**Authors note: The translation I am reviewing is that of Aubrey De Sélincourt, published by Penguin classics. However if $16 on Amazon is too pricey, you can find another translation provided online by Marquet University. **
Livy
Last Christmas I got into a classics kick and began reading several of the more ancient classics, one of which was Livy’s first 5 books from his “History of Rome” (often packaged as the “Early History of Rome”). The following is my review of this work.
Not much is known about Livy himself, to the point that historians can’t agree on a proper date of birth for the man, placing his birth in either 64 or 59 BC. He lived during the Civil Wars of Julius Caesar and Augustus, but his politics are unknown. He was once called a “Pompeian” by Augustus himself, but so little is known that historians aren’t sure if it was meant as a friendly joke or not.
Livy compiled his full history of Rome under the title “Books from the founding of Rome”, which covered the period from 753 BC up to 9 BC. When the work was completed, it appears that it became a sensation. For us modern readers, its success was unfortunate, as other works were lost in favor of it. Even his own work was a victim of this success. The Books were rather lengthy and so derivative “pocket Livy’s” were published. Today only 34 of the 142 books have survived in their entirety, with the rest being lost or only known to us by a few quotes in other later works.
Books 1-5 deal with the Founding of Rome, the reign of the kings, their expulsion and founding of the republic, the wars with the neighboring Latin cities, and the sacking of Rome by gauls in 387 BC. Today it is mostly regarded that the first few books are mostly mythical. Our historian didn’t have many primary records to work with, most of which (if they ever existed) had been destroyed in the aforementioned sacking of Rome. Livy stoutly believed that present behaviors of men would provide a window into the past, and so filled in details by imputing what he saw of his fellow man in the current day and applying them to events of the past. Such thinking has since become scorned by modern historians, however I think it is a mistake to completely dismiss it out of hand. It is not the case that the stories that Livy writes are alien to us, but the opposite. The behaviors of the tyrants, kings and senators are all too recognizable to the modern eye. While they may not be factual truth, they do present principles of human behavior that can teach us today.
Excuse me, my eyes are up here.
There is one such example in Livy’s Second Book. This book begins right after the expulsion of the kings and the founding of the republic. Livy writes:
Everybody knew that war with the Tarquins was sure to come; it was, however, unexpectedly delayed, and the first move in the struggle took a form which no one had anticipated. Treason within the city itself nearly cost Rome her liberty. It began with a group of young Aristocrats who had found life under the Monarchy very agreeable; accustomed to associate with the younger members of the royal family, they had been able to give freeer reign to their appetites and to live the dissolute and irresponsible life of the court. Under the new dispensation they missed the freedom to do as they pleased, and began to complain that what might be liberty for others was more like slavery for themselves. The King, they argued, was, after all, a human being, and there was a chance of getting from him what one wanted, rightly or wrongly; under a monarchy there was room for influence and favour; a king could be angry, and forgive; he knew the difference between an enemy and a friend. Law, on the other hand, was impersonal and inexorable. Law had no ears. An excellent thing, no doubt, for paupers, it was worse than useless for the great, as it admitted no relaxation or indulgence toward a man who ventured beyond the bounds of mediocrity. Human Nature not being perfect, to suppose that a man could live in pure innocence under the law was, to put it mildly, risky.
(Livy 2.3)
This passage alone raises interesting questions to the modern reader: How does a society deal with the children of wealthy elites who have come to expect privileges? Are there benefits to a system that allows for mercy, rather than the cold justice of law? Does the law represent an unlistening force, or simply the unmerciful will of the Mob, driven by passions, as opposed to a monarch who can be understood and reasoned with?
However the questions that struck me was about allowances made for those who would be considered “great” men or women. When do we make them? Are they ever justified? When should elites be held to a higher standard, and when should we give them a pass?
Now before you go off on me about the “libertarian” ideal of “rule of law” permit me to be devils advocate. First, I would argue that a legal system that doesn’t allow for any room for human judgment and mercy can be just as tyrannical as an arbitrary king. Its the kind of slavish obedience to strict justice that drives the Javerts of the world. It’s the sentiment behind “don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time” cops . Secondly, I’d argue that all (except maybe the Hyperbole) of you have made such exceptions for great men. Americans almost universally agree that George Washington was a great man, and should be recognized and honored for his actions and character, despite his grievous flaws such as being a slave owner.
But it seems almost self evident as well, that what the youths in Livy’s tale want is unjust. Furthermore, it is a well understood principle that those in whom more power is entrusted, should be held to a higher standard. Benedict Arnold should be held to higher infamy as a traitor, than the common soldier who switched sides. Where much is given, much is required. So how do we square these two seemingly opposing sentiments?
I don’t know if I have an exact answer for this yet, but I would suggest that it has something to do with true virtue. The young men of Rome wanted to receive the benefits of the virtuous heroes, simply by result of their social status. In short they were positing their wealth not merely as proof of their good character, but instead of it. We honor George Washington, not merely because he was a wealthy land owner of the revolutionary period, but because he sacrificed for our country, and willingly shrunk from absolute power when it was offered to him.
Livy’s writings reinforce the fact that, no matter what society, there will always be “top men”. Often we mock the idea of just picking “the right TOP MEN”, but we need to be careful to not be just as utopian as the socialists we oppose. There will always be elites. What we learn from Livy is that there are important moral values that we should expect from our heroes and elites. As persons who are dedicated to freedom, we should strive to inculcate these values among ourselves, our children and our neighbors.
Executed his own kids for the republic… harsh
Overall Livy makes the stories he writes exciting and provides interesting personalities. However without a good map the locations of the narratives and additional information about the obscure cultural aspects, it can be a bit inaccessible. Overall I rate it 3/5 stars.
History…Just one damned thing after another.
Good review leon, Ill have grab a copy, I love Roman history, it is our own past,
The trouble is so few seem to learn anything from it. These moronic commie shitbirds we are infested with now still can’t grasp that they go up against the wall first. They seem to have no clue why the founders built the system that they did.
History has a liberal bias, that’s why it must be erased.
Case in point
https://www.kgw.com/mobile/video/news/local/the-story/compromise-is-no-longer-considered-valuable-one-on-one-with-sen-peter-courtney/283-b0bb08ab-810d-4b96-9020-2c087924fb65
One of the top state Dems wouldn’t want his own children and grandchildren to move to this state because it’s changed too much, whines about a loss of congeniality in politics and increasing partisanship, while barely recognizing his own role in fostering all of that.
(I personally am not entirely unhappy with the supposed lack of congeniality and unwillingness to compromise. I think the post WWII “consensus” was a phony Establishment cover for the rise of the bureaucrat state and is ahistorical. Naked partisanship is reverting to the mean and norm.)
I think he’s truly deluded. He simply cannot see that the example of Portland is an anathema to the rest of the state and the rest of the state absolutely refuses to go that direction.
Democrats hold all the cards in Oregon and they’re whining that the opposition dares to disagree with them.
That is the left in general over the last decade or so. Well, except for the holding all the cards part. Which is what is really driving a lot of this shit. They have so insulated themselves from any counter opinion that they cannot understand why people vote against them.
I think the post WWII “consensus” was a phony Establishment cover for the rise of the bureaucrat state and is ahistorical.
While it certainly was used as a cover for a lot of things, I don’t think the “consensus” was phony, but it also was a historical anomaly. I believe that the consensus was in large part driven by the foreign threat of the USSR, and I do believe that in a great nation consensus usually only comes when facing a grave foreign threat. In the Cold War there really was a cross-partisan consensus of anti-Communism, and I think that helped build bridges on many other issues (and even so, there were of course very many contentious issues, so the consensus was stronger in theory than in fact). The normal course of democracy is not consensus, so anyone who pines for consensus is no friend of true democracy. The greatest criticism of democracy is that it is divisive and acrimonious, because it is – when you make power up for grabs, people will fight for it.
Much of this seems like harmful misinformation. There must be a way to block people from seeing it, for the good of marginalized people.
Dont read it?
Can’t take that chance. If it washes just one brain, it was all worth it.
“George Washington was a great man, and should be recognized and honored for his actions and character, despite his grievous flaws such as being a slave owner.”
Washington, as much as you and I, did not make the world. He was trying to live in it.
So one of the interesting things in reading the histories in South America is that Bolivar very much likened himself to Washington. Yet he lacked Washington’s willingness to relinquish power. That’s a very big difference (and one would expect the far more common choice).
It is a big difference. What it means is that he was nothing like Washington. He was the model for today’s banana republic dictators.
Yep, and sadly there are people here in this country that think a caudillo is what we need to set things straight. You would think the ample examples of our southern neighbors would disabuse people of that.
Washington should be recognized for opting out of being a king and advocating for no foreign entanglements.
Otherwise, he left much to be desired. He was a lousy general, a notoriously thin-skinned aristocrat, and a federalist. Without his support for the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation most likely would have remained in place.
First pass:
Constantly.
No.
Interesting one. Does the power they wield mean they should be subject to a higher standard, or does it just mean that when they do bad things, the effects of those bad things may well be worse because of their power? I lean to the latter, which means the standards are the same, but the consequences of violating those standards scale with the damage done.
Never.
Indeed. And a system that provides that leniency only for the elite removes any incentive for them to provide it to the proles. Build it in at the systemic level. The alternative is a worse form of tyranny than strict rules applied to everyone without mercy. Because once you allow “flexibility” only for the elites, it will never be provided to the proles. See, e.g., the Jan. 6 prosecutions.
If I wanted to build a system of ensuring liberty, I don’t think I’d do much better than the founders, and they failed. Mankind is irredeemably cruel and war always becomes the only answer. That’s they way they want it, that’s they way they’ll get it.
I can’t help but read that in Strother Martin’s voice and want to cap it with “what we have here… is failure, to communicate”.
Often a “great man” is a egotistical sociopath that happened to be at the right place at the right time. Like Winston Churchill.
I think being so responsible for Galipolli broke him and made him a better man for what happened in WWII.
So maybe not a complete sociopath; just enough of a sociopath to be able to recover.
I’d add to your definition “and has the right vision”. To take your example, there were many other egotistical sociopaths in British politics at the time of Churchill (politics is always full of such people, after all), but his vision of complete opposition to the Nazis and complete unwillingness to surrender was what his country needed, which is why his countrymen consider him the greatest of all his contemporaries.
Another Roman history book I enjoyed: The Storm Before the Storm: The Beginning of the End of the Roman Republic
You can see some parallels between our Republic and the Romans; minus the part were the different factions are openly murdering each other. I’m sure we’ll get there soon enough
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Aaron Danielson would like a word.
With Roman history on particular, it always seems like they had to face similar challenges as we are facing. The challenges of wealth and success, urbanization, corruption, mass immigration, etc…
Like us, they generally responded better to the challenges when they small agrarian community – and not as well when scaled up to a massive empire.
OK, but wasn’t what we look back on as their era of success actually while they were out conquering all that they could. That the fall came only after there was damn near nothing left worth conquering? It’s a pretty healthy period of time between the destruction of Carthage and the final fall of Rome (and that leaves out the story of the Eastern end of the empire).
Lots of exciting things happened after the Punic Wars. Civil wars, Roman citizenship was extended to most of Italy – and the Republic immediately began to crumble, Sulla fixed it for a while, then it collapsed. The Empire started strong and by the To third Century was a complete mess and splintered into 3 parts… Miraculous it lasted as long as it did.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century
If you like both Roman history and lots of good gossip of questionable validity you can’t beat Suetonius and “The Twelve Caesars”
It’s been so long I forget which translation I read.
Every Empire is eventually going to end up living cheek-by-jowl with its enemies. They made deals with the Goths and reneged, starving & enslaving them.
Our politicians that like to talk about nukes & F15s might do well to remember how the impoverished yet motivated Goths did against Rome.
Our politicians that like to talk about nukes & F15s might do well to remember how the impoverished yet motivated Goths did against Rome.
And those that talk like that also forget a key issue in successful military action: logistics & supply. If you nuke your own country you will seriously damage your own supply (the reason the US nuked and firebombed Japan was for this very reason, to destroy industrial capacity), and your fancy fighter jets can’t do much about guerillas disrupting their fuel lines.
I recently re-read Thucydides’s History of the Peloponnesian Wars, and will be reading Xenophon’s Hellenica and Anabasis. It’s interesting to see similar, but far from identical, themes play out in Athens vs Rome. I’m pretty sure I’ve got the Livy around and if not will grab a copy.
As noted above ancient history is fun.
What we are seeing in our cities – murder, violent protests – seems to be destroying our civilization. What remedies, that also respect individual rights, can be implemented in our cities (assuming the Blue rulers see the light) to turn around the cultural decay that spawns the violence? Every “solution” that gets in the media seems to promote “stop and frisk,” “take away peoples’ guns,” “lock up the criminals and throw away the key,” “take more resources from the successful folks and give it to those waving their fists and committing crimes.”
What remedies, that also respect individual rights, can be implemented in our cities (assuming the Blue rulers see the light) to turn around the cultural decay that spawns the violence?
Arrest and prosecute anyone who violates other people’s rights, for violating other people’s rights, would be a good start. Looting, arson, assault, etc. should provide plenty of fodder to encourager les autres within a framework of liberty.
True, but the problem the city cops seem to have is finding witnesses who will finger the perps. Except for countless FBI hours spent finding doofusses who wandered around the Rotunda on Jan. 6th, how much time have LEOs put into finding who burned down buildings and assaulted people in those mostly peaceful riots last year?
https://www.kmov.com/news/murder-charges-dismissed-after-st-louis-circuit-attorneys-office-failed-to-show-up-at-hearings/article_02db69c4-e945-11eb-a02a-c3e54cad9220.html
Witnesses?
Hell, they can’t even get the DAs to show up.
The prosecutor was on maternity leave. Give her a break.
You don’t expect the DA’s office to provide cover for her while she’s out do you?
And a link earlier today referred to govt as an “expert system”.
True, but the problem the city cops seem to have is finding witnesses who will finger the perps.
When the perps they catch red-handed are immediately released, why should anyone expose themselves to retaliation by helping to catch more, who will also be immediately released.
Sit some of these antifa goons down, let them know there will be no bail because of the danger they represent, walk them through what they will face when convicted because the DA is going to drop the hammer on them, and see what kind of cooperation you get. Scoreboard some 20 to life sentences, and they’l start talking.
The FBI is purposefully stonewalling on the issue of Antifa.
Why is not that important. They’re refusing to do their jobs in this case.
Eventually, someone will do their job for them.
It is simply incredible that mutliple violent assaults on federal buildings, federal employees, even federal LEOs is going completely unpunished by the feds. I have to believe the other agencies, the ones with their people in the hospital or blinded, are pretty pissed.
The BLM/antifa crew threw one riot in Tucson. The local cops responded by dragging students who participated off campus in handcuffs.
No. More. Riots.
Antifa is nothing without protection provided by the government.
Interestingly enough, Barr provided cover for the FBI’s refusal. Trump wanted to fire Wray over it, but Barr said he’d quit if Trump did so.
Barr turned out to be yet another shining example of the rot in DC.
It’s Posobiec, so take it with a grain of salt, but it certainly fits my biases.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/06/revealed-bill-barr-chris-wray-worked-block-trumps-efforts-go-antifa-video/
Don’t forget Milley who along with other brass refused to allow the military to put down actual no shit domestic insurrection and restore civil order. But pat themselves on the back for their brave response to Jan 6 and willingness to oppose a coup attempt that lives in their heads.
Milley is a reprehensible sack of shit.
Yep. One local riot and the police have been announcing arrests every couple of months as they figure out more people. Another, more conservative, town had several attempts to create violence in residential neighborhoods. Police there nipped it in the bud. As a result the leftists have been waging war against the PD and got the then chief removed and replaced by a big city “professional”. Also helps that Portland has sucked the most willing and violent into that briar patch.
Antifa is nothing without protection provided by the government.
This. They only seem to thrive where the government both does not prosecute them but also does prosecute those who stand up to them.
Hence why they will eventually start mysteriously disappearing or their meeting spaces will spontaneously combust with them in it.
There’s a limit to what people will tolerate.
The cultural decay is a different issue, with a different locus. That, I fear, can’t be remedied without the wholesale purge or destruction of the institutions fostering it – government, the media, academia, government schools, etc.
That was my thinking, wholesale purge. But I also think the decay can outlast me. A real shift, if it comes, will be very slowly and then suddenly.
“What remedies…?”
1. End entitlements.
2. Unleash 2A, Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground.
3. Rock n Roll.
$16 isn’t too much but the redesign Penguin Books did about 15 years ago made me never buy another new book from them. Their books used to have a nice feel to the pages and would lie flat when open. The revision used very stiff almost plastic like covers with sharp cut edges and stiff binding that make it a chore to hold and read.
Don’t get me started on the larger industry change of the dimension size for mass market paperbacks. Gone from a book you can stick in your pocket to a shape resembling a box of spaghetti and a width that only T Rex would find comfortable to hold.
From the dead thread — kinnath’s house has a walkability score of 0 — first line of defense.
Same score for me. Closest is a convenience store 6 miles away. Still see some bums walking down the main road from time to time.
Not sure how much I trust that site. They said the area I’m in has low bikeability and public transit score. There’s a bike trail a quarter mile from my house that connects into the full Metropark system (over 100 miles of trails with plenty of places to pop out), and two blocks away is a major North/South bus corridor that can take you to the Rapid station. Not that you would want to ride the bus system in the suburbs unless you had to.
Yeah, looking at it for my location it seems to be weighing on the distance of downtown Henderson (for me). Would have to see some other data to confirm how they weigh it. Says I have to drive to errands, but I have booze, haircut, bank, grocery all within a 2-minute walk. For biking it seems to only look at the hilly areas, but in the opposite direction, it is bike heaven.
Hell, they reference a distance to the “downtown” of my suburb. I have no idea where they’re calling downtown.
My house is at the top of the hill, which means riding out is always a lot easier then riding home. In fairness, it’s only a 1% grade.
I got a 1. Pretty good for the suburbs.
Oh I have maximum walkability… right in the center of the biggest city in the country
Smoke in the air, can smell the burning. I’m guessing the western fires, none locally AFAIK. Montana? Hazy sun yesterday, grey air today and no breeze.
I saw your post about the seedlings pretty late the other day.
I would plant late August or early September. You want them to go dormant shortly after they have been planted and to wake up in the spring in the new location.
My best guess anyway.
I think I’ll defer to your advice. It’ll also give a little more time for me to get stronger.
Air quality has steadily gotten worse today, eastern PA. This fire in SE Oregon must really be something to actually alter ground level conditions like it has. It’s amazing to me how far away events can impact weather. I remember a glorious sunset from a Sahara sandstorm. I preferred that.
Lots of fires
https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/
(not all are active, but even the ones fully contained may still be smoldering)
I saw that this morning, reports that the smoke from the western fires has made it to the east coast.
So thats why the sky is pale yellow, and Im on the Lake Michigan shoreline, a l ong wat from the fires!
Interesting map
https://fire.airnow.gov/
I hate purple air.
We’re in the “Very Unhealthy” status now
Isn’t that the truth.
Any updates on blue Laredo suing DHS for bussing in all the covid-positive border jumpers and dumping them all there? Dissention in the Dem ranks.
I doubt it. must tow the lion to get Kamala elected
I was not told there would be ancient history. Will this be on the test?
It should be easy for you. You were there, weren’t you?
Rome was a dump those days.
Just copy off of R C, he seems pretty smart.
My exposure to Roman History is limited to HS Latin (Caesar’s Gallic Wars, Cicero’s Catalinian orations) and Taylor Caldwell’s A Pillar of Iron (more Cicero; dude was a badass). Definitely need to check out Livy.
I wonder if the ancient Romans had the equivalent of our media. This is from Yahoo, but every media outlet seems to have the same headline all of a sudden:
https://news.yahoo.com/texas-senate-bill-end-classroom-200640544.html
The headline:
Texas Senate bill removes classroom requirement to teach that the KKK is ‘morally wrong’
The actual requirement to be dropped:
A current requirement, that students learn: “the history of white supremacy, including but not limited to the institution of slavery, the eugenics movement, and the Ku Klux Klan, and the ways in which it is morally wrong” would be dropped if the bill is passed.
Poorly worded, but as I read it “it is morally wrong” references “white supremacy”. At any rate, the headline is grossly misleading at best, and searching for “texas kkk morally wrong” will fetch identical results from multiple media outlets. TMITE.
I would expect that Progressives would be happy that the history of the eugenics movement isn’t required to be taught any longer.
Where does it say we can’t talk about Margaret Sanger?
According to the textbooks, eugenics was a Republican thing.
How many times do we have to explain it to you. THE PARTIES SWITCHED!
I know. I always forget the mass defections of elected officials and apparatchiks from one party to the other in the 60s.
Yes, like Strom Thurmond. And… and… oh, we all know they’re out there!
I’m surprised Robert Byrd won re-election after he became a Republican.
Thurmond, Byrd, and any others I (obviously) don’t remember must have regarded LBJ as the ultimate race traitor. Didn’t appreciate the value of practical racism, I guess. LBJ had the right formula for keeping the darkies on the plantation.
@Ghostpatzer
Byrd never changed parties, R C Dean was being facetious. Also, Thurmond ironically would have been considered a race traitor by many of his pro-segregation supporters, as it came out after he died that he had a bastard daughter with a black woman who he secretly supported, including paying for her to attend college.
Thanks, Gadfly. Thought I missed something there. I really do appreciate the continuing education here.
CLIMATE CRISIS IS WHITE SUPREMACY.
You see, if they had worked that into the curriculum more prominently, it would have been more successful.
CLIMATE CRISIS IS WHITE SUPREMACY.
That’s what we want you to think. The dead thread comments on sunburn by melanin-challenged glibs suggest otherwise. Sun People will rise again!
Relevant ?
LOL, that tickles my fancy in two areas. /not a euphemism
“including but not limited to”
Oh, please elucidate us with the other examples of white supremacy that you conveniently left out of your description.
I wonder if the ancient Romans had the equivalent of our media.
I’d say the town criers people could pay to say whatever they want was essentially the same, and the various book writers somewhat similar. All manner of slander was frequently spread about opposing politicos, although what was considered taboo was of course different (although, when you break it down into the broad categories of “impiety” and “sexual deviancy”, you might be able to consider it broadly the same). The biggest difference I can think of is that the slanderers of old had a much greater chance of coming to bodily harm over their lies, so can at least be considered to have a little bravery in their vice.
Resumé rewrite time. I have one new (pending) educational achievement/qualification (box ticking curriculum which amounts to nothing in terms of actual content or ability), so I suppose I have leveled up very slightly on paper? It is all irrelevant in the end. Every job I’ve ever had was because someone needed someone at the right time, ended up talking to me, and liking what they saw at interview. Educational boxes check didn’t matter at all.
Is it the kind of thing that would get you mo’ money if someone did want to hire you? My Certified Scrum Master got me a few extra bucks. Made up for the cost of the education, at least.
I doubt it, but it’s in the pocket, and I made some friends/connections doing the course, which has consistently been the only significant value I have found in any education past high school.
Livy’s writings reinforce the fact that, no matter what society, there will always be “top men”. Often we mock the idea of just picking “the right TOP MEN”, but we need to be careful to not be just as utopian as the socialists we oppose. There will always be elites. What we learn from Livy is that there are important moral values that we should expect from our heroes and elites. As persons who are dedicated to freedom, we should strive to inculcate these values among ourselves, our children and our neighbors.
I agree wholeheartedly. A society organized around those moral values is more likely to produce a better class of Top. Men.
I really enjoyed your review, leon. Thanks!
What we learn from Livy is that there are important moral values that we should expect from our heroes and elites.
Also agree. And those moral values are squarely in the crosshairs these days. I’ve always been leery of “thin libertarianism”, as I think a society with a minimalist legal code is going to need a strong moral code, or there’s nothing keeping it from sinking to the lowest common denominator.
Americans almost universally agree that George Washington was a great man, and should be recognized and honored for his actions and character, despite his grievous flaws such as being a slave owner.
…
We honor George Washington, not merely because he was a wealthy land owner of the revolutionary period, but because he sacrificed for our country, and willingly shrunk from absolute power when it was offered to him.
I think that the whole willingness to refuse being dictator does a lot to overshadow being a slave owner and make him worthy of honor. A dictator, which so many of our current politicians aspire to be, desires to be master over a whole nation, while a slave-owner desires only to be master of his household – there’s a great degree of difference there, despite the two vices extending from the same impulse.
The Brewster’s angle for a material x (in degrees) is 360-arctan(n(x)).
I’m so glad I can rely on calculators for this.
Also, 350nm of a SiON film gives a really nice purpleen effect.
You know who else wanted to create an empire…
Stalin?
Ensemble Studios?
James K Polk?
Queensrÿche?
Joseph Katz?
Chancellor Palpatine?
Jean-Bédel Bokassa?
Mojeaux?
Queensryche?
Anticipated by Gustave. Should’ve gone with Mussolini.
[Joshua Abraham] Norton I?
I know who did not. Me.
Everyone else’s problems become yours. Who needs that shit?
However the questions that struck me was about allowances made for those who would be considered “great” men or women. When do we make them? Are they ever justified? When should elites be held to a higher standard, and when should we give them a pass?
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Ain’t nothin’ ’bout no l33ts.
A nice cynical summation of the past 40 years.
https://thezman.com/wordpress/?p=24462
Watching Fauci lie.
Note Fauci’s shift – he goes from “we never funded gain of function research” to “well, that gain of function research that we funded wouldn’t have resulted in COVID”. What a dirtbag.
And now we see what it’s all about. From day one, this has been Fauci and a few others trying to cover their asses knowing that they fucked up royally.
I don’t think that accomplishing your goal is ‘fucking up’. I remember him from 35 years ago. He was full of beans then and he is full of beans now. Because it has been so long I cant remember how this got stuck in my head but I think he is a malthusian and palled around with other prominent malthusians. I cant swear to it but that is my foggy memory.
I loved his reliance on group think of the collected (but anonymous) staff as opposed to their own published standard on what is gain-of-function. The true art of bureaucracy on full display.
Fauci’s panicking.
“Senator Paul, you do not know what you’re talking about.”
He’s not challenging what is in the papers, he’s going after Rand’s credibility instead. Meaning he knows he can’t contest the paperwork.
I loved his reliance on the staff groupthink that the paper did NOT represent gain of function even though it fit the NIH definition of it.
WTF, I thought that comment was eaten. [kicks pebble]
I think it just gained function, so its transmissability was improved.
Paul made a rookie error, there, BTW. He shouldn’t have gone on to editorialize about causing death. He should have just pinned Fauci on his lie about the NIH never funding gain of function research. He gave Fauci a rhetorical out.
Then Paul could move on to the gain-of-function research done by the same team, at the same lab, on coronaviruses.
Yeah, Rand’s too concerned with creating a media outtake for fundraising. It’s annoying.
Election’s coming!
“So, Mr. Fauci, you admit that the NIH did fund gain of function research at Wuhan, that the same team that you funded did gain of function research on coronaviruses, and you cannot give us assurances that NIH funding was not used for gain of function research on coronaviruses. Given your support for this funding, I wonder if you feel any responsibility at all for the pandemic which has cost millions of lives.”
That should do it for the fundraising soundbite. Gotta lay the foundation first, though.
I am not sure that it matters that much. No one on either side will be swayed.