Exciting stories of currency manipulation, shady fiscal policy enactments, and that can-do German spirit await you!
1 Like
History: “Don’t make me repeat myself!!!”.
Humanity: " 
… 
why not?".
1 Like
WW2 is definitely probably the most over-represented part of western history. That’s what got myself studying the subject when I was a young boy.
On the other note: I’ve never really studied Chinese history. Of course I know the basics, specially the most recent stuff, but one of this years goals is to read more about history of pre-industrial era China and far-east.
Chinese history is a mammoth subject, on account of thousands of years of civilization and writing. It is somewhere on my list of future topics to explore in more depth.
I recently watched a very good lecture about Mao from US Naval War college professor Sarah Paine. She’s a very impressive lady and I like her presentation style.
1 Like
I would suggest reading the first volume of Will Durant’s history, Our Oriental Heritage to learn about Chinese and Asian history. He won the Pulitzer Prize and his very comprehensive work has rarely been equaled. The book is widely available dirt cheap on Kindle or at any (online or physical) used book store, likely since it used to be given away free if you joined the Book-Of-The-Month Club back when this was popular.
1 Like
I’ll ad it to this years book list!
If you read it, you will understand everything important about China, India, Japan and Asia, in addition to the essential parts of anthropology, religion and culture (necessary to really understand Asia). No one has repeated what Durant wrote, though it took him forty years.
These are some quotes of his from Our Oriental Heritage pulled from Goodreads. Durant is such a good writer many of his summaries of famous people became well known quotes accredited to the people he was writing about. Only negative point is he wrote this in the 1930s and could not see the future.
• Quotes
◦ Most history is guessing, and the rest is prejudice.
◦ Magic begins in superstition, and ends in science.
◦ History, said Bacon, is the planks of a shipwreck; more of the past is lost than has been saved.
◦ The radicals of one age are the reactionaries of the next.
◦ “All the world fears Time,” says an Arab proverb, “but Time fears the Pyramids.”
◦ The real basis of the royal power and imperial government was the army; an empire exists only so long as it retains its superior capacity to kill.
◦ It is in the nature of governments to degenerate; for power, as Shelley said, poisons every hand that touches it.
◦ Religion destroyed what it could no longer inspire.
◦ It is in the nature of an empire to disintegrate soon, for the energy that created it disappears from those who inherit it, at the very time that its subject peoples are gathering strength to fight for their lost liberty.
• Humor and Cynicism
◦ The moulders of the world’s myths were unsuccessful husbands, for they agreed that woman was the root of all evil; this was a view sacred not only to Hebraic and Christian tradition, but to a hundred pagan mythologies.
◦ Nietzsche thought Asia right about women, and considered their subjection the only alternative to their unchecked ascendancy.
◦ In simple days men married for cheap labor, profitable parentage, and regular meals.
◦ When Kublai Khan’s ambassador, Tcheou-ta-Kouan, visited the Khmer capital, Angkor Thom, he found a strong government ruling a nation that had drawn wealth out of its rice-paddies and its sweat. The king, Tcheou reported, had five wives: “one special, and four others for the cardinal points of the compass,” with some four thousand concubines for more precise readings.
◦ Thutmose I not only consolidated the power of the new empire, but—on the ground that western Asia must be controlled to prevent further interruptions—invaded Syria, subjugated it from the coast to Carchemish, put it under guard and tribute, and returned to Thebes laden with spoils and the glory that always comes from the killing of men.
◦ Death was the penalty for any of a great variety of crimes, such as housebreaking, damage to royal property, or theft on a scale that would now make a man a very pillar of society.
◦ In a conflict between superstition and philosophy one may safely wager on the victory of superstition, for the world wisely prefers happiness to wisdom.
◦ Slowly, however, evolving morals changed even religious rites; the gods imitated the increasing gentleness of their worshipers, and resigned themselves to accepting animal instead of human meat; a hind took the place of Iphigenia, and a ram was substituted for Abraham’s son. In time the gods did not receive even the animal; the priests liked savory food, ate all the edible parts of the sacrificial victim themselves, and offered upon the alter only the entrails and the bones.
◦ Women were attached to every temple, some as domestics, some as concubines for the gods or their duly constituted representatives on earth.
◦ When men were cannibals human sacrifices were offered in India as elsewhere; Kali particularly had an appetite for men, but the Brahmans explained that she would eat only men of the lower castes.
◦ The priests assured the faithful that a man of forty could purchase another decade of life by paying forty temples to say masses in his name; at fifty he could buy ten years more by engaging fifty temples; at sixty years sixty temples—and so till, through insufficient piety, he died.
◦ [On Japan’s invasion of China] The European world, which had proposed a moratorium on robbery after it had gathered in all available spoils, joined America feebly in protests against this candid plunder, but prepared, as always, to accept victory as justification in the end.
◦ Manchuria belonged by manifest destiny to Japan. By what right? By the same right whereby England had taken India and Australia, France Indo-China, Germany Shantung, Russia Port Arthur, and America the Philippines—the right of the need of the strong. In the long run no excuses would be necessary; all that was needed was power and an opportunity. In the eyes of a Darwinian world success would sanction every means.
• Civilization
◦ a pathological concentration of wealth, leading to class wars, disruptive revolutions, and financial exhaustion: these are some of the ways in which a civilization may die.
◦ It is almost a law of history that the same wealth that generates a civilization announces its decay. For wealth produces ease as well as art; it softens a people to the ways of luxury and peace, and invites invasion from stronger arms and hungrier mouths.
◦ The superstitions of Babylonia seem ridiculous to us, because they differ superficially from our own. There is hardly an absurdity of the past that cannot be found flourishing somewhere in the present. Underneath all civilization, ancient or modern, moved and still moves a sea of magic, superstition and sorcery.
◦ The weakness of Oriental monarchies was bound up with this addiction to violence. Not only did the subject provinces repeatedly revolt, but within the royal palace or family itself violence again and again attempted to upset what violence had established and maintained. At or near the end of almost every reign some disturbance broke out over the succession to the throne; the aging monarch saw conspiracies forming around him, and in several cases he was hastened to his end by murder. The nations of the Near East preferred violent uprisings to corrupt elections, and their form of recall was assassination.
◦ Weakened by division, [India] succumbed to invaders; impoverished by invaders, it lost all power of resistance, and took refuge in supernatural consolations; it argued that both mastery and slavery were superficial delusions, and concluded that freedom of the body or the nation was hardly worth defending in so brief a life. The bitter lesson that may be drawn from this tragedy is that eternal vigilance is the price of civilization. A nation must love peace, but keep its powder dry.
◦ At every step the history of civilization teaches us how slight and superficial a structure civilization is, and how precariously it is poised upon the apex of a never-extinct volcano of poor and oppressed barbarism, superstition and ignorance.
◦ Sumeria was to Babylonia, and Babylonia to Assyria, what Crete was to Greece, and Greece to Rome: the first created a civilization, the second developed it to its height, the third inherited it, added little to it, protected it, and transmitted it as a dying gift to the encompassing and victorious barbarians. For barbarism is always around civilization, amid it and beneath it, ready to engulf it by arms, or mass migration, or unchecked fertility. Barbarism is like the jungle; it never admits its defeat; it waits patiently for centuries to recover the territory it has lost.
◦ The world is dotted with areas where once civilization flourished, and where nomads roam again.
◦ Civilization is an occasional and temporary interruption of the jungle.
• Philosophy
◦ The goal of philosophy is to find that secret, and to lose the seeker in the secret found.
◦ Religion offered motives, ideas and the inspiration; but it imposed conventions and restraints which bound art so completely to the church that when sincere religion died among the artists, the arts that had lived on it died too. This is the tragedy of almost every civilization—that its soul is in its faith, and seldom survives philosophy.
◦ A nation is born stoic, and dies epicurean. At its cradle (to repeat a thoughtful adage) religion stands, and philosophy accompanies it to the grave.
◦ The first lesson that the sages of the Upanishads teach their selected pupils is the inadequacy of the intellect. How can this feeble brain, that aches at a little calculus, ever hope to understand the complex immensity of which it is so transitory a fragment? Not that the intellect is useless; it has its modest place, and serves us well when it deals with relations and things; but how it falters before the eternal, the infinite, or the elementally real! In the presence of that silent reality which supports all appearances, and wells up in all consciousness, we need some other organ of perception and understanding than these senses and this reason.
◦ In the end, says Buddha, we perceive the absurdity of moral and psychological individualism. Our fretting selves are not really separate beings and powers, but passing ripples on the stream of life, little knots forming and unraveling in the wind-blown mesh of fate. When we see ourselves as parts of a whole, when we reform our selves and our desires in terms of the whole, then our personal disappointments and defeats, our varied suffering and inevitable death, no longer sadden us as bitterly as before; they are lost in the amplitude of infinity. When we have learned to love not our separate life, but all men and all living things, then at last we shall find peace.
◦ While Greece was winning victories she paid little attention to Pythagoras or Parmenides; when Greece was declining, Plato and the Orphic priests took up the doctrine of reincarnation, while Zeno the Oriental preached an almost Hindu fatalism and resignation; and when Greece was dying, the Neo-Platonists and the Gnostics drank deep at Indian wells.
◦ It is characteristic of Chinese thought that it speaks not of saints but of sages, not so much of goodness as of wisdom; to the Chinese the ideal is not the pious devotee but the mature and quiet mind, the man who, though fit to hold high place in the world, retires to simplicity and silence. Silence is the beginning of wisdom.
• Religion
◦ Fear, as Lucretius said, was the first mother of the gods. Fear, above all, of death.
◦ Just as compulsion grew into conscience, so fear graduated into love; the ritual of ancestor-worship, probably generated by terror, later aroused the sentiment of awe, and finally developed piety and devotion. It is the tendency of gods to begin as ogres and to end as loving fathers; the idol passes into an ideal as the growing security, peacefulness and moral sense of the worshipers pacify and transform the features of their once ferocious deities. The slow progress of civilization is reflected in the tardy amiability of the gods.
◦ A man—or, in later and milder days, an animal—was sacrificed to the earth at sowing time, so that it might be fertilized by his blood. When the harvest came it was interpreted as the resurrection of the dead man; the victim was given, before and after his death, the honors of a god; and from this origin arose, in a thousand forms, the almost universal myth of a god dying for his people, and then returning triumphantly to life.
◦ The glories of science have their roots in the absurdities of magic. For since magic often failed, it became of advantage to the magician to discover natural operations by which he might help supernatural forces to produce the desired event.
◦ Religion begins by offering magical aid to harassed and bewildered men; it culminates by giving to a people that unity of morals and belief which seems so favorable to statesmanship and art; it ends by fighting suicidally in the lost cause of the past. For as knowledge grows or alters continually, it clashes with mythology and theology, which change with geological leisureliness. Priestly control of arts and letters is then felt as a galling shackle or hateful barrier, and intellectual history takes on the character of a “conflict between science and religion.” Institutions which were at first in the hands of the clergy, like law and punishment, education and morals, marriage and divorce, tend to escape from ecclesiastical control, and become secular, perhaps profane. The intellectual classes abandon the ancient theology and—after some hesitation—the moral code allied with it; literature and philosophy become anticlerical. The movement of liberation rises to an exuberant worship of reason, and falls to a paralyzing disillusionment with every dogma and every idea. Conduct, deprived of its religious supports, deteriorates into epicurean chaos; and life itself, shorn of consoling faith, becomes a burden alike to conscious poverty and to weary wealth. In the end a society and its religion tend to fall together, like body and soul, in a harmonious death. Meanwhile among the oppressed another myth arises, gives new form to human hope, new courage to human effort, and after centuries of chaos builds another civilization.
◦ [In Judaism,] for the first time in the literature of Asia, the social conscience takes definite form, and pours into religion a content that lifts it from ceremony and flattery to a whip of morals and a call to nobility.
◦ By picturing the world as the scene of a struggle between good and evil, the Zoroastrians established in the popular imagination a powerful supernatural stimulus and sanction for morals. The soul of man, like the universe, was represented as a battleground of beneficent and maleficent spirits; every man was a warrior, whether he liked it or not, in the army of either the Lord or the Devil; every act or omission advanced the cause of Ahura-Mazda or of Ahriman. It was an ethic even more admirable than the theology—if men must have supernatural supports for their morality; it gave to the common life a dignity and significance grander than any that could come to it from a world-view that locked upon man (in medieval phrase) as a helpless worm or (in modern terms) as a mechanical automaton.
◦ Human beings were not, to Zarathustra’s thinking, mere pawns in this cosmic war; they had free will, since Ahura-Mazda wished them to be personalities in their own right; they might freely choose whether they would follow the Light or the Lie. For Ahriman was the Living Lie, and every liar was his servant.
◦ The contrast between Christian precept and the practice of Christians left the Hindus skeptical and satirical. They pointed out that the raising of Lazarus from the dead was unworthy of remark; their own religion had many more interesting and astonishing miracles than this; and any true Yogi could perform miracles today, while those of Christianity were apparently finished.
◦ Despite its elements of nobility, Buddhism, like Stoicism, was a slave philosophy, even if voiced by a prince; it meant that all desire or struggle, even for personal or national freedom, should be abandoned, and that the ideal was a desireless passivity
2 Likes
Long post! Ton of good stuff.
Some notes below:
People rarely understand how little material there is at hand when we move beyond 20-21th century. It’s often like doing a puzzle, but with fraction of the pieces left.
And there are problems even with modern history. Human mind can not understand history as a whole, world is too large and chaotic for that. There is no such entity as history, there is just massive amounts of different events happening and by interpreting some of these events we build narratives what can be called as history (or histories).
This is some pure Montesquieu. I fully agree. The fallacy of a ”good absolute ruler”.
Ukraine or Taiwan comes to mind too.
Hahah. Yes.
1 Like
@twojarslave
Tank museum writeup
The Tank Museum (actual name lol) was absolutely phenomenal and worth the trip.
The collection is absolutely insane. Tanks from every era and every conflict where tanks were used from WWI to Ukraine, and even more in the conservation centre that we didn’t get to see in detail. The exhibits are organised into 7 exhibits. The main one “tanks throughout history” traces the history of tank development and use. There are others that cover tanks in popular culture, WWI, WWII from the British perspective and two “special” exhibits, one on tanks in Ukraine and another on failed models.
We also went during the VE Day period so we got to see them do a driving display involving the Sherman from Fury and peek into the conservation centre. I also really appreciated the attention put into non tank vehicles (e.g., recon vehicles, personnel carriers) and anti tank weapons. I do wish they would have shown more tanks from smaller countries though. I wanted to see some Italian and Japanese tanks just for the contrast.
In total, we spent 5.5 hours there and probably could have spent more time going through the some of the exhibits if we were more interested in stuff like tanks in popular culture or didn’t have as much background knowledge with WWII.
Other takeaways:
- Seeing the tanks in person is quite different from watching them on screen. Most of the tanks looked a lot smaller than expected and definitely did not look like 3- 4 grown men would fit inside. On the other hand, the heavy tanks were a LOT bigger than I imagined. The barrels were also a lot longer and thicker and the engines are a lot louder than I thought. There’s something special about being able to feel the vehicles and contrast the differences in quality. I didn’t quite appreciate how difficult maintaining German tank would be until I saw the jigsaw puzzle of wheels. Whoever designed that hadn’t been anywhere near mud
- The museum really put in effort to cater to families with simple explanations, small games, colouring areas and even a cafe playground area. The tradeoff is that some of the explanations aren’t quite accurate, but it doesn’t really matter.
I’ll definitely be going back again for tankfest at some point.
Finally, some pics
8 Likes
Thanks for the great write-up and taking nice photos. That’s definitely a place I’d like to visit for a lot of the same reasons you explained.
1 Like
I cannot stop reading about colonial America. Ive gone through everything interesting about the revolution and now im diving more into the French and Indian war. I thnk in some of whatcdraws me especially to those conflict is a lot of important fighting happened where im from. Used to visit Ticonderoga (Carillon) and fort william henry years back. Cant help but watch Last of the Mohicans 4 times a year.
Currently reading this. Kind of an overview, but a good start before the deep dove.
1 Like
Who was it extracted from?
Hitler and the NS rejected capitalism, but from my knowledge encouraged entrepreneurship. How would their economic system be classified?
I sincerely want to know. I’ve only watched some videos on the Third Reich and read some articles. I did read the first volume of Mein Kampf from beginning to end and only part of the second about two decades ago. If I recall correctly, Hitler’s ideas for societal organization are written in the second.
First Jews and other undesirables within the Reich, then their neighbors after successful conquests, along with taxing wealthy Germans. Gotz Aly goes into remarkable depth about how this was achieved, including manipulating the foreign currencies to inflate them while keeping the Reichsmark afloat. There were a lot of accounting and finance gimmicks throughout the entire Nazi era, sometimes playing reactive games on a week-by-week basis to keep the whole thing from collapsing.
I would call it a totalitarian state-controlled economy that strongly discouraged entrepreneurship while retaining nominal concepts of private property and “market competition”. It didn’t seek to completely erase the concept of private property like communism, but it did seek total state control of everything. The Reichstag Decrees were not just about Jews, but redefining the concept of private property for everyone in the Reich. It was by no means anything resembling a free market or even a highly regulated market like the USA’s.
It was a centrally-planned command economy featuring wage controls, price controls, rent controls, procurement controls, progressive taxation, extensive social welfare and the nationalization of entire industries. It had the largest union in history called the Deutsches Arbeit Front (DAF), which had about 3 times as many members as the Nazi Party itself. This was a nationalized union, similar to what happened to the unions in the Soviet Union.
The Vampire Economy is a great book written by a German communist dissident in the 1930’s where he makes a lot of direct, well-documented observations about all of the economic controls I mentioned above, while the author still clings to the idea that everything he was documenting was somehow “capitalist”. Tooze plays similar mental gymnastics in Wages of Destruction, and so do many well-regarded historians who are often sympathetic to Marxism or outright Marxists themselves.
In that regard The Vampire Economy is a good example of how a person’s own political bias shapes their perspective on what they’re observing. The fact that private property existed at all is enough to call it “capitalist” in the eyes of a communist or even a socialist, despite many situations like Hugo Junkers, where his entire aircraft business was taken from him because he didn’t want to produce armaments for the Nazis.
IG Farben is another notorious example of a so-called “private” business. How “private” is a business whose entire board of directors were Nazi Party members except for one Swiss national?
If McDonalds were doing business in Nazi Germany, it would have looked similar as it does here except it would have a Nazi standing there to enforce party ideology and policy within the business, doing nothing to help with the actual business activities. If the owner didn’t want to run the business in that way, they could simply take it from him by having men with guns show up from the government.
When I think about the term “right wing” in 2025, it now strikes me as a long-term Socialist propaganda effort to conflate National Socialism with American Republican ideas about government, when in fact the two have very little in common.
2 Likes
Thanks for that detailed reply.
1 Like
For a REALLY detailed explanation, Hitler’s Beneficiaries delivers. This is page 140, explaining how rail cars, automobiles and food was extracted at scale from occupied Belgium.
1 Like
Thanks. I actually have big interest in the subject but my life now does not allow to read about all I want to learn. Perhaps when I retire I will dedicate much reading time to this. I’m admittedly skeptical about authors who write on World War II and National Socialism considering some of the conflicting information I’ve consumed.
Just one example is the cause of World War II. Some say it was caused because of Polish aggression and Poland not letting go of Danzig. Others say this is BS and that Danzig was German run even before WWII started and that the Germans used false-flag events as an excuse to go to war with Poland.
Some say Hitler wanted to “kill all the Slavs,” yet he supported the gaining of independence of Croatia and Slovakia, and allied with Bulgaria and Serbia. And there were many Slavs in the Waffen SS. A chunk of Germans (even those close to Hitler) have Slavic last names.
Hitler did express hostility to Czechs, Russians, and Poles in Mein Kampf though (and the French, who he considered obsessed with black people).
Awesome photos
1 Like
That’s why I think current academic history books are far superior to most stuff written during Hitler’s time and even long after the war ended. The two I mentioned above, Hitler’s Beneficiaries and Hitler’s National Socialism, are very well-supported in their sources and reasoning. Zitelman even addresses his academic critics in the most recent edition.
If you compare those two books to, say, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by Shirer, a very well-known book on Nazi Germany, it isn’t even close. Shirer is more of a storyteller in this regard, and he uses sources of a less-reliable nature, like imprisoned Nazis after the war, newspaper articles, diaries, and personal recollection of his time in Germany. He’s trying to paint a particular picture and there’s a lot of people who want to see it the same way he does.
History is full of contradictions and WWII is no exception. Nazi ideology shifted over time and wasn’t entirely a one-man show, which is part of how non ethnic Germans ended up in SS uniforms and similar outcomes.
Lumping NS in with fascism also began as communist propaganda, even if Hitler leaned into this term for his own reasons. Italian fascism and National Socialism were totally different ideologies. Fascism in Italy wasn’t racist until 1938, when Italy’s own dysfunction and pressure from Hitler got them to adopt anti-Jewish measures, which were still nothing like what was in the Reich. There were over 10,000 Jews in the Italian Fascist party.
2 Likes
Not really. Shirer was a journalist in Berlin at the relevant time (from the early 30s), met many of the officials personally, and heard things from the horse’s mouth. It is true his account was contemporaneous and lacked perspective at a time when the bigger picture was hard to know. But it is a fascinating personal account, hardly just propaganda.
A much longer perspective on the German economy is in the excellent book The Arms of Krupp. A rarely told perspective on the immediate aftermath of the war (including the Cold War until the Berlin Airlift) is given in Botting’s Ruins of the Reich. Many Germans suffered considerably too.
I didn’t call it propaganda, but storytelling. A journalist’s account of the whole thing is nothing like an economist and sociologists account of the whole thing. He’s a storyteller, not an academic interested in getting to the facts.
Hitler’s National Socialism’s main source is everything Hitler spoke or wrote about that’s been reliably documented, for instance. It is rather straightforward in that regard, with good explanations of Zitelman’s methodology, translation, assumptions, and how he puts it all into context. It is very transparent.
Aly is also an economist who uses primary source documentation like government records, not newspaper propaganda, to explain the actual mechanisms by which the Nazis extracted wealth. RKK certificates used to purchase goods in occupied countries are just one example that he dives into, as are currency exchange rates, freight manifests, Nazi party policies enacted into law, and other objective facts that simply aren’t the same as Franz Halder explaining his take on what happened from a jail cell or long after the war ended.