Writings on History, Science, Reason, Classical Liberalism, the Alternative Future and the Philosophy of Life. Enjoy!!
Most of the posts here will largely focus on my Quora Answers as well as the Western History posts that I am working through in sequential fashion.
Please feel free to comment.
We live in a world that is deluged with bad ideas,
false narratives and a toxic political tribalism. Science, education and public
policy have all been bombarded by a malfeasance that is challenging the
essential framework of our vital institutions.
Navigating the Chaos is the passionate and well reasoned attempt of one
man to make sense of the daily insanity and chart a course that re-affirms the
necessity of our Authentic Liberal tradition.
The book makes no apologies in taking to task the rot that
threatens our society. However, it is not an exercise in pessimism. For as the
author emphasizes, clarity fosters an inner strength, that when augmented by
the wisdom of others, can energize communities to push back against dangerous
post-truths that are harming the shared civilization.
What were the consequences of Mao's Great Leap Forward?
A Giant Leap Backwards. The Great Leap Forward (1958–1962) resulted in one of the largest famines in human history. Death estimates range from 15 to 55 million. The entire exercise in economic and social restructuring was an unmitigated disaster.
The only positive was that Mao was eventually forced (at least temporally) to allow Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping to proceed cautiously in the future with any future changes. However this did not last long.
Ever the ideologue though, Mao could still not come to terms with his policy failure He placed the blame on the Party’s rightists thus precipitating another round of death in what was to become known as the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976).
In terms of absolute numbers of death it had been argued that Mao topped both Stalin and Hitler.
Having said this I am under no illusion that the myriad of CCP bots here on Quora will try and spin this in a positive light or gaslight the issue altogether.
For number of death re: Great Leap Forward Famine check out.
Was a war between the Soviet Union and Germany inevitable?
Yes. Hitler’s focus on acquiring Lebensraum in the East meant that war between these powers was likely to happen sometime in the near future. The Soviets knew this as well but were betting that it would occur at a later date than it did (June 22nd 1941). Some historians (check out the Viktor Surov thesis) have argued that the Soviets would have attacked Germany first had the time been right but this is not a well supported mainstream view. Having said that, one could say that the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (August 1938) was in many ways more of a delaying strategy that benefited both parties than anything else.
Why has Japan produced so many Nobel Prize winning scientists?
They modernized earlier then the rest of Asia (and for that matter a great deal of Europe) and have a general population that has one of the highest gfactor values (general intelligence) for all nations. This means that on a global level they have a large number of people as a proportion of the country above the 120 IQ level (SD=15). This correlates well with innovation, analytic thought and Nobel Prize wins in the sciences.
Why were the French people so poor before the Revolution?
They had a top down class system that restricted upward mobility while foistering on the the 3rd Estate a ridiculously high tax burden. If want block all paths to life improvement both socially and economically, poverty is the natural outcome. The Ancien Regime did both. It was the antithesis of genuine liberalism.
I am by no means a Biden fan and consider him a dumpster fire of President when it comes to foreign affairs but I don’t believe that you can completely blame Old Joe for Russia and China’s apparent geopolitical embrace.
Such a cocktail of malevolence and incompetence was set in motion and later maintained by all Presidents from the 1990s onward, who empowered China by the gift of Most Favored Nation (MFN) trading status (although Trump pushed back more than the others). This policy greatly strengthened the Chinese economy by allowing Beijing to benefit from the utility of more open trade while selectively flouting what didn’t suit them. China was set on its road to becoming a trading superpower.
Then add on to such an economic transformation the parallel expansion of NATO into the many territories and nation states that were formerly part of the Old Warsaw Pact and you have a second ingredient. From Moscow’s perspective the arrow of aggression was directly pointed at them.
Russia though has oil and natural gas. Lots of it. China needs this for her burgeoning economy and so you have a match made in heaven (or hell depending on perspective). Russia can use China to push back against Western influence (especially when faced with wartime sanctions) while China can exploit the gas station next door. Its a win-win for both. The Ukraine war merely brought what was inevitable to the front.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis gives you all of Trump’s strong policy points but none of Trump’s negative character flaws. He is more eloquent than Trump, far less divisive, resonates better with genuine conservatives, is not riddled with scandals and will likely bring in the independent /centrist vote that the GOP needs to win in Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona and Pennsylvania. He is also a man of action who will focus on what matters instead of defaulting to the Trumpist playbook of name-calling, social media feuds, salesman promises and never ending hyperbole.
Trump has had his time in the sun and it would be best for the nation if he steps aside instead of acting as a spoiler nationally. His continued presence and stifling cult of personality will in all likelihood guarantee a Democratic party victory in 2024. In addition the longer Trump remains on the scene the more he will act as bonfire fuel for extremists on both sides. America deserves better and in DeSantis they have such a candidate.
What was the most powerful country in Europe until the British Empire?
Except for the time leading up to and including the Hundred Years War when English kings owned vast territory in France as a result of their Gallic/Norman connections, Britain has never been a continental power in Europe proper.
Yes they fought successful military campaigns on the continent (War of the Spanish Succession, Peninsular War and enjoyed influence in Hanover) but British strength has always centered around their global holdings. This is ultimately what saved the nation of shopkeepers in their fight against Napoleon.
In Europe itself the Hapsburg branches - in both Spain and Austria - were arguably the most significant powers on the continent for the early part of the Modern era (from the Renaissance to the early Enlightenment). However the rise of the Bourbons (particularly Louis XIV) would shift the locus of strength toward France.
Prussia’s ascendancy under Frederick the Great challenged France (and Austria) but it was only after French overreach under Napoleon and Prussia’s success at unifying German that France’s position as Europe’s primary continental juggernaut was ever in doubt.
In the east one can point to the Ottomans as a great power but their inability to take Vienna and extend into Central Europe doomed them to the periphery. Russian growth westward was limited by the rivalry with Sweden and Turkey and their modernization deficit (which was somewhat improved under Peter the Great).
Which was bigger the Soviet Union or the Austrian Empire? Why?
The Soviet Union by far. It wasn’t even close. At its peak the Soviet Union covered 22.4 million square kilometers (well over twice the size of the United States) compared to the 0.7 million square kilometers of the Austrian Empire (1867).The latter was about the size of Texas. As for the Why?…The Soviets started from a huge base…Russia. WWII also played a key role in supplementing earlier Tsarist ambitions. Numbers Source: Encyclopedia Britannica.
