What Modern means to a historian

[late]

The Modern era, roughly, in the 1800s.

It's not subtle, mercantilism gives way to capitalism. The British government develops manufacturing processes and standards. We tend to think of Henry Ford, and the speed of his assembly line. But that was built using over a century of progress done mostly by the Brits.

If you haven't heard of the battle of Trafalgar, google it. The Brits had parts ready to go, to repair, and they had started the very long process of standardising. It was much, much cheaper (and quicker) for them to repair their ships.

All this might seem academic, until you get into the details. It wasn't subtle.

What happened before was the Early Modern era. It may have looked like I was dismissive of Sam Johnson. He's a hero to me, and his dictionary was a magnificent accomplishment. But the Oxford was the work of thousands over roughly 70 years, the difference is not subtle.

Capitalism is a cooperation between government, business and knowledge institutions. If you don't study history, this is easy to miss. When the Brits were becoming the first fully capitalist country, the immensely conservative landed gentry didn't like it. But they also didn't want to kill the goose laying the golden eggs..

Government grew, business grew, knowledge institutions grew.

It's not subtle. WW1 makes the difference clear.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/039333939...NOWTHXPDE7&sprefix=relentless rev&tag=usmb-20

 

[shockedcanadian]

The Modern era, roughly, in the 1800s.

It's not subtle, mercantilism gives way to capitalism. The British government develops manufacturing processes and standards. We tend to think of Henry Ford, and the speed of his assembly line. But that was built using over a century of progress done mostly by the Brits.

If you haven't heard of the battle of Trafalgar, google it. The Brits had parts ready to go, to repair, and they had started the very long process of standardising. It was much, much cheaper (and quicker) for them to repair their ships.

All this might seem academic, until you get into the details. It wasn't subtle.

What happened before was the Early Modern era. It may have looked like I was dismissive of Sam Johnson. He's a hero to me, and his dictionary was a magnificent accomplishment. But the Oxford was the work of thousands over roughly 70 years, the difference is not subtle.

Capitalism is a cooperation between government, business and knowledge institutions. If you don't study history, this is easy to miss. When the Brits were becoming the first fully capitalist country, the immensely conservative landed gentry didn't like it. But they also didn't want to kill the goose laying the golden eggs..

Government grew, business grew, knowledge institutions grew.

It's not subtle. WW1 makes the difference clear.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393339394/?bestFormat=true&k=relentless revolution&ref_=nb_sb_ss_w_scx-ent-bk-v2_k0_1_14_de&crid=JDNOWTHXPDE7&sprefix=relentless rev&tag=usmb-20

The British to me built the greatest empire in world history. Yes, some will talk of the Roman Empire of course due to their longevity, but the British exported the most unique and powerful asset: communication. The world spoke English and it became the language of business.

Banking, the Magna Carta (the forefront of liberty), the industrial revolution.

The reason their decline was assured is their adherence to a class system which celebrated the caste and prevented upward mobility. It is still this system in Canada today and hence so many of the brightest minds never reach their potential.

Then WWI and in particular WWII decimated them. In truth, the Germans ended the British Empire though they still were strong through the 60s. It has been surmised by many that one of the reason FDR did not immediately assist the British was that he despised the old colonial British out of love for the more free and capitalist Republic of America. Eventually he was convinced to send military goods to the Canadian border and allowed the Canadians to just bring them over and ship the goods to the U.K.

Sorry for the long rant but it is both amazing to understand the history and sad to see the present day. FDR actually sided with Stalin at the Yalta Conference which bothered Churchill who knew through intelligence reports that Stalin was a monster. However, FDR did not think too kindly of the Monarchist Churchill. At that time, the Brits were hardly allies, their old ways an affront to American values.

Canada is going to learn the hard way that massive, domestic policing destroys a nation. Trump views Canada and much of the West the way FDR viewed the Brits in his time. Slow and uninspiring while America is the land of the free mind, the innovative, creative and capitalist in fight for freedom.

It can be said that Trump is looking to expand the U.S empire while also saving the West primarily by saving America and nations like Israel, Argentina, Japan, Ukraine ( to a lesser extent in terms of freedoms), Venezuela (influence), perhaps Cuba and Greenland next.

The future must be what the U.S envisions and what the British failed to achieve: liberty and capitalism in which a man can pursue the greatest heights without limitations of class at birth.

Britain should still be an Empire today but they did not learn the lesson the Americans knew from inception.

 

[late]

The British to me built the greatest empire in world history. Yes, some will talk of the Roman Empire of course due to their longevity, but the British exported the most unique and powerful asset: communication. The world spoke English and it became the language of business.

Banking, the Magna Carta (the forefront of liberty), the industrial revolution.

The reason their decline was assured is their adherence to a class system which celebrated the caste and prevented upward mobility. It is still this system in Canada today and hence so many of the brightest minds never reach their potential.

Then WWI and in particular WWII decimated them. In truth, the Germans ended the British Empire though they still were strong through the 60s. It has been surmised by many that one of the reason FDR did not immediately assist the British was that he despised the old colonial British out of love for the more free and capitalist Republic of America. Eventually he was convinced to send military goods to the Canadian border and allowed the Canadians to just bring them over and ship the goods to the U.K.

Sorry for the long rant but it is both amazing to understand the history and sad to see the present day. FDR actually sided with Stalin at the Yalta Conference which bothered Churchill who knew through intelligence reports that Stalin was a monster. However, FDR did not think too kindly of the Monarchist Churchill. At that time, the Brits were hardly allies, their old ways an affront to American values.

Canada is going to learn the hard way that massive, domestic policing destroys a nation. Trump views Canada and much of the West the way FDR viewed the Brits in his time. Slow and uninspiring while America is the land of the free mind, the innovative, creative and capitalist in fight for freedom.

It can be said that Trump is looking to expand the U.S empire while also saving the West primarily by saving America and nations like Israel, Argentina, Japan, Ukraine ( to a lesser extent in terms of freedoms), Venezuela (influence), perhaps Cuba and Greenland next.

The future must be what the U.S envisions and what the British failed to achieve: liberty and capitalism in which a man can pursue the greatest heights without limitations of class at birth.

Britain should still be an Empire today but they did not learn the lesson the Americans knew from inception.

Love it.

Couple things, there was massive resistance to war before Pearl Harbor. FDR was no dummy, he knew what was coming, but his hands were tied.

Second, it is in the nature of empires to fail. Technically, we don't have an empire, but we have the costs of empire and a staggering combination of stupidity and corruption.