Which civilization was the equivalent of America in the ancient world?

I answered this on Quora.

Very interesting question. There are several levels that this can be analyzed. The US today is a large pluralistic society and a constitutional republic. It has a separation of powers with many of institutions operating along democratic lines at the local, state and federal level. Its value system is based on the fusion of Greek Rationalism, Scottish Enlightenment Empiricism and Judeo-Christian Ethics. Economically the US pivots around a Free Market systems with various public sector and government checks. When suffused these attributes acting as one make it a rather unique continuous experiment in the history of our species.

Having said that its still worthwhile drawing comparisons certainly in the realm of international footprint, the will to power and cultural influence. With this in mind I would argue that Four Civilizations bear somewhat of a comparison.

a. Ancient Egypt - Dominated North Africa and influenced much of the politics of the Levant (although to a lesser extent) prior to the birth of Christ. Together with Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, can be seen as one of the primordial driver of the early Western Civilization.

b. Ancient Greece - Its city state model existing within a broader civilization model is roughly equivalent to the State-Federal model that defines the US (although I agree that such an analogy has problems…it was no way near as centralized until at least the era of Alexander the Great). However it impacted a great deal of the Mediterranean and existed as a bulwark to the civilizations of the East. Its intellectual accomplishments and cultural reach certainly resonate in parallel with the US.

c. Ancient Rome - The early Republic had a remarkably similar structure to the US (this is no coincidence of course as the Founding Fathers of the US were greatly influenced by Rome) and while Empire would dominate the later civilization, Rome’s capacity to exert its strength over an extremely broad platform made it a legitimate superpower for its age. At the height of its prowess it was also largely unrivaled on a military level and greatly dictated matters that defined the ancient economies of its realm.

d. Achaemenid Persia - Persia, prior to the Greek resurgence, was the Near East’s sole superpower. Like the US it was extremely tolerant of a variety of beliefs and expanded to include a smorgasbord of metaphysical nesting in a framework of tolerance.

However even after looking at all four of these (and putting aside such obvious distinctions as monarchy and rule by tyrants) I would argue that the US is furthermore distinct. Unlike these other powers the American Republic is not primarily driven by a continuous need to force an Imperialistic agenda beyond the bedrock nation state. Its tendency is to turn away not embrace Empire and although its foreign policy has been influenced by economic considerations it is not by nature a power of occupation. Certainly not in the long run. The same cannot be said for all the other Ancient Power Civilizations.

More Tales from the World of Physics Education

As a Physics teacher I never feel truly comfortable that I have figured it all out and that (for want of better words) is a good thing. If I did I would be tempted to sit back and relax which may have its benefits in the short run but from a growth perspective offers dubious value in the long term.

Over the course of the last week I have been working with my Grade Twelves on Special Relativity - a notorious pitfall for conceptual errors. I have taught (not to mention learned and re-learned) the sub-unit over twenty times in my career and I still find oddities that compel me to rethink my understanding of what is arguably one of the most counter-intuitive areas in all of Physics (notwithstanding Quantum Mechanics of course).

You see Special Relativity takes so much of what we formalize in classical physics and turns it on its head. Absolute space - gone, Absolute time - dead, Absolute momentum - see you later, Kinetic Energy - we need a rethink. To top this off we teach the topic in a week (due to time constraints - I will avoid the pun) and tantalize the students with such notions as the Twin Paradox and the notion that events that are simultaneous in one frame of reference need not be in another.

Serious stuff - but the kids love it and boy do they challenge me with a series of 'What happens ifs..?' .This in turn makes me hit the books/internet for solutions which in turn improves my own understanding. A wonderful positive feedback loop if ever there was one and for this I am thankful

What makes Empires crumble?

Answered on Quora

As someone who reads a great deal of history across all fields I have identified several reasons. Narrowing it done to one factor usually oversimplifies the issue. Here they are in my opinion

• Economic mismanagement and devaluation of the currency - the Empire’s chief currency loses buying power over time eg. Western Roman Empire;
• Poor leadership - A persistent chain of corrupt, weak and ineffective leadership eg. the Ottoman and Western Roman Empires;
• The Rise of an outsider power that is more aggressive eg. The Arabs taking down the Byzantine Empire;
• A series of catastrophic wars that saps the will to rule of the Empire’s elite eg. British Empire post WWI and WWII;
• Greatly increased Cost of administration - eg. The European Colonial Empires in the latter part of the 20th century;
• Over extension of power leading to blow back eg. Rome following Trajan;
• Leadership struggles eg. Mongol Empire post Genghis Khan or Alexander the Great’s Empire following his death;
• Failure to innovate and maintain a high level of technological progress eg. Ottoman Empire from the 18th century onward;
• Growth of Nationalism and Liberalism in conquered territory eg. South American uprisings against Spain the 19th century;
• Radical climate change leading to famine or drought eg. thought to be the main cause of the fall of the Mayan Empire;
• Civil War eg. Struggles between power groups within an Empire eg. Various Chinese Dynasty battles;
• Defeat by a coalition of forces eg. Japan during WWII or Napoleon’s Empire;
• Revolutionary change eg. Portugal following the Flower Revolution;
• Disease and Demographic disturbance eg. Impact on the Aztecs and Incas as a a result of the Spanish influence;
• Loyalty to the center core disappears with time eg. Austro-Hungarian Empire;
• Rise of ideology that undermines the core value system of the Empire - eg. Communism in the Tsarist Empire or as some would argue Christianity in Rome.

In Praise of Me-Time

One of the discoveries of growing older is the realization that time itself is extremely valuable. When one was younger, time seemed as plentiful as the atmosphere. It was there it was available and it seemed to last forever. 
Then the milestone of forty kicked in and something triggered inside me. There are only twenty-four hours in a day and one needs to use them wisely. 
Now in my case I know exactly the cause of this trigger. Essentially it was the onset of fatherhood that had ambushed me at thirty-seven and was redefining my persona with each passing moment. However it was only at forty that this realization became intellectually apparent.
Maybe I had blocked it out for a while but now in a brief respite I could contemplate what it truly was. It wasn’t time that was the problem but a deficiency of ‘me-time’ the opportunity to retreat and ‘be alone’ to charge one’s battery and escape even for a while the realities of adulthood. 
Its not that this ‘me-time’ is better than any other time for most of my greatest moments are spent with my family but for somebody who is naturally introverted such ‘me-time’ is critical to my functioning. Supply it at the right amount and I function optimally on all fronts. Take it away and I cease to be the best version of Gavin that I can be. 
So in a sense I place great value on ‘me-time’. It is currency in my life whose value seems to appreciate with age. 
I am sure others feel the same way. It’s a healthy selfishness but one that when all said and done is extremely necessary

My Favourite Art Works

(not in any order)


1. Chagall Windows at the Hadassah Medical Center (Chagall)
2. Starry Night (Van Gogh)
3. Liberty Leading the People (Delacroix)
4. Tennis Court Oath (David)
5. Ceiling of the Sistine Chapel (Michelangelo)
6. Last Supper (Da Vinci)
7. Persistence of Memory (Dali)
8. Bathers (Cezanne)
9. Luncheon of the Boating Party (Renoir)
10. Salon at the Rue des Moulins (Toulouse Lautrec)
11. Guernica (Picasso)
12. The Second of May 1808 (Goya)
13. A Few Small Nips (Kahlo)
14. Women and Birds at Sunrise (Miro)
15. Symbolic Landscape (Riviera)
16. Coronation of Napoleon (David)
17. Laughing Cavalier (Hals)
18. Dream caused by the Flight of a Bee around a Pomegranate a Second before Wakening up
(Dali)
19. The Models (Seurat)
20. Two Tahitian Women (Gaugin)
21. Night Watch (Rembrandt)
22. Cafe Terrace at Night (Van Gogh)

Star Wars is Evil

I grew up in the generation that Star Wars was custom made for. At the age of eight I remember sitting with my jaw at ground level, mouth drooling, fixated on a universe that was simply unbelievable. If I had been moved to a utopia, this was it. That was then. My enthusiasm continued as I submerged myself in the Empire Strikes Back and the trilogy’s concluding episode Return of the Jedi.

 Years later when Lucas released these three with a few modifications I sat through them again with a healthy nostalgia. Jedi had taken over from a New Hope as my personal favourite and Empire seemed a slightly less disjointed than the time that I saw it as a kid. However the series had dropped remarkably in my overall esteem, the magic was tarnished and I couldn’t believe how insipid both the plot lines and acting were.

Of course I was of an older age – one cannot dismiss that variable – but compared to the Science Fiction of the British Comic World – Judge Dredd and Rogue Trooper – not to mention the alternative Blade Runner or other Dystrophic films, Star Wars looked remarkably inferior - at least by a parsec or two. In fact it was downright awful. I watched the prequels (hoping for a broader salvation) but loathed all three. The third was particularly bad and I cursed the fact that I had been duped, even at a young age by Lucas’ space odyssey of junk. 

Alec Guinness, who played Obi-Wan, was dismissive of Star Wars in his personal writing and rightfully so. The series was a gigantic con job, that used the brilliance of special effects to hide its glaring flaws. Nothing of substance emerges from the Star Wars – it is a massive cliché but worse than that is morally questionable something the masses who bathe in its sub-culture almost never admit.

 In A New Hope, Darth Vader carries out an unspeakable genocide, the destruction of the planet Alderaan. I remember even as a kid being shocked by that. Lets put this in context for a second – History is replete with its evil despots – Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot – all of them carried out massive genocides but none of them destroyed a planet and all of its inhabitants….not even close. Yet Vader does this in a matter of minutes… and we are exposed to it as a matter-of-fact. Of course its part of the story but get this …once Vader comes clean and has the dark side’s hold over him broken (in Jedi)..we are now supposed to cheer for this villain, sympathize with him as he takes his place alongside Obi-Wan and Yoda in the pantheon of Jedi.

 In fact Luke Skywalker ceremonially honours this genocidal lunatic in a funeral ceremony…Talk about turning your back on evil….What about all his victims? Was this monster not responsible for destruction in the billions (a likely estimate range for planetary populations)? But Lucas wants us to forget this because he (Vader) did the honourable ‘thing’ and saved his son. Frikkin Hell…story or no story!…fiction or not!…Does this not show how morally decrepit Lucas’ universe is? 

Now one could argue that I am wasting too much bytes on this line of thought (ink is so 20th century) …but unfortunately the Star Wars super meme has infected our collective conscious in a manner that is extremely pervasive… Kids know more about such asinine lines… as ‘I am your father Luke’ and ‘Use the force’ than the words of Churchill, Schweitzer or King. Adults dress up in Vader costumes…and when questioned about this will retort with a line such as Vader is the ‘ultimate bad ass’….which begs the next question where does that leave Genghis Khan who ‘only’ redrew the face of Eurasia?…A third-tier bad ass perhaps. 

Ideas drive action and Lucas has a twisted calculus that he has sold to the rest of us. Disney and Lego will of course further entrench this nonsense in the next generation’s mind set. It’s a further statement on the sad reality of a truism that we overlook as we amuse ourselves to oblivion. 

What role did French philosophers play in the French Revolution?

My answer on Quora.

everal Important Philosophers spring to mind when discussing the French Revolution.

Voltaire -Influenced the anti-clericism of the revolution. Championed John Locke’s philosophy in the “Letters concerning the English Nation” (the notion of the Free Individual). This was called”the first bomb hurled against the “Old Regime”. Voltaire was a strong supporter of the radical English ideas of Liberty (now known as Classical Liberalism).

Baron Montesqueu - Favored a constitutional monarchy like England (which was essentially the tone of the first part of the Revolution). A nobleman himself he believed in a progressive and responsible nobility. His most famous work was “The Spirit of the Laws”

Denis Diderot - Champion of the Encyclopédie project along with Jean d’Alembert. Concerived nature as a creative process, stressed change and relativity of culture. Opponent of Bourgeois conformism. Favoured secularization of knowledge and a belief in science.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau - Father of the Romantic Movement. His writing concerning the Noble Savage (a longing for the Primitive) and the Social Contract impacted the Jacobins in particular. Emphasized the General Will and the need for the individual to subjugate themselves to the Collective, This would have dangerous consequences in the Reign of Fear but would become the dominant philosophy in the period from 1792–94. Views were to a great extent the antithesis of John Locke’s.

Other key philosophical ideas that impacted the Revolution from the Enlightenment were the notions that

1. Man is not innately depraved
2. The purpose of life was life itself not the after-life
3. Humanity had to be freed from ignorance and superstition
4. Progress and perfection is possible with individual liberty
5. All is interconnected through a type of benevolent Providence

How successful was democracy in post WWII Germany?

My answer on Quora.

his all depends on what Germany you are talking about . In West Germany (1949–1990) it was largely successful as a consequence of the pro-free market (less regulation intense) policies that came to define the Wirtschaftswunder (Economic Miracle) after WWII. These were engineered by Konrad Adenauer and his economic minister Ludwig Erhard and preceded the formation of the Common Market in 1957. The Economic Miracle provided the necessary foundation to allow the young West German democracy to thrive. West Germany would grow into the Fourth largest economy in the world.

Besides its role in the European Coal and Steel community (the forerunner of both the Common Market and the EU) West Germany also played a vital part in NATO. It took a fairly tough line against Communism (although this moderated with Ostpolitik) despite the actions of Far-Left wing terrorist groups such as the Red Army Faction (RAF) and the Baader-Meinhof Gang.

A feature of West Germany worth noting is the relative stable governments compared to other coalition style governments on the continent. There were only six chancellors between 1949 and 1990 with power flipping (for the most part) between center-left and center-right groupings.

East Germany on the other hand was never a democracy. It used the term in its name but was essentially an authoritarian communist state that served as a puppet of the Soviet Union.

The Unified Germany today has its challenges. The biggest of these is the fall of the birth rate, the integration of refugees and migrants in the country and the crisis of will that seems to have engulfed most of Western Europe at present. On a positive note it continues to be the economic driver in the EU and is a stable democracy for now.

Western History 98: What was the Dutch Golden Age?

The Dutch Republic existed from 1581 to 1795 and comprised the territories of the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg.  The early elements of the republic was recognized by the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, as part of the Pragmatic Sanction but it was the Act of Abjuration (1581) that saw the provinces of the Netherlands declare independence from Philip II of Spain.

The Dutch Revolt (1568-1648) would see the Protestant Provinces break finally with the Spanish Empire (supported by the Holy Roman Empire) with the Treaty of Munster (1648) making this separation final.

As an era the Dutch Republic is regarded as a Golden Age in Dutch history. A confederation brought together the seven provinces who sent representatives to States General in the Hague. A Stadtholder officially headed the government with William of Orange serving as the First Stadtholder. The House of Orange would dominate Dutch politics. However the Republic’s constitution was very liberal and is believed to have influenced the framers of the US Constitution.

Both the Dutch East India Company (VOC) and the Dutch West India Company (WIC) that played a key role in Dutch shipping, exploration, colonization and trade derived their authority from the States General. Dutch influence spread to South America, South East Asia, the Caribbean and Southern Africa.  The First Stock Exchange was born in the Dutch Republic in the city of Amsterdam and was later named the Amsterdam Bourse.

In art (Mannerism, the Delft School, Dutch baroque), women’s issues, religious freedom, theology and economics the Republic was considered a leader for its time. It benefited greatly from Renaissance Humanism and was tolerant of Jews and Huguenots fleeing Catholic persecution. In the Sciences the Republic produced such luminaries as Anton von Leeuwenhoek (inventor of the microscope) and Christian Huygens (father of the wave theory of light). The great justice Hugo Grotius was a product of the system as was Baruch de Spinoza and at a time the Republic offered residence to both Rene Descartes and John Locke.

What are your most important values as a Conservative or a liberal?

My answer on Quora

A a Classical Liberal my top ten would be

1. Belief in Freedom of thought, speech, expression and religion
2. The right to ownership of private property
3. Separation of Church and State
4. The State taking its authority from the people not the other way around
5. Equality before the Law
6. The right to defend oneself
7. Rule of Law
8. Individual Rights dominating group rights (actually I don’t see the need for group rights at all)
9. Equality of Opportunity not outcome
10. Necessary checks on government.

What was Hitler's reasoning behind the May 1940 order to stop his military short of actually taking Dunkirk?

My answer on Quora

There is a great deal of debate on this issue as it certainly provided the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) with the biggest let off in the war’s turbulent history.

To begin with the halt order itself was not issued directly by Hitler but came through Generals von Kluge and von Runstedt. It is believed that there was debate within the German High Command with both generals fearing an Allied counterattack (such as what happened at the Marne in 1914). There was also some suggestion that the German army was exhausted by the speed of its own advance and needed to rest.

Another general, von Brauschitsch had disagreed with the halt order and favored an immediate attack but Hitler appeared to have overruled him( von Brauschitsch was the Army’s Chief of Staff).

Some have suggested that Hitler was intending to give an olive branch to Churchill but an analysis by the German historian Karl Heinz Friedser makes the case that this was not the fact the reason and that Hitler was instead using the occasion to make it clear to the Army that he was indeed the Supreme Commander.

Of interest is that the attack did resume on the 26th of May 1940 (two days after the original halt order) but by this stage the success of Operation Dynamo (the mass evacuation from Dunkirk) had negated the strategic advantage of this later move.

What are your thoughts on Agnosticism and Deism?

Agnosticism is a position on knowledge. It is not a statement of belief. It reflects a degree of uncertainty about a belief position. One can be an Agnostic Theist, Deist or Atheist.

A Deist is an individual who believes in God based on Reason not revelation. It is a statement of belief.

I am personally an Agnostic Jewish Deist. How has it worked for me? So far so good. No complaints.

Was the French Revolution a good thing?

Answered on Quora.

It was not so much a good thing but an inevitability. The lopsided and corrupt Ancien Regime could only continue to exist for so long. However in weighing the Positives and Negatives over the Long run I would argue that it was largely a positive development.

Here in my opinion are its positives

1. It brought to an end a corrupt monarchy and the equally complicit First and Second Estates;
2. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) which introduced natural rights (that are universal) into the continental framework - this would help in the development of both freedom and democracy;
3. It strengthened the French National character (gave the Third Estate more power);
4. Meritocracy was given breathing room to evolve at the expense of elitist privilege;
5. Women’s voices were actively heard through such action as the March of the Women on Versailles;
6. It limited the power of the clergy in France;
7. It provided a framework for the reorganization of France politically (into more structured departments);
8. It would provide a catalyst to challenge monarchical autocracy throughout the continent;
9. French law would be reformed on a more equitable basis.
10. Necessary modifications took place to the taxation system in France.
11. From a learning perspective - It allowed us to see the ramifications of a positive movement being engulfed by a radical intolerant ideology.

The negatives are

1. It was incredibly bloody - The Reign of Terror was an extremely bleak period;
2. It ultimately lead to the Rise of Napoleon and the Coalition Wars that would engulf Europe (and elsewhere) until 1815;
3. The Revolution was hijacked by a destructive ideology (Jacobinism) that would eventually culminate in the establishment of a police state;
4. Group Identity politics dominated much of its proceedings - although it appeared to champion individualism the Revolution in practice centered on group politics;
5. It was the mother of Far Leftism - Marxist-Leninism owes a great deal of gratitude to the Revolution's earlier fellow travelers.

Do different regions of the world teach historical wars and events differently from one another?

My answer on Quora

In some cases (especially in countries where open discussion is not encouraged) both the facts and the narrative emphasis are often distorted. However even in areas where free inquiry is championed interpretation may vary. Here are some examples

• The War of 1812 is largely seen in the US as an American victory over the British. In Canada the interpretation is to see the war as a win or at the very least a draw (US invasion of Canada was stopped and the British burnt the White House);
• The 1948 Arab-Israeli War is seen by Israel as a war of survival where the country beat back a multitude of Arab Armies, Palestinians see it as the Nakba (source of a Palestinian exodus) and the origin of the modern strife in the region today;
• The British saw the Second Anglo-Boer (1899–1902) as a necessary victory for the Empire, Afrikaners see it as negatively impacting their self determination and the context for a great deal of human rights abuse (Afrikaner Women and Children were herded into concentration camps by the Brits);
• Manifest Destiny was viewed traditionally as a positive expansion of the American ideal, Indigenous Americans often see it as a genocide.
• Turkish apologists often justified the actions of their regime towards the Armenians as necessary recourse in a time of war, Armenians and almost all others see it as a genocide.
• Japanese textbooks rarely deal with the issue of the Rape of Nanking (1937) this is not the case with Chinese texts;
• The Horrors of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution have traditionally been downplayed in China, this is not necessarily the case elsewhere
• The Bolsheviks saw the Red-White war as a necessary fight to save Russia from the old order and Western Imperialism, Western countries viewed it as a valiant attempt to defeat a loathsome ideology.

How do we discover true economic theories?

My answer on Quora.

The tricky word here is true. One needs to decide what is meant by this word. I prefer the word reality.Economics is a social science so it roughly follows a version of the scientific method. One can theorize as much as one wants but if the Empirical evidence does not support the theory then it should be rejected. The problem with economics is that there is great deal of grey and safeguarding assumptions that are put in place by the respective theoretical proponents that are designed to explain away (almost ad hoc) the failure of the theory to correlate with reality.

To some extent this is part of the political nature of the discipline and the polarizing camps that have formed around each school (Keynesian, Neo-Keynesian, Austrian, Chicago etc),

Once economists move past the loyalty toward their school and look more objectively at the field evidence then I suspect that it may have more success. Right now it has more of a tendency to place the cart (theory) in front of the horse (evidence). This is not true of all economists but it certainly a phenomenon that I have observed as a casual follower.

What are the uses of Science and technology to politicians?

My answer on Quora.

There are two ways to answer this question. I will offer both. The first is what they should be used for (Positive) , the second is the arena that politicians driven by less than honorable have unfortunately taken science into (the Negative).

Positive Uses

• Informing decision on complex issues where many stakeholders are involved;
• Using it to drive policy that will likely improve the living conditions for many;
• debunking irrational thought;
• safeguarding the population against legitimate threats both external and internal.

Negative uses

• generating fear to promote a specific political agenda;
• misinterpreting it to shut down dissenting voices;
• overextending scientific conclusions into regions beyond its scope of interpretation;
• disregarding empirical evidence that contradicts the science;
• using it to snoop on people’s privacy for no immediate concern;
• minimizing the environmental impact of technology to oversell its economic utility;
• Using it as a weapon against certain segments of the population.

Was the apartheid government in SA the most stable government of the 20th century in Africa?

My answer on  Quora

It all depends on how one defines stability. The National Party was in power in South Africa between 1948 to 1994 (which I believe is an African 20th century record). In terms of single party control this indeed was rather extensive. However apartheid was inherently an unstable system as seen by the Sharpeville massacre, the Rivonia trial, the Biko affair, the Soweto riots and the mass protests in the 1980s. The system was sustained by a strong police and military presence that created an illusion of stability. At the core it was rotting away.

Once the political structure was undercut by economic sanctions, political isolation and a further demographic power imbalance it was only a matter of time before it would collapse.

On an ideological level (and I say this as a South African) the Apartheid government made group identity the mantra of its policy. When this comes at the expense of the rights of the individual then one has the trappings for the genesis of a volatile outcome.

Why can't we replace teachers with robots?

My Answer on Quora

Teaching incorporates many aspects that are difficult to replicate mechanically. Can a robot.....

• manage a classroom with students having varying behavioral challenges?
• differentiate the curriculum to facilitate specific learning styles?
• motivate students to think beyond the curriculum?
• assist the student in overcoming test anxiety?
• provide the social interaction that is necessary for effective learning?
• report back to parents and guardians on personal observations of the learning process?
• work with guidance to assist the student in managing personal issues that may impact classroom performance?
• gauge mood of the class and adjust the temp of instruction accordingly?
• change lesson plans on a whim based on unexpected contingencies?
• interact with colleagues to improve program based on shared experience?
• provide real life anecdotes to enhance the learning based on actual experience?
• act as a mentor?

This is what defines Teaching.

What was the cause of the English Peasant Revolt?

Answered on Quora

There are several causes. However most of these center around feudal control of the labor market and excessive taxation. The English peasant revolt of 1381 for example can be traced back to the Statute of Laborers (1351) that attempted to limit wages to two pence a day. The Statute was passed after the Black Death to prevent peasants profiting from the labor shortage that resulted after the plague.

The law had the net effect of preventing the peasants from moving to higher wage jobs thereby limiting their opportunities. Add to this an unfair Poll Tax (that fell heavily on the peasants) and the fact that many Laborers were forced to work on Church land without pay and you have the recipe for revolt.

One can only restrict the Freedom of the Individual both socially and economically for so long before a system eventually snaps.

Thought of the day

Full many a flower is born to blush unseen, And waste its sweetness on the desert air.”
― Thomas Gray, An Elegy Written In A Country Churchyard

Why did Churchill favour a North Africa campaign in 1942? Why not attack the Germans in Western Europe?

Answered on Quora.

Churchill’s reasons for pursuing a North African strategy as opposed to a direct attack on Western Europe were driven by several major factors

1. The opposition of the British military brass to a land war in Western Europe - don’t forget that the horrors of the Somme was not far removed;
2. He needed to protect Egypt and the Suez Canal from falling into Axis hands if it indeed fell this could endanger British interests in India and the Far East;
3. The British Army was not up to the strength in 1942 for fighting head-on with the Wehrmacht in Western Europe in 1942 not after the debacle at Dunkirk and before that the failure in Norway;
4. North Africa offered Britain a theater for military success which Churchill very much needed to sustain the morale of the populace (German forces were also depleted in North Africa to sustain the war in the East so that he was choosing his battles well);
5. Failure to secure North Africa would have effectively turned the Mediterranean Sea into an Axis controlled lake (Italy had a considerable navy force here as well);
6. There was a concern as well that if the Germans were successful in North Africa they would have swept onward to the Middle East Oil Fields that would have provided them with fuel to sustain the war effort indefinitely. This may have turned the tide in their favour on the Eastern Front as well.
7. Securing North Africa would provide bases to harass German/Italian shipping in the Mediterranean

What were the political implications of the French Revolution on the politics of Europe?

Answered on Quora.

here were a number of implications all of which are worthy of further consideration. Here are some of the key ones :

1. The growth of nationalism as a political force - Revolutions based on the Nationalist argument would grip Europe in 1830 and 1848 (impetus eventually for German and Italian unification);
2. Spread of Liberalism throughout the continent (the initial phase of the Revolution was liberal it turned regressive later)- Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen (1789)was a positive driver;
3. The formalization of Left and Right as political constructs (these have their origin in the French Revolution);
4. The Napoleonic Era that followed plunged Europe into a period of continuous war that lasted from the late 18th century until his defeat at Waterloo in 1815 - Napoleon also created an early version of the Modern police state ;
5. The beginning of the demise of formalized aristocracy in the European power structure;
6. The outgrowth of Bourgeoisie politics and the influence of the educated middle class;
7. Promotion of an anti-clerical thinking across the continent;
8. Further cementing of Balance of Power alliances that would continue until WWI;
9. Excesses of the Reign of Terror revealed the dangers of an unchecked far leftism;
10. Women’s rights were given a platform during the French Revolution that would gain traction continent wise;
11. It showed the folly of placing ideology ahead of pragmatism (not all would learn this lesson unfortunately);
12. It provided a go ahead to remove ossified political/administrative structures that in the long term would help seed the grounds for meritocracy across the continent (by no means an immediate process).

Key Events in the History of the West Until 1600

The following is a list of 30 events (not conclusive) that changed the course of Western History. These are great to build 'What If' stories around.

1. The End of the Ice Age (not just the West)
2. Development of Abrahamic Montheism
3. The birth of Western Philosophy in Ancient Greece (Miletus with Thales)
4. Rome defeats Carthage to gain control of the Western Mediterranean.
5. The Life of Jesus Christ.
6. Paul develops Christianity as a seperate entity from Judaism.
7. Constantine legalizes Christianity in the Roman Emperor.
8. The fall of Rome and the Barbarian Invasions.
9. The Arabic Exapansion of the 7th-9th centuries.
10. Charles Martel saves Europe from Islam.
11. Charlemagne strengthens Western european power.
12. The Viking invasions impact on the continent. Height of the Dark Ages.
13. Spread of Feudalism throughout Europe.
14. Split between Catholic and Orthodox Churches.
15. Marco Polo makes contact with China - Silk Road re-ignited.
16. The Crusades encourage mixing of ideas between Europe and the East.
17. The Mongols fail to advance into Western Europe.
18. The Monastic Orders (especially in Ireland) protect Western Culture during Dark and Middle Ages.
19. Decline of Church Power after the Crusades. Church no longer seen as all-powerful. Growth of the secular ruler.
20. Black Plague decimates European population (1/3rd dead). Leads to improvement of Worker rights (more demand for Labour). End of Feudalism. Further weakening of the Church.
21. Venetians and Turks dominate Mediterranean sea trade routes.
22. Invention of the Printing Press accelerates a cultural, scientific revolution in Europe.
23. Birth of the Early Art Renaissance in Italy. Power of Florence grows.
23. Constantinople falls to the Turks. End of Byzantine Empire. 1453.
24. Hundred Years War (1337-1453) between England and France Ends.
25. Italian City States reach peak of Power, Italian Wars will however ravage Italy.
26. Growth of Spain, France and Austria as continental powers.
27. Beginning of the Age of Exploration. Early domination by Portuguese and Spanish. Later English, French and Dutch.
28. Discovery of the New Worlds (Americas) - Colonization to follow.
29. The Protestant Reformation further splits the Cheristian World.
30. March of Physics - Copernicus (The Heliocentric Universe), Kepler and Galileo.

Jews and Armenians

It strikes me as to how similar the Jews and Armenians are as a people

1. Both are religious minorities in the Middle East. The Armenians are christians.
2. Both have been the subject of a 20th century genocide. Over 1.5 million Armenians were killed by the Turks in World War I. 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis in World War II.
3. Both reclaimed their nation states in the 20th century.
4. Both are in conflict with a predominantly Islamic local population group - the Palestinians and the Azerbaijans.
5. Both have larger population groups living in the diaspora than in the homeland.
6. Both are a merchant based society.
7. Both have been heavily influenced by both the Ottoman Empire and Russia.
8. Both have produced more than their fair share of quality chess players.
9. Both played a vital economic role in pre-Mullah Iran.
10. Both have mountains as symbols of their people: Mount Zion for the Jews and Mount Ararat for the Armenians.

A Quantum Mechanics thought experiment

An object follows a Path P through Space (and time). It then collides with another particle resulting in momentum and energy transfer.

Modern Physics only concerns itself with this actual collision as it demonstrates the shifting of energies.(and therefore states). From its philosophical point of view the history of this path is inconsequential. What only matters is the conditions before and after the collision. I am somewhat bothered by this. Why is the history ‘meaningless’? Is it really so or do we choose to omit it in order to simplify the problem? I would argue the latter and go one step further by reasoning that it is the history that may contribute to the ‘uncertainty’ that so defines interactions at the quantum level. 

I do not believe that ‘history’ is lost. Physics abhors the loss of ‘information’ (look at the laws of conservation of mass, energy and momentum).Somehow it must be conserved (maybe not in its original form but in some other form). I propose that historical information is transformed maybe into quantum foam but more likely into one of the higher dimensions that string theory supports. What happens to it in these dimensions is anyone’s guess. But here is an idea. What if this information was churned (by some black box process) into an entity that returns to form the ‘Dark Energy’ needed the Inflationary Expansion of our own universe?