violated U.S. antitrust law by reducing competition and fixing prices. JND and Western Alliance have denied wrongdoing, calling the claims baseless or inaccurate. Huntington declined to comment, and other parties have yet to respond.Class action administrators, banks accused of kickback scheme in new lawsuits | ReutersMy column for Bloomberg this week looks at Spain's proposed 100% tax on non-EU homebuyers, introduced as a bold fix for the country's deepening housing crisis. The government is responding to surging public frustration over exploding rents—up more than 60% in Barcelona in five years—and the sense that local housing is being turned into an asset class for absentee owners. But while the policy grabs attention, I argue it misses the real target. The problem isn't who owns the homes—it's how those homes are being used. A blanket nationality-based tax is a blunt instrument that's economically ineffective, legally risky under EU and international law, and symbolically inflammatory.Instead, I suggest a more focused approach: taxing speculative flipping and underutilization directly. A resale tax on homes sold within a short holding period, calibrated by how quickly they're flipped, would discourage fast-moving speculation without penalizing genuine residents or workers. Similarly, a progressive vacancy tax—getting steeper the longer a property remains empty—would address the roughly four million vacant or underused homes across Spain. These tools would pressure banks and investors to put housing back into circulation while raising revenue for public housing initiatives.Critically, these proposals are neutral as to the owner's nationality. Whether a home is owned by a Spanish bank, a Canadian retiree, or a U.S. fund manager, what matters is whether it's being used as shelter or as a sidelined asset. The column makes the case that Spain's housing crisis won't be solved by turning foreign investors into political scapegoats, but by confronting speculative behaviors that choke supply and inflate prices—regardless of the flag the buyer flies. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Edward Mandell House, better known as Colonel House, was a pivotal figure in American politics and diplomacy during World War I, serving as President Woodrow Wilson's closest advisor and confidant from 1913 to 1919. A wealthy Texan, House was a skilled political operator who shunned public office but wielded immense influence behind the scenes. His role during World War I was particularly significant in shaping U.S. foreign policy and Wilson's vision for peace. To discuss House, the World War I Podcast hosted Andrew Phillips, Curator at the Woodrow Wilson Presidential Library and Museum in Staunton, VA.Part 2 of 2Listen to Part I.Learn more about the Woodrow Wilson Presidential Library and Museum.Have a comment about this episode? Send us a text message! (Note: we can read texts, but we cannot respond.) Follow us: Twitter: @MacArthur1880 Amanda Williams on Twitter: @AEWilliamsClark Facebook/Instagram: @MacArthurMemorial www.macarthurmemorial.org

Edward Mandell House, better known as Colonel House, was a pivotal figure in American politics and diplomacy during World War I, serving as President Woodrow Wilson's closest advisor and confidant from 1913 to 1919. A wealthy Texan, House was a skilled political operator who shunned public office but wielded immense influence behind the scenes. His role during World War I was particularly significant in shaping U.S. foreign policy and Wilson's vision for peace. To discuss House, the World War I Podcast hosted Andrew Phillips, Curator at the Woodrow Wilson Presidential Library and Museum in Staunton, VA.Part I of 2Learn more about the Woodrow Wilson Presidential Library and Museum.Have a comment about this episode? Send us a text message! (Note: we can read texts, but we cannot respond.) Follow us: Twitter: @MacArthur1880 Amanda Williams on Twitter: @AEWilliamsClark Facebook/Instagram: @MacArthurMemorial www.macarthurmemorial.org

On Friday's Mark Levin Show, the core difference between conservatives and the modern left lies in their view of the Declaration of Independence, which is a unique, revolutionary document grounded in eternal truths and God-given unalienable rights. The concept of power, as outlined in the Declaration of Independence, is central to the founding of the United States, uniquely vesting sovereignty in the people rather than the government. This power establishes individuals and society—"we the people"—as the ultimate sovereign authority. The nation's structure requires the consent of the governed while protecting individual rights. The left fundamentally rejects the foundational principles of the United States, particularly those rooted in Judeo-Christian values and the Declaration of Independence. Woodrow Wilson was a key figure who dismissed the Declaration's emphasis on unalienable rights, natural law, and divine sovereignty, viewing them as outdated and mystical. This rejection contrasts sharply with the founders' vision of individual and collective sovereignty, which Democrats oppose in favor of a more progressive, secular framework. Later, Douglas Murray calls in to explain that the recent killing of two Israeli Embassy staffers in Washington, D.C., reflects how anti-Israel propaganda, fueled by groups like Qatar and the Iranian Revolutionary Government, is inciting Americans to commit antisemitic violence. This incident is part of a broader wave of antisemitism driven by false narratives about Israel's actions in Gaza, leading to increased violence against Jews. Also, why are federal judges are involved in decisions regarding federal funding for colleges and universities, national security, and immigration policies, which should be handled by the president and the administration. Judges should dismiss such cases, explaining that they lack jurisdiction. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's Tuesday, May 20th, A.D. 2025. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 125 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Kevin Swanson Fulani Muslim killed 15 unarmed Nigerian Christians On Saturday, May 17th, armed Fulani Muslim militia opened fire on Agatu Christians in Benue State, Nigeria, killing 15 unarmed men. Throughout that North Central region, the Fulani have also killed 159 Christian residents over the last 40 days, according to TruthNigeria.com.   Pray for Christians in Nigeria, suffering the most severe violence in the world today. Romania turns left after election interference On Sunday, Romania has taken the centrist-left position with the election of a new president named Nicușor Dan. Dan is supportive of Romania's participation in the European Union, and has made moves to approve the homosexual/transgender movement in his country. The more conservative candidate, George-Nicolae Simion, lost the election in a vote of 54% to 46%. Romania is the second largest Eastern European country by population.  The mainstream media is interpreting this election as an international rejection of the Trump agenda.  The back story is that Călin Georgescu, the conservative in the first round of the Romanian presidential election last December, garnered the most votes among the six presidential candidates at that time. After his opponents claimed that Russia had influenced the election through TikTok accounts, Romanian government officials detained Georgescu, canceled that election, and re-set it for May 18th.  Tens of thousands of Romanians protested in the streets back in March. At the time, Elon Musk said, “They just arrested the person who won the most votes in the Romanian presidential election. This is messed up.” Most and least benevolent countries According to this year's Gallup World Happiness Report, the most benevolent countries in the world, judged by donations and volunteer hours, are Indonesia, the United States, Kenya, Gambia, United Arab Emirates, Ireland, Canada, and New Zealand. The least benevolent countries are Afghanistan, Yemen, Egypt, Jordan, and Morocco.  Biden announces advanced prostate cancer Former President Joe Biden has been diagnosed with an "aggressive form" of prostate cancer that has spread to his bones, reports CBS News. On Sunday, President Trump posted on social media that he and First Lady Melania Trump are "saddened to hear about Joe Biden's recent medical diagnosis." Appearing on MSNBC's “Morning Joe” on Monday, former Obama health advisor Dr. Zeke Emanuel said the cancer is so advanced, he has had it for many years. SCARBOROUGH: “Doesn't it take some time for prostate cancer to develop to a point where it would spread to the bones?” EMANUEL: “He's had this for many years, maybe even a decade, growing there and spreading.” Dr. Emanuel explained how serious Biden's prostate cancer truly is. EMANUEL: “That Gleason score, that score is from 2 up to 10, and he's at a 9. That means that the cancer doesn't look normal. It looks very abnormal.” Appearing on Fox News with Jesse Waters, talk show host Hugh Hewitt was incredulous. HEWITT: “This is the fourth time, in a little over 100 years, that a Democratic president -- Woodrow Wilson, FDR, John F. Kennedy and now Joe Biden, have hidden crucial details about their health as Commander-in-Chief from the American people. Ronald Reagan did not do that. “And it just astonishes me that in a free republic, we have to worry about our leaders telling us whether they're healthy or not.” Supremes allows Trump to revoke protection for thousands of illegal Venezuelans On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling allowing the Trump administration to deport 350,000 Venezuelans who are presently living in the U.S. on what they call a “humanitarian parole,” reports NBC News. Christian camp sues over foolish transgender mandates The State of Colorado is threatening to shut down a Christian Camp called Idrahaje -- short for “I'd Rather Have Jesus.” The Colorado Department of Early Childhood has refused to grant the camp a religious exemption concerning its transgender policies. This would require the camp to allow boys, pretending to be girls, to sleep, shower, and dress with female campers. The camp has sued the state, with representation from Alliance Defending Freedom. The camp disciples 2,500 to 3,000 students each year with the mission to “win souls to Jesus Christ through the spreading of the Gospel.”  Camp Idrahaje has complied with all regulations until this year when the Colorado government officials released new gender identity rules that became effective on February 14, 2025. 96% of atheists embrace homosexual/transgender agenda The most likely group in America to support the homosexual/transgender agenda are atheists with 96% professing support.  By contrast, 70% of white Evangelical Protestants oppose the lifestyle. Psalm 14:1 describes the atheist this way: "The fool has said in his heart, there is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works.” Mother loses right to disciple daughter Liberty Counsel is defending a mother in the state of Maine who has lost the right to guide the religious upbringing of her 11-year-old girl in a custody case.  This includes taking her daughter to Calvary Chapel services on Sunday.   A state district judge has ruled against the mother, citing “The ‘fear mongering,' paranoia, and anxiety taught by Calvary Chapel has, more likely than not, already had an impact on [the daughter's] childhood development.”   Expert testimony concluded that Calvary Chapel is a cult, the church's pastor a “charismatic” speaker, who spoke “authoritatively” in his messages, and that he asserted his messages were objective truth.   Liberty Counsel is appealing the case to the Maine Supreme Court. They still persecute people who preach about Jesus. 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 says, “For you also suffered the same things from your own countrymen, just as they did from the Judeans, who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they do not please God and are contrary to all men, forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved, so as always to fill up the measure of their sins; but wrath has come upon them to the uttermost.” Housing prices sag Since June 2022, housing prices are sagging in some metro areas around the U.S. — 22.8% in the Austin market, 9.9% in the Phoenix market, 9.2% in the San Francisco market, 9.1% in the San Antonio Market, 7.3% in the Denver market, and 6.7% in the Dallas Market. The Consumer Price Index has also risen about 10% over that period of time. Moody's downgraded America's financial rating And finally, in a year-over-year comparison, the U.S. government is still breaking records for fiscal expenditures running 10% over Fiscal Year 2024. Moody's has downgraded the U.S. as a long-term issuer of bonds by one notch, ending a perfect rating for America over the last 108 years.  No longer does the U.S, government get a Aaa rating, the highest level available. Now, it's an Aa1. Moody's noted that the downgrade "reflects the increase over more than a decade in government debt and interest payment ratios to levels that are significantly higher than similarly rated sovereigns.” The rating organization added that: “Successive U.S. administrations and Congress have failed to agree on measures to reverse the trend of large annual fiscal deficits and growing interest costs.”   Another independent rating service, named Fitch, downgraded the United States in 2023.  Close And that's The Worldview on this Tuesday, May 20th, in the year of our Lord 2025. Subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

Former U.S. Congressman Christopher Cox (R-CA), author of "Woodrow Wilson: The Light Withdrawn," takes a critical look at the 28th President of the United States and his attitudes towards racial equality and women's suffrage. Mr. Cox also talks about Wilson's intellectual development and his tenure as president of Princeton University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Former U.S. Congressman Christopher Cox (R-CA), author of "Woodrow Wilson: The Light Withdrawn," takes a critical look at the 28th President of the United States and his attitudes towards racial equality and women's suffrage. Mr. Cox also talks about Wilson's intellectual development and his tenure as president of Princeton University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Entretenir une discussion ininterrompue entre les nations pour assurer la paix du monde, c'est la vocation de l'ONU. Cette Organisation des Nations Unies qui nourrit de grandes attentes et de grandes ambitions, celle qu'on attend au tournant lorsque les feux s'allument en Ukraine, à Gaza ou encore au Darfour. Pourtant, elle n'a pas bonne presse aujourd'hui, justement parce que, depuis la fin de la Guerre froide, les conflits se multiplient. Alors pour cette nouvelle série, Histoire Vivante vous propose d'explorer les premiers pas de l'ONU avec ses grandes ambitions et ses grandes déceptions... L'ONU est inventée en 1945, dans le fracas de la Deuxième guerre mondiale, mais son histoire commence bien avant avec la Première guerre mondiale, lorsque le président états-unien Woodrow Wilson invite les Etats à s'associer pour ne plus jamais verser dans le paroxysme de violence des tranchées. Genève devient capitale de ce concert mondial, d'abord de la Société des Nations et ensuite de l'ONU pour l'Europe. Pierre-Etienne Bourneuf est conseiller scientifique auprès des archives et de la bibliothèque des Nations Unies à Genève. Il nous aide à comprendre comment s'invente l'ambition d'un monde sans guerre à Genève. Chloé Maurel est spécialiste de l'histoire de l'Organisation des Nations Unies. Réf. bibliographique : Pierre-Etienne Bourneuf, Genève, berceau de la Société Des Nations (United Nations, Geneva, mars 2022). Chloé Maurel, Histoire des idées des Nations unies. L'ONU en 20 notions (Paris, L'Harmattan, 2015).

Who was the president over the last 4 years? Woodrow Wilson vs Joe Biden. Why Jesse keeps a 20 on him. Starting a bonfire on a sacred mountain. A theory on why Bondi isn’t going after more people in the government. They are only going to ramp up the rhetoric. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

William J. Federer is a nationally known speaker, historian, author, and president of Amerisearch, Inc. He's the speaker on "The American Minute" daily broadcast.On April 2nd, President Donald Trump had a special event on the White House lawn. He declared, "A declaration of economic independence...Liberation Day...the day that we began to make America wealthy again."Since then there's been quite an uproar, not merely from nations around the world but from opposing politicians and the American media. With the way the reactions have gone (12 states are suing the Trump administration) you'd think that tariffs are some sort of new idea that President Trump has concocted. But there's much more to this than you may realize both historically and constitutionally. As William began, he described tariffs as a tax on items imported into America from other nations. Keep in mind that prior to the time of Woodrow Wilson there was no income tax. So for the first 150 years of our nation's history, tariffs were the number one instrument used to finance the federal government.In spite of this history, is there a constitutional basis for tariffs? Yes there is. Article 1, Section 8 authorizes the federal government to collect duties and imposts (tariffs) to help pay the debt, provide for the common defense and the general welfare of the United States.Hear the rest of the history behind this subject to see how President Trump is simply following our Constitution. Listeners joined the discussion as well to round out the broadcast.

In the latest episode of Liberty and Learning, Mark Levin engages in a thought-provoking discussion with Dr. Larry Arnn, the president of Hillsdale College. Together, they explore the profound significance of the Declaration of Independence, a document that not only marked a pivotal moment in American history but also established universal principles that continue to resonate today. Dr. Arnn articulates the necessity of the Declaration's opening statement, "When in the course of human events," emphasizing its universal applicability. This phrase sets the stage for a document that seeks to justify the colonies' separation from British rule by appealing to higher principles of natural law and rights. As they dissect the language and intent behind the Declaration, listeners are invited to reflect on the foundational values that shaped the nation. One of the key themes of this episode is the contrast between the principles enshrined in the Declaration and the ideologies of modern progressivism. Dr. Arnn argues that many contemporary critics of the Declaration, including figures like Woodrow Wilson, reject its timeless truths in favor of a more authoritarian approach to governance. This rejection, he asserts, undermines the very essence of what it means to be governed by consent. Levin and Arnn delve into the connection between the Declaration and the Constitution, illustrating how the latter was designed to uphold the principles established in the former. They discuss the importance of consent in governance and how the founding fathers were acutely aware of the need to limit their own powers to prevent tyranny. This historical context is essential for understanding the ongoing relevance of the Declaration in today's political discourse. Listeners are encouraged to engage with the ideas presented in this episode, particularly as the 250th anniversary of the Declaration approaches. Dr. Arnn suggests that reading the Declaration regularly can deepen one's understanding of its significance and the principles of liberty it embodies. For anyone interested in American history, political philosophy, or the enduring legacy of the Declaration of Independence, this episode offers a rich exploration of ideas that are as relevant today as they were in 1776. Tune in to Liberty and Learning for this enlightening conversation that challenges listeners to consider the principles that underpin our government and society. To learn more about Hillsdale College, go to https://www.hillsdale.edu/ Order Dr. Arnn's book: The Founders' Key: The Divine and Natural Connection Between the Declaration and the Constitution and What We Risk by Losing It Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

J D Vance said it most clearly: for the Trump people, “The universities are the enemy.” That's why Trump is cutting billions of federal funding and making impossible demands that threaten dozens of universities. But universities have begun to resist. Michael Roth comments-- he's president of Wesleyan, and was the first university president to speak out against Trump's attacks.Also: Trump is not the worst president when it comes to constitutional rights and civil liberties; Woodrow Wilson was worse. Adam Hochschild explains why – starting with jailing thousands of people whose only crime was speaking out against the president. Adam's most recent book is 'American Midnight: The Great War, A Violent Peace, and Democracy's Forgotten Crisis.'Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

The easiest decision Donald Trump will have to make during his second term is whether or not to shut down the staggeringly inept Department of Education. This experiment in scrambling kids' brains has gone on for nearly half a century, and the results are overwhelmingly catastrophic, even by government standards. The teachers aren't doing much better either. With the states in control of the education system, will the notorious Common Core curriculum be removed before it destroys another generation of children? What happens to charter schools when the Feds are out of the picture? Will the price of college tuition ever drop, or is Woodrow Wilson's vision of a two-tiered education system soon to become a reality? One thing is for sure: the Department of Education needs to go.

Glenn starts the show by discussing the unrest that is going on in Syria as Bashar al-Assad was overthrown, causing an all-out war between Assad loyalists and the new regime. Glenn lays out the historical context that's at play and why the only side he cares about is the Christians who are losing their lives. Glenn also explains how Woodrow Wilson has his fingerprints on all this turmoil. Pat Gray joins Glenn and Stu to discuss Democrat Texas Rep. Al Green's reaction to being kicked out of Trump's speech to Congress and his censure, Democrats claiming racism over Trump's immigration policies, and Trump's hopeful plans to get rid of the Department of Education. Glenn argues that there's a method to the madness regarding Trump's tariff strategy. Many high-ranking ActBlue executives are reportedly jumping ship as the organization continues to be exposed. Glenn lays out how President Trump's actions are based on reality as he attempts to enact the mandate he was given. Glenn and Stu discuss Trump's negotiation skills and why you have to judge the outcome, not the optics. Glenn and Stu discuss AI and social media. Glenn takes calls from listeners on how they use AI in their daily lives.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Former Democratic fundraiser Lindy Li joins to share her journey from being a DNC insider and raising billions for Democrats to becoming an independent thinker who has officially left the Democratic Party. As the Left continues to claim that President Trump and Elon are "destroying democracy," Glenn explains the real shadow government threat that President Woodrow Wilson kick-started. President Trump isn't destroying democracy; he's destroying the unelected bureaucracy. Recovering investment banker Carol Roth joins to discuss the importance of growing the economy alongside cutting unnecessary spending. Glenn plays the Democrats' new screeching opposition chant: "Which Side Are You On?" Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) joins to discuss the new task force she will lead on the declassification of federal secrets, of which the first hearing will focus on the JFK assassination. Glenn's chief researcher, Jason Buttrill, joins Glenn to discuss what government secrets could be exposed by Trump's new task force.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A century ago, President Woodrow Wilson imposed a radically new vision of American government: Rule by the "experts," instead of rule by the people. Charlie explains how President Trump's sweeping executive orders and aggressive attacks on D.C. agencies aren't just about keeping his promises: They're a restoration of the Constitution's vision of the presidency. Plus, Riley Gaines reacts to President Trump's executive order rescuing women's sports from the intrusion of perverted biological men. Watch ad-free at members.charliekirk.com!Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.