Browsing Tag: history

    Articles

    New Sacramento mural ‘corrects history’ by honoring Chinese Transcontinental Railroad workers

    August 30, 2019


    >>>>OUR>>OUR GOAL>>OUR GOAL IS>>OUR GOAL IS TO>>OUR GOAL IS TO CREATE>>OUR GOAL IS TO CREATE THE>>OUR GOAL IS TO CREATE THE
    COOLEST,>>OUR GOAL IS TO CREATE THE
    COOLEST, BIGGEST,>>OUR GOAL IS TO CREATE THE
    COOLEST, BIGGEST, BEST>>OUR GOAL IS TO CREATE THE
    COOLEST, BIGGEST, BEST PUBLIC COOLEST, BIGGEST, BEST PUBLIC COOLEST, BIGGEST, BEST PUBLIC
    ART COOLEST, BIGGEST, BEST PUBLIC
    ART GALLERY COOLEST, BIGGEST, BEST PUBLIC
    ART GALLERY IN COOLEST, BIGGEST, BEST PUBLIC
    ART GALLERY IN THE COOLEST, BIGGEST, BEST PUBLIC
    ART GALLERY IN THE WORLD. ART GALLERY IN THE WORLD. ART GALLERY IN THE WORLD.
    WE ART GALLERY IN THE WORLD.
    WE ARE ART GALLERY IN THE WORLD.
    WE ARE ON ART GALLERY IN THE WORLD.
    WE ARE ON OUR ART GALLERY IN THE WORLD.
    WE ARE ON OUR WAY, ART GALLERY IN THE WORLD.
    WE ARE ON OUR WAY, DON’T ART GALLERY IN THE WORLD.
    WE ARE ON OUR WAY, DON’T YOU WE ARE ON OUR WAY, DON’T YOU WE ARE ON OUR WAY, DON’T YOU
    THINK? THINK? THINK?
    >>THINK?
    >>AT THINK?
    >>AT SIX THINK?
    >>AT SIX STORIES THINK?
    >>AT SIX STORIES HIGH THINK?
    >>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND THINK?
    >>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND HALF>>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND HALF>>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND HALF
    A>>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND HALF
    A BLOCK>>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND HALF
    A BLOCK WIDE,>>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND HALF
    A BLOCK WIDE, THIS>>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND HALF
    A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL>>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND HALF
    A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON>>AT SIX STORIES HIGH AND HALF
    A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON THE A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON THE A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON THE
    EAST A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON THE
    EAST SIDE A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON THE
    EAST SIDE OF A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON THE
    EAST SIDE OF THE A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON THE
    EAST SIDE OF THE TOWER A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON THE
    EAST SIDE OF THE TOWER WAS A BLOCK WIDE, THIS MURAL ON THE
    EAST SIDE OF THE TOWER WAS AN EAST SIDE OF THE TOWER WAS AN EAST SIDE OF THE TOWER WAS AN
    UNDERTAKING EAST SIDE OF THE TOWER WAS AN
    UNDERTAKING FOR EAST SIDE OF THE TOWER WAS AN
    UNDERTAKING FOR ARTIST EAST SIDE OF THE TOWER WAS AN
    UNDERTAKING FOR ARTIST CONRAD UNDERTAKING FOR ARTIST CONRAD UNDERTAKING FOR ARTIST CONRAD
    AND UNDERTAKING FOR ARTIST CONRAD
    AND HER UNDERTAKING FOR ARTIST CONRAD
    AND HER TEAM. AND HER TEAM. AND HER TEAM.
    THEY AND HER TEAM.
    THEY PAINTED AND HER TEAM.
    THEY PAINTED IT AND HER TEAM.
    THEY PAINTED IT IN AND HER TEAM.
    THEY PAINTED IT IN SEVEN AND HER TEAM.
    THEY PAINTED IT IN SEVEN DAYS. THEY PAINTED IT IN SEVEN DAYS. THEY PAINTED IT IN SEVEN DAYS.
    TWO THEY PAINTED IT IN SEVEN DAYS.
    TWO THIS THEY PAINTED IT IN SEVEN DAYS.
    TWO THIS IS THEY PAINTED IT IN SEVEN DAYS.
    TWO THIS IS THE THEY PAINTED IT IN SEVEN DAYS.
    TWO THIS IS THE MOST THEY PAINTED IT IN SEVEN DAYS.
    TWO THIS IS THE MOST INTRICATE TWO THIS IS THE MOST INTRICATE TWO THIS IS THE MOST INTRICATE
    COMPLEX TWO THIS IS THE MOST INTRICATE
    COMPLEX HARDEST TWO THIS IS THE MOST INTRICATE
    COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES TWO THIS IS THE MOST INTRICATE
    COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES OF TWO THIS IS THE MOST INTRICATE
    COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES OF ART COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES OF ART COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES OF ART
    THAT COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES OF ART
    THAT I COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES OF ART
    THAT I HAVE COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES OF ART
    THAT I HAVE ACHIEVED. COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES OF ART
    THAT I HAVE ACHIEVED. DAVID COMPLEX HARDEST PIECES OF ART
    THAT I HAVE ACHIEVED. DAVID IS THAT I HAVE ACHIEVED. DAVID IS THAT I HAVE ACHIEVED. DAVID IS
    THE THAT I HAVE ACHIEVED. DAVID IS
    THE FOUNDER THAT I HAVE ACHIEVED. DAVID IS
    THE FOUNDER AND THAT I HAVE ACHIEVED. DAVID IS
    THE FOUNDER AND PRODUCER THAT I HAVE ACHIEVED. DAVID IS
    THE FOUNDER AND PRODUCER OF THE FOUNDER AND PRODUCER OF THE FOUNDER AND PRODUCER OF
    WIDE-OPEN THE FOUNDER AND PRODUCER OF
    WIDE-OPEN WALLS THE FOUNDER AND PRODUCER OF
    WIDE-OPEN WALLS WHICH THE FOUNDER AND PRODUCER OF
    WIDE-OPEN WALLS WHICH GIVES WIDE-OPEN WALLS WHICH GIVES WIDE-OPEN WALLS WHICH GIVES
    SACRAMENTO WIDE-OPEN WALLS WHICH GIVES
    SACRAMENTO ITS WIDE-OPEN WALLS WHICH GIVES
    SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS. SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS. SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS.
    >>SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS.
    >>WE SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS.
    >>WE CAME SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS.
    >>WE CAME UP SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS.
    >>WE CAME UP WITH SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS.
    >>WE CAME UP WITH THE SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS.
    >>WE CAME UP WITH THE IDEA SACRAMENTO ITS MURALS.
    >>WE CAME UP WITH THE IDEA TO>>WE CAME UP WITH THE IDEA TO>>WE CAME UP WITH THE IDEA TO
    CELEBRATE>>WE CAME UP WITH THE IDEA TO
    CELEBRATE THE>>WE CAME UP WITH THE IDEA TO
    CELEBRATE THE ANNIVERSARY>>WE CAME UP WITH THE IDEA TO
    CELEBRATE THE ANNIVERSARY WITH CELEBRATE THE ANNIVERSARY WITH CELEBRATE THE ANNIVERSARY WITH
    THE CELEBRATE THE ANNIVERSARY WITH
    THE MURAL CELEBRATE THE ANNIVERSARY WITH
    THE MURAL ON CELEBRATE THE ANNIVERSARY WITH
    THE MURAL ON HIS CELEBRATE THE ANNIVERSARY WITH
    THE MURAL ON HIS BILLING. THE MURAL ON HIS BILLING. THE MURAL ON HIS BILLING.
    THE THE MURAL ON HIS BILLING.
    THE RAILROAD THE MURAL ON HIS BILLING.
    THE RAILROAD WAS THE MURAL ON HIS BILLING.
    THE RAILROAD WAS COMPLETED THE MURAL ON HIS BILLING.
    THE RAILROAD WAS COMPLETED IN THE RAILROAD WAS COMPLETED IN THE RAILROAD WAS COMPLETED IN
    MAY THE RAILROAD WAS COMPLETED IN
    MAY 1869. MAY 1869. MAY 1869.
    WITH MAY 1869.
    WITH TWO MAY 1869.
    WITH TWO RAILROADS MAY 1869.
    WITH TWO RAILROADS MEETING MAY 1869.
    WITH TWO RAILROADS MEETING AT WITH TWO RAILROADS MEETING AT WITH TWO RAILROADS MEETING AT
    PROMONTORY WITH TWO RAILROADS MEETING AT
    PROMONTORY PORT WITH TWO RAILROADS MEETING AT
    PROMONTORY PORT UTAH. PROMONTORY PORT UTAH. PROMONTORY PORT UTAH.
    >>PROMONTORY PORT UTAH.
    >>THEY PROMONTORY PORT UTAH.
    >>THEY BUILT PROMONTORY PORT UTAH.
    >>THEY BUILT THIS PROMONTORY PORT UTAH.
    >>THEY BUILT THIS WORLD.>>THEY BUILT THIS WORLD.>>THEY BUILT THIS WORLD.
    IT’S>>THEY BUILT THIS WORLD.
    IT’S MORE>>THEY BUILT THIS WORLD.
    IT’S MORE ACCURATE>>THEY BUILT THIS WORLD.
    IT’S MORE ACCURATE HERE. IT’S MORE ACCURATE HERE. IT’S MORE ACCURATE HERE.
    IT’S IT’S MORE ACCURATE HERE.
    IT’S A IT’S MORE ACCURATE HERE.
    IT’S A PHOTO IT’S MORE ACCURATE HERE.
    IT’S A PHOTO THAT IT’S MORE ACCURATE HERE.
    IT’S A PHOTO THAT WAS IT’S MORE ACCURATE HERE.
    IT’S A PHOTO THAT WAS OUT IT’S MORE ACCURATE HERE.
    IT’S A PHOTO THAT WAS OUT OF IT’S A PHOTO THAT WAS OUT OF IT’S A PHOTO THAT WAS OUT OF
    THE IT’S A PHOTO THAT WAS OUT OF
    THE HISTORICAL IT’S A PHOTO THAT WAS OUT OF
    THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY. THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY. THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
    WAS THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
    WAS AN THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
    WAS AN IMPORTANT THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
    WAS AN IMPORTANT PHOTO THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
    WAS AN IMPORTANT PHOTO THAT THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
    WAS AN IMPORTANT PHOTO THAT WE WAS AN IMPORTANT PHOTO THAT WE WAS AN IMPORTANT PHOTO THAT WE
    ARE WAS AN IMPORTANT PHOTO THAT WE
    ARE CELEBRATING. ARE CELEBRATING. ARE CELEBRATING.
    >>ARE CELEBRATING.
    >>IT ARE CELEBRATING.
    >>IT TOOK ARE CELEBRATING.
    >>IT TOOK RESEARCH ARE CELEBRATING.
    >>IT TOOK RESEARCH AND ARE CELEBRATING.
    >>IT TOOK RESEARCH AND EFFORT>>IT TOOK RESEARCH AND EFFORT>>IT TOOK RESEARCH AND EFFORT
    TO>>IT TOOK RESEARCH AND EFFORT
    TO FIND>>IT TOOK RESEARCH AND EFFORT
    TO FIND SOMETHING>>IT TOOK RESEARCH AND EFFORT
    TO FIND SOMETHING THAT>>IT TOOK RESEARCH AND EFFORT
    TO FIND SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY TO FIND SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY TO FIND SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY
    HAD TO FIND SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY
    HAD BOTH TO FIND SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY
    HAD BOTH EUROPEAN, TO FIND SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY
    HAD BOTH EUROPEAN, AND TO FIND SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY
    HAD BOTH EUROPEAN, AND CHINESE HAD BOTH EUROPEAN, AND CHINESE HAD BOTH EUROPEAN, AND CHINESE
    WORKERS HAD BOTH EUROPEAN, AND CHINESE
    WORKERS WORKING HAD BOTH EUROPEAN, AND CHINESE
    WORKERS WORKING ON HAD BOTH EUROPEAN, AND CHINESE
    WORKERS WORKING ON THE HAD BOTH EUROPEAN, AND CHINESE
    WORKERS WORKING ON THE SAME WORKERS WORKING ON THE SAME WORKERS WORKING ON THE SAME
    REAL.>>WORKERS WORKING ON THE SAME
    REAL.>>MARGARET WORKERS WORKING ON THE SAME
    REAL.>>MARGARET COFOUNDED WORKERS WORKING ON THE SAME
    REAL.>>MARGARET COFOUNDED U.S. REAL.>>MARGARET COFOUNDED U.S. REAL.>>MARGARET COFOUNDED U.S.
    CHINA REAL.>>MARGARET COFOUNDED U.S.
    CHINA RAILROAD REAL.>>MARGARET COFOUNDED U.S.
    CHINA RAILROAD FRIENDSHIP CHINA RAILROAD FRIENDSHIP CHINA RAILROAD FRIENDSHIP
    ASSOCIATION CHINA RAILROAD FRIENDSHIP
    ASSOCIATION UNTIL CHINA RAILROAD FRIENDSHIP
    ASSOCIATION UNTIL THE CHINA RAILROAD FRIENDSHIP
    ASSOCIATION UNTIL THE STORIES ASSOCIATION UNTIL THE STORIES ASSOCIATION UNTIL THE STORIES
    OF ASSOCIATION UNTIL THE STORIES
    OF THESE ASSOCIATION UNTIL THE STORIES
    OF THESE CHINESE ASSOCIATION UNTIL THE STORIES
    OF THESE CHINESE IMMIGRANTS. OF THESE CHINESE IMMIGRANTS. OF THESE CHINESE IMMIGRANTS.
    >>OF THESE CHINESE IMMIGRANTS.
    >>I OF THESE CHINESE IMMIGRANTS.
    >>I AM OF THESE CHINESE IMMIGRANTS.
    >>I AM VERY OF THESE CHINESE IMMIGRANTS.
    >>I AM VERY PROUD OF THESE CHINESE IMMIGRANTS.
    >>I AM VERY PROUD OF OF THESE CHINESE IMMIGRANTS.
    >>I AM VERY PROUD OF THIS>>I AM VERY PROUD OF THIS>>I AM VERY PROUD OF THIS
    MURAL. MURAL. MURAL.
    TELLS MURAL.
    TELLS A MURAL.
    TELLS A STORY, TELLS A STORY, TELLS A STORY,
    >>TELLS A STORY,
    >>THE TELLS A STORY,
    >>THE CONTRIBUTION TELLS A STORY,
    >>THE CONTRIBUTION OF TELLS A STORY,
    >>THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE>>THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE>>THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE
    CHINESE>>THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE
    CHINESE AMERICANS. CHINESE AMERICANS. CHINESE AMERICANS.
    WE CHINESE AMERICANS.
    WE NEED CHINESE AMERICANS.
    WE NEED TO CHINESE AMERICANS.
    WE NEED TO BE CHINESE AMERICANS.
    WE NEED TO BE ABLE CHINESE AMERICANS.
    WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO CHINESE AMERICANS.
    WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE
    TO WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE
    TO BUILD WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE
    TO BUILD UP WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE
    TO BUILD UP THE WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE
    TO BUILD UP THE RELATIONSHIP. TO BUILD UP THE RELATIONSHIP. TO BUILD UP THE RELATIONSHIP.
    >>TO BUILD UP THE RELATIONSHIP.
    >>ONLY TO BUILD UP THE RELATIONSHIP.
    >>ONLY THROUGH TO BUILD UP THE RELATIONSHIP.
    >>ONLY THROUGH TEAMWORK TO BUILD UP THE RELATIONSHIP.
    >>ONLY THROUGH TEAMWORK THE>>ONLY THROUGH TEAMWORK THE>>ONLY THROUGH TEAMWORK THE
    SPARROW>>ONLY THROUGH TEAMWORK THE
    SPARROW COME>>ONLY THROUGH TEAMWORK THE
    SPARROW COME TOGETHER>>ONLY THROUGH TEAMWORK THE
    SPARROW COME TOGETHER IN>>ONLY THROUGH TEAMWORK THE
    SPARROW COME TOGETHER IN SIX SPARROW COME TOGETHER IN SIX SPARROW COME TOGETHER IN SIX
    YEARS. YEARS. YEARS.
    JUST YEARS.
    JUST AS YEARS.
    JUST AS TEAMWORK YEARS.
    JUST AS TEAMWORK BROUGHT YEARS.
    JUST AS TEAMWORK BROUGHT THIS JUST AS TEAMWORK BROUGHT THIS JUST AS TEAMWORK BROUGHT THIS
    MURAL JUST AS TEAMWORK BROUGHT THIS
    MURAL TOGETHER. MURAL TOGETHER. MURAL TOGETHER.
    >>MURAL TOGETHER.
    >>WE MURAL TOGETHER.
    >>WE WERE MURAL TOGETHER.
    >>WE WERE 18 MURAL TOGETHER.
    >>WE WERE 18 AND MURAL TOGETHER.
    >>WE WERE 18 AND A MURAL TOGETHER.
    >>WE WERE 18 AND A FAMILY.>>WE WERE 18 AND A FAMILY.>>WE WERE 18 AND A FAMILY.
    DOING>>WE WERE 18 AND A FAMILY.
    DOING SOMETHING>>WE WERE 18 AND A FAMILY.
    DOING SOMETHING VERY>>WE WERE 18 AND A FAMILY.
    DOING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT DOING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT DOING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT
    TO DOING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT
    TO CORRECT DOING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT
    TO CORRECT HISTORY, DOING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT
    TO CORRECT HISTORY, TO DOING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT
    TO CORRECT HISTORY, TO GIVE DOING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT
    TO CORRECT HISTORY, TO GIVE THE TO CORRECT HISTORY, TO GIVE THE

    Money & Debt: Crash Course World History 202
    Articles, Blog

    Money & Debt: Crash Course World History 202

    August 29, 2019


    Hi, I’m John Green. This is Crash Course World
    History and today we’re going to make it rain. We’re going to talk about money, the stuff
    that makes the world go ’round. I’m not very good at making it rain. MFTP: Mr. Green! Mr. Green. I’m sorry, but
    money doesn’t make the world go round. It’s actually conservation of angular momentum.
    It’s the same thing that allows, like, figure skaters to turn in circles. John: Look, me from the past. I know you came
    in fourth for physics, among all “C” students in the entire state of Alabama in the 1994
    state academic decathlon tournament, but that doesn’t actually make you good at science. [Intro] So, here is what economic textbooks say about
    money. In general it has three functions: medium of exchange, unit of account, and store
    of value. And its first function is by far the most important. Like, this is a quote from my actual, physical
    high school econ text book: “In primitive economies, food might be traded for clothing,
    or help in building a house might be exchanged for help in clearing a field. But exchange
    today in all economies — market as well as command — takes place through the medium
    of money.” A couple things about that quote, first off,
    primitive is a cringe-y word. Secondly, a market economy is basically all economies
    these days, and a command economy is what we called the Soviet Union’s economy back
    in the eighties. Anyway, money is very important to history–like,
    our old friend Adam Smith thought that, quote: “property money and markets not only existed
    before political institutions, but were the very foundation of human society.” Ehh, he
    was pretty into economies, so he was probably a little biased toward money, but it is important. Smith also thought that before there was money,
    there was barter, but barter could be cumbersome; like if I make cheese and you make shoes,
    and you’re lactose intolerant, then barter breaks down because I need shoes, but you
    don’t need cheese. Then I have to live like a hobbit and get this very powerful ring,
    it’s like, really stressful, I end up having to go to Mordor, it’s just very complicated. So, Smith’s ideas that rather than adapt to
    shoelessness, humans created a commodity that they would agree upon ahead of time could
    be used in exchange, and that commodity is money. Yes, these are all ones. Stan, I forgot to mention this, but you are
    buying lunch today. Now, we generally think of money as like coins,
    or later, bills, but the material of money is arbitrary. Smith wrote: “In all countries,
    however, men seem at last to have been determined by irresistible reasons to give the preference,
    for this employment, to metals above all other commodity.” A sentence that shows you why
    we didn’t teach him in Crash Course Literature. But of course, it’s really inconvenient to
    like, weigh and measure metals every time you wanna buy or sell something, so people
    hit upon the idea of making coins with a standard size and weight. Now, Smith is probably right
    that coins are much more convenient than bartering, right? Like, especially if the main store
    of value in your community is something like cattle. I mean, let’s say you still need a
    pair of shoes, well, they aren’t worth an entire cow; trading in partial cows… fairly
    messy. It’s also very bad for the cow’s health, and the cow loses a lot of its value, because,
    you know, it’s no longer living. So that all makes sense, but it’s problematic
    when Smith universalizes that observation by claiming that as a matter of convenience,
    every prudent man in every period of society must naturally have endeavored to create money. Smith — man of the enlightenment that he
    was — is positing that the creation of money is part of human nature. Like, in the second
    chapter of Wealth of Nations, Smith explicitly says that the division of labour is the, quote:
    “consequence of a certain propensity in human nature … to truck, barter, and exchange
    one thing for another.” But yet, no! Like, what made sense for eighteenth
    century city and town dwellers like Adam Smith doesn’t necessarily apply to like, all human
    beings over the course of many millennia. And if you don’t believe me, you can just
    ask anthropologists. They love to talk about this stuff. So, here’s the fascinating thing to me: when
    you look at places where the social order is not based on money, we find that people
    actually don’t barter at all. So David Graeber’s book “Debt: The First 5,000 Years” surveys
    the literature of anthropology and discovers that in societies without money, people don’t
    actually barter, but they do find ways to exchange. He quotes an anthropologist named
    Caroline Humphrey, who concluded: “No example of a barter economy, pure and simple, has
    ever been described, let alone the emergence from it of money; all available ethnography
    suggests that there has never been such a thing.” Now, that’s not to say that barter doesn’t
    exist or that it never has, I mean, I just traded Stan two copies of my book Paper Towns
    for the candy left in this pinata. Big money, no whammies. Two things of Sweet Tarts?! Stan!
    That’s not fair. Alright, let’s go to the Thought Bubble. So, according to Graeber, barter was reserved
    for trade between strangers, even enemies. For most of human history, humans lived in
    small communities, and in those small communities, most exchange took place using forms of credit.
    Basically, when people know each other well, they’re willing to trade with the future expectation
    that what one gives today will be repaid at some future date with something of roughly
    equivalent value. So in small, localized communities, everyone is in debt to everyone else, and
    there’s no real need of physical money, like coins, as a way of keeping a count, because,
    you know, you remember when someone owes you forty barrels of beer, or whatever. We see this historically in the early civilizations
    of the Fertile Crescent, where the basic monetary unit was the shekel, and one shekel’s weight
    in silver was the equivalent of a bushel of barley. Money in Ancient Sumer was actually
    created by bureaucrats in order to keep track of resources and move things back and forth
    between departments. But that doesn’t mean that silver actually circulated freely. Graeber
    writes: “While debts were calculated in silver, they didn’t have to be paid in silver.” So while some people seem to think that money
    is naturally backed by precious metals, usually gold or silver, that doesn’t seem to have
    been the case. It was enough to establish that something was worth a shekel or a fraction
    thereof, and then trade for something of equivalent value — meat, or whatever else, without actually
    having to have the shekels change hands. And this was especially helpful in economies
    where taxes and payments to workers were both in grain, rather than money. Thanks, Thought Bubble. So, first, Graeber
    blows our minds by telling us that Adam Smith was all wrong about money evolving from barter
    societies, but what about credit as the precursor to money? I mean, it’s basically saying that credit
    cards aren’t an advancement so much as they’re a return to the glorious past, except instead
    of trust, there are like, large, faceless corporations with the power to sue you. So the essence of credit is debt, and at least
    according to Graeber, that’s the glue that holds social orders together, at least, if
    you consider debt at its heart, to be about obligation. At least one of the things that
    binds us together as a community is the recognition that we owe our neighbors something and that
    they owe something to us in return. It’s like keeping your lawn mowed so that you can keep
    your neighbor’s property value high. It doesn’t make sense to have a lawn — they’re expensive
    and time consuming, and you can’t eat grass. But you take care of your lawn for the same
    reason your neighbors take care of theirs. Out of the sense of mutual obligation. But money changes our understanding of those
    obligations, right? Because once we’re able to put a price on our obligations, we can
    make them transferable, which wouldn’t be possible without money. Like, for instance,
    it allows you to hire someone to mow your lawn for you, but Graeber argues that money,
    especially in the form of coinage, also may chattel slavery, possibly. So in West African social orders before the
    arrival of Europeans, money was used, but only for weddings, funerals, and other activities
    that like, cemented human relationships. And the money largely had symbolic value. But
    when Europeans arrived, they introduced monetized trade into the system, and in the process,
    transformed that system. Money was no longer about transferring value to solidify relationships
    between individuals and families; it was about quantifying debt and also making it transferable. So, Graeber’s theory links money as we know
    it to slavery and war, like, coins began to be used in India, China, and the soon to be
    Persian province of Lydia, almost simultaneously, all around 600 BCE. And in Graeber’s view,
    this happened because this was a period of time that saw a shift from earlier forms of
    honor-based warfare, like, what is described in the Iliad, to a new, more state-based warfare. Armies started fighting over things like territory
    and resources, rather than, like, kidnapped wives. So in a– oh, it’s time for the open
    letter! But first, let’s see what’s inside my globe
    today. Oh, look, it’s a molten core of nickel and iron! Can–can you turn into coins? Oh!
    Stan! Look how rich I am! Virtually. Thought Bubble’s clearly much better at making
    it rain than I am. An open letter to honou-based warfare. Dear Honor-Based Warfare, um, I guess now
    is the time in the video that I have to tell you that I don’t entirely agree with Mr. Graeber.
    Like, with the Iliad we were telling ourselves a story about why we went to war, right? We
    went to war not for resources, but for glory. Honor. Now, I don’t want to sound cynical
    and disbelieving, but we still tell ourselves those stories. These days, the President rarely
    goes on TV and says, “You know why we’re going to go to war? We need resources.” No, we still
    say it’s about honor and ideas and standing up for the defenseless, and et cetera, which
    is all about as historically convincing as the Iliad. In short, honor-based warfare,
    I’m not entirely convinced that you, you know, exist. Best wishes, John Green. Anyway, so in all three of these governments
    in India, China, and Lydia, they were pretty small scale, especially compared to the empires
    that would soon come, but they built their power on professional armies that needed to
    be paid, and coins were a great way to pay them. It just works much better than like,
    trying to split up the plunder among everybody. The plundering method of payment is just like
    a garage sale. The people who get there early get all the good plunder, and then the rest
    of the people, they’re just left dividing up, you know, old clothes. Also, in Graeber’s view, states began to encourage
    the use of coins because of the uncertainty of war — like, violence creates uncertainty
    for merchants, and decreases the likelihood that they will accept payment in the form
    of some kind of trust-based credit arrangement. And soldiers aren’t known for accepting credit
    as payment, either, because, you know, soldiers are keenly aware that they might die soon.
    So, according to Graeber, this combination of war and state-building led to the rise
    of coinage. And then in order to keep paying soldiers, rulers, like, say, Alexander the
    Great, needed to continue their conquests. So you need an army in order to have an empire,
    and your army only likes to be paid in coins. Now, you can seize some sweet, sweet metal
    plunder and then melt it down and make coins, but with an empire-sized army, that’s not
    gonna cut it. You need more silver. Where are you gonna get new silver? Mining. Nope,
    Stan, not miming, I said “mining”, don’t ever put mimes in Crash Course again. So now you need a steady supply of miners;
    fortunately, you’ve conquered a bunch of people, so you have lots of prisoners of war, and
    now you have slavery. This military-coinage slavery complex was
    described explicitly in the Arthashastra, a political guidebook written by Minister
    Kautilya for the Mauryan dynasty, that made it clear that coins and markets sprung up,
    above all, to feed the machinery of war. He wrote: “The treasury is based upon mining,
    the army upon the treasury; he who has the army and the treasury may conquer the earth.” And Graeber says that China followed a similar
    pattern: he writes, “The same fractured political landscape, the same rise of trained, professional
    armies, and the creation of coined money largely in order to pay them.” So, if money is a creation
    of the state and its military, then it follows that when the state fails, as it did in Europe
    after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, coinage largely disappears. And that’s exactly
    what happened, actually, but of course, that doesn’t mean that transactions failed to take
    place or that trade completely disappears, but it did decline a lot. And in situations
    like that, people often revert to the virtual credit systems that we talked about earlier:
    the ones that rely more on personal connections than on like, state enforcement. So Adam Smith’s origin myth of money — that
    it derives from people’s natural desire to make barter more convenient through the creation
    of a medium of exchange — really doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. I mean, there are clearly
    examples of an alternate history where production and exchange work okay without actual coins
    or bills changing hands. It’s kind of like today, actually — money works as long as
    there is some form of trust and a way to make people meet their obligations. People used
    to feel obligated because failure to meet their obligations would hurt their standing
    in their small, localized communities, and now we meet our obligations because otherwise,
    like, people take our houses or whatever. But while we have evidence that money, as
    we conceive of it today, isn’t necessary for exchange, it IS necessary, or, at least, very
    useful, for states, and I think states are probably good. Oh, maybe not, I’m not positive. I just like
    the internet so much; I don’t think we would have the internet without states. So I wanna be clear that I don’t entirely
    buy Graeber’s version of history. I might be wrong, of course, but I’m not convinced
    that coins necessarily lead to slavery. And I don’t think that ancient slavery is really
    comparable to the chattel slavery that we saw in the Americas. But I do think that it’s
    important to look at alternative points of view when it comes to history, even when you
    don’t agree with them. It’s helpful to understand that there’s more than one well-argued point
    of view in the world. And I do think Graeber very effectively challenges the idea that
    human beings are like natural, rational, economic actors who wouldn’t be possible without money.
    And in the face of overwhelming anthropological evidence, at least this much is true: money
    is not the product of human nature; it’s the product of human actions, like the formation
    of governments and markets. In short, and I know this will disappoint
    some of the economics majors out there: ultimately, I think my mom was right. We aren’t made of
    money. Thanks for watching, I’ll see you next week. Crash Course is made with the help of all
    of these nice people. I didn’t want to do the credits without my globe. And it exists
    because of your support through Subbable.com. Subbable is a voluntary subscription service
    that allows you to support Crash Course directly. We want to thank all of our Subbable subscribers;
    thanks to everyone for watching. As we say in my hometown, don’t forget to be awesome.

    Postcards: Railroad Legends
    Articles, Blog

    Postcards: Railroad Legends

    August 29, 2019


    (slow orchestral music) – [Voiceover] The following
    program is a production of Pioneer Public Television. (slow orchestral music) This program on Pioneer
    Public Television is funded by the Minnesota Arts and
    Cultural Heritage Fund, with money from the
    vote of the people of Minnesota on
    November 4, 2008. Additional support provided by Mark and Margaret Yackel-Juleen in honor of Shalom Hill Farm, a nonprofit rural
    education retreat center in a beautiful prairie
    setting near Windom in southwestern Minnesota,
    shalomhillfarm.org. The Arrowwood Resort
    and Conference Center, your ideal choice for
    Minnesota resorts, offering luxury townhomes,
    18 holes of golf, Darling Reflections Spa, Big Splash Waterpark,
    and much more. Alexandria, Minnesota,
    a relaxing vacation or great location for an
    event, explorealex.com. Easy to get to, hard to leave. (slow orchestral music) – Welcome to Postcards,
    our weekly look at the arts, history,
    and cultural heritage of western Minnesota and beyond. I’m your host, Dana Johnson. This week we’ll learn
    about steam engines with local engineers from
    Willmar and ride the rails with Twin Cities and
    Western Railroad. First, Tom Steinman,
    Elmond Ekblad, and Bob Feichtinger
    share with us their legendary
    tales from the track. (moderately slow guitar music) (steam train whistle blows) (diesel train horn blares) – The railroad had
    a certain romantic fascination, I think,
    with a lot of kids. – Well, it’s probably
    an odd term to use, but I think most
    railroad men would agree that there was a certain romance with the steam engine,
    you got to love ’em. – [Elmond] It was the idea
    that you were on the move, there was something
    about a steam engine that when you got it going,
    if you worked it right, it put out a sound
    like a sewing machine. (steam engine chugs) When you get in a diesel,
    it’s just like getting in a truck and
    going, there’s no, there’s no momentum there that there is when you
    have a steam engine. – Diesel is much more
    comfortable, of course, but there was something
    romantic about a steam engine. – Not only the thrill of
    that, either, but the thrill of the people off the track,
    children, they just love the steam engines, they’d
    come out along the track. A lot of places
    where we see new kids would be, we’d
    always have candy, there was always a
    lot of entertainment. My interest in working
    on the railroad, I guess I would have
    to say it was a moment in Fulda, Minnesota, when
    a locomotive engineer looked out of his cab down at
    me, as a little five-year-old, and tossed a pack of
    Black Jack gum down there. And when I saw
    that, I told myself, “I would really like to be an
    engineer driving locomotives.” And that stuck with
    me for my entire life. And so in a way I sort
    of was living a life of something that started
    when I was just a young boy. – [Bob] Well, I started,
    I started right after I got out of the
    military, up in St. Cloud. And then I came to visit
    a friend in Willmar, and he talked me
    into hiring out here on the engine train,
    engine service. – [Elmond] Then he
    asked me if I wanted to go railroading,
    and I said “Yeah.” Well, he says, he says,
    “How old are you?” I says, “I’m 16.” Oh, he says, “You gotta
    be 21.” (chuckles) Well, the next year, then
    he came, and the boss down at the roundhouse,
    they come back to me again and ask me if
    I want to go railroading. And I says, “Yeah, but age.” He says, “We’ve
    taken care of that.” I found out later
    that they’d filled out a birth certificate, in
    place of me being born in 1918, they showed
    1915. (laughs) So I went to work, I was only
    17 years old in place of 21. – [Tom] Actually, my first
    job on the train itself was a fireman, and
    the fireman was the assistant to the
    locomotive engineer. I guess you could call
    it an apprenticeship. And you had to get
    the steam engine out of the roundhouse
    in the morning, get it ready for the
    engineer and the conductor and the crew to get on, and then when the day’s work was
    done, it was your job to take the steam
    engine to the roundhouse and, as we would call it,
    put it to bed for the night. And after going out
    and about in the world, uh, 1977, I came
    back to the railroad, and I made a career
    of it, and I just recently retired after
    34 years on the railroad. – [Bob] There were many
    interesting things. Four, five o’clock in the
    morning, the sun come up, you’d be going across
    the countryside, you’d see animals,
    probably some farmer didn’t know he had a
    fox in his backyard. The sun coming up, and… The crops waving in the wind. It was very picturesque to see. Just every trip was different,
    every trip was different. Something unusual or
    different would happen. It was, you never
    knew what to expect. – [Elmond] Craziest
    thing I’ve ever seen is, we come into
    Charlesville, Minnesota, that’s between here
    and Breckenridge. And we seen some
    cattle on the track, and we figured, well, that’s
    kind of usual, you know. But we got a little
    closer, then I could see there was a red bull,
    and this red bull, he kinda stood and
    looked at us, and then when we got, I’d say,
    about a hundred yards from it, he started
    putting his head down, you know, and he
    got a little closer. He started using
    his hoof, and was, he was, he was gonna
    show us who was boss! Well, we hit him, and we
    just pulverized him. (laughs) And then, we had a new brakeman, and he had never, had never
    worked on a trip before, and the first thing he
    did, he put his head out the window, and wanted
    to see what happened. Well, good thing I grabbed him and pulled him back in,
    because one of the legs of the bull went right
    by and broke the window, and he maybe would have
    got killed. (laughs) That was pretty
    unusual. (chuckles) That’s one thing I
    never did forget. – [Tom] With the Barnum
    and Bailey Circus trains, when the train would
    actually park at Midway over in the Twin Cities,
    it was quite an event. The animals in their
    cages would be, wagons, wooden-wheeled wagons, and the elephants
    would head down the main streets of St.
    Paul or Minneapolis, headed to their big circus tent or the state fairgrounds
    from the railroad siding, where they would park the
    train, ’cause everybody wanted to come and see the circus
    heading down the street from the railroad
    yard, off to the tent. (diesel train engine roars) – [Elmond] Willmar is one
    of the best railroad towns, smaller railroad towns in
    Minnesota, and it’s been noted for that, as kind of a
    headquarters, because trains went to St. Cloud and
    they went to Sioux City, and we had locals
    going out of here, they went to a lot of
    towns, it was kind of a hub. And people always,
    even people that lived in West Coast, they always
    talked about Willmar. – I can’t imagine a town like
    Willmar without a railroad. This railroad that
    runs through Willmar, the railroads that run through other towns in
    western Minnesota, are the through points of a lot of products that
    are passing through, from the West Coast
    of the United States to Chicago and the East
    Coast, and vice versa. (connecting train cars clang) – [Elmond] And I like to,
    and I like to be busy, and I like to have a challenge. And the biggest challenge we had on the railroad was the weather. We had to put up with
    all kinds of weather. Snowstorms and, we went
    out and plowed snow, you know, or left
    Willmar and the snowbanks were four
    or five feet high, but if we could get a
    pretty good speed on, we could go quite a
    ways through a drift. – [Tom] 1997 was
    memorable in Willmar for being a winter of
    ferocious blizzards. And in particular I remember,
    one memorable night, going to Clara City,
    that we not only went into the snowbank, but
    we went through the snowbank and came
    out the other end. And the train was
    covered in snow by the time we came
    out the other end. (diesel train hums) I guess the fondest
    memories come from the camaraderie
    of the other, fellow employees I
    worked with, and talking about the good trips
    we had, and of course grumbling about the
    bad trips we had. – You miss the men, and
    that’s why to this day I have coffee with
    Elmond and some other railroad men, you
    miss the camaraderie. – [Elmond] I never
    had any trouble with the men working
    with me on the railroad. They were very cooperative,
    and out in a snowstorm, they tried to get
    signals to me so I could see ’em when we
    didn’t have radios. But between the
    brakemen and myself, it seemed like there
    wasn’t a situation that we couldn’t get
    through some way. – If I would have to tell
    anyone one particular thing that has had a lasting
    memory for me as an employee of the railroad, was
    the predictability that I was gonna
    have a job tomorrow. I was very fortunate
    that I was able to spend my entire
    career with one employer. Most of the towns
    across America are here because the railroad came
    through that part of the state. In southern Minnesota and
    particularly in Willmar. Willmar was a major
    stopping-off point for trains, there’s a
    lot of grain shipped out of Willmar, a lot of
    ethanol, and a lot of lumber and
    fertilizer that travels through Willmar on
    its destinations, either near Chicago
    or south to Iowa. A lot of these cars
    and the entire train, which is called a
    unit train, will stay in one piece all the way
    to its final destination. And if it’s grain,
    most commonly it goes all the way to Seattle or
    Long Beach, California. Other trains go to
    the Mississippi River to be unloaded on barges. It’s a diesel-electric
    locomotive, and they’re extremely efficient. They’re so much more
    efficient than trucks hauling products across
    the country that a lot of trucks now are hauled
    on railroad flatcars rather than a
    tractor-trailer rig going across the country on the
    interstate highway system. In 1920, as I recall, I think 2,000,000 people
    worked on the railroad. And in 2010, it
    was 200,000 people. So that’s one-tenth
    the number of people. But the railroads are hauling
    more than they ever have. There’s an efficiency
    there that was missing for many, many years
    until the 1980s. Trains are bigger, they’re
    longer, they’re faster, and there’s fewer
    people that are on the trains and
    repairing the track. (moderate tempo piano music) – [Elmond] The reason
    why I think this one is special, because this
    was the first engine, steam engine, that
    had pulled the Empire Builder
    through the mountains. This was a, it wasn’t
    big, it’s not small according to today,
    but it was big enough, and was the first one,
    on the Empire Builder. The superintendent, he
    said we could have it, so we built a
    track from the yard out here at a
    curve, and hooked… Right where it stands right now. This historical society
    would not be what it is today if we hadn’t gotten
    that locomotive moved out here, because
    that, people go by and they see that locomotive,
    they’ve never been in Willmar, and
    they’ll still stop in. – When I was a young boy, the passenger
    trains did operate. My hometown,
    Chandler, Minnesota. I can remember it just
    like it was yesterday. My mother would take me
    down to the train station, and I would get on the
    train, and actually it was a steam-engine-powered
    train, and I would go to Iona, Minnesota, to
    stay with my grandparents. And it was 14 miles,
    and it cost seven cents. And my mother would pin a
    little note on my pocket, and the note would
    say to the conductor, “Please make sure Tommy
    gets off at Iona.” And then she would give me
    10 cents for the ride back. Well, those days are long gone. (moderately slow guitar music) – To find out more
    about these stories and other local
    history, visit the Kandiyohi County Museum
    in Willmar, Minnesota. Now let’s hop on board with
    Twin Cities and Western Railroad and learn about its impact
    on local communities. (train rumbles and hums) – [Ken] I love it
    all, ’cause you learn something new every day,
    every day is different. Every day is a
    different day, you know. And you work with
    different people all the time, and
    it’s, it’s just fun. – Oh yeah, when I was
    in, like, a little kid, I always wanted to be
    a railroad engineer, and then I end up working
    on this section here. Didn’t fall far from
    the tree, I guess. – It’s pretty much
    different every day, but this is, what
    we’re doing now is one of the more
    routine jobs that we do. – [Dana] Twin Cities and
    Western Railroad has been a major part of transporting
    goods across Minnesota. President Mark Wegner
    provides rail service across southwestern Minnesota,
    into the Twin Cities. – [Mark] Well, the history
    is, it was originally built by the Hastings and
    Dakota back in the 1870s. The Hastings and
    Dakota became part of the Milwaukee Road,
    and Milwaukee Road built the Pacific
    extension in 1909. So this line here was
    part of a main line from Chicago to
    Tacoma, Washington. At one point it
    boasted 80-mile-an-hour
    passenger trains. (train wheels
    rumble on the track) The rail industry
    started to decline in the, after World War
    II, a gradual decline, which accelerated during
    the 1960s and ’70s, and by 1980 the Milwaukee
    Road declared bankruptcy. They abandoned from
    Montana to the West Coast. The Montana to the
    Minnesota border was acquired by the
    state of South Dakota, and the Milwaukee
    retained from Ortonville into the Twin Cities,
    as part of their system. They were sold in 1985 to
    the Soo Line, and in 1991 the Soo Line sold the
    segment from the Twin Cities out to Appleton to the
    Twin Cities and Western, and hence we were
    formed July 26, 1991. We serve south-central
    Minnesota, basically our draw area is maybe 30 miles either side
    of the main line. We go through Glencoe,
    Olivia, Montevideo, out to Appleton,
    along 212, primarily. We are like a spoke
    in a great big hub. We connect in St. Paul
    to the Canadian Pacific, the Burlington
    Northern Santa Fe, the Union Pacific,
    which serve the North American continent,
    so we’re basically giving our customers a
    gateway to the world. (train chugs and hums) – Today we’ll be spotting
    in the grain cars for these elevators,
    and we’ll go out to the Renville
    sugar-beet plant, and get them empty
    for their sugar. And today we got some
    coal, coke on there and coal, and empty
    sugar cars, and then we go out to Granite Falls,
    the ethanol plant, we service that daily, and… (train bell rings) (train horn blares) – [Mark] The unique
    thing about the Twin Cities and Western
    is, we do connect with three major railroads
    in the Twin Cities, so our customers
    have competition to go on the North
    American continent, which isn’t always true
    of other railroads. They’re captive to
    one single railroad. I think the railroad
    will be important because the
    steel-on-steel technology, steel wheels and steel rails,
    is very low resistance, hence we achieve some great fuel economies for
    the tonnage we move. Moving one ton of
    freight 435 miles on one gallon of
    fuel is often quoted. We’re roughly anywhere
    between four times to 10 times more fuel
    efficient than trucks, depending on whose
    study you look at. But I think the nation
    didn’t realize how important the railroads were
    up until about 2003, when gas started to
    go up and diesel hit five dollars a gallon,
    then all of a sudden everybody wanted to ship rail. So if you think there’s
    an unlimited supply of oil in the world,
    yeah, we’ll go away, but I don’t think
    that’s the case. – [Dana] Twin Cities
    and Western Railroad also owns the
    Minnesota Prairie Line. Julie Rath talks
    about the efforts of the Minnesota Valley
    Regional Railroad Authority, and their efforts to
    restore the tracks. – And I’m sure it was
    founded on the basis to provide services
    for the ag community. We have an elevator
    right behind us, and I don’t know the
    year of that, but it says “number two” on it, so
    it’s got quite a history. And it’s a vibrant
    corridor for the communities that are along here. There are 16 communities
    in the five counties that are dependent
    on this rail service, and the actual railroad itself was revitalized again in 2002. It had various owners and
    actually went inactive for two years, and
    then the five counties took the ownership
    back and formed the Minnesota Valley
    Regional Rail Authority. You know, our rail line starts at Norwood Young America
    and goes all the way to Hanley Falls, that’s
    94 miles of track. And we’re currently
    doing a rail restoration, a rehab project, and so
    we’ve done 24 miles so far, and so we’re getting
    there inch by inch. We always say, “I think
    I can, I think I can,” and we will get that done. Well, we have a big
    vision in that area, we have a group in
    the Redwood area that’s called Tatanka
    Bluffs, and our goal is to use the rail for vintage
    passenger rail service, to bring people out
    from Hopkins Depot for the weekend,
    bring your bike with, and explore the southern
    part of Minnesota, for biking, camping,
    horseback riding, to see where Minnesota
    history really happened. And we think that’s
    key, ’cause a lot of the historic sites
    that you learn about in your sixth-grade
    history are really here, and we want to share that
    with students, especially. There’s a big plan
    for the future, and it’s all dependent
    on this railway. I mean, it’s pretty
    unique, aside from Amtrak, you just don’t hop on a train. So if we can get this
    vintage rail service put together, that was
    a very good attraction for some of the people
    that are forming the history learning
    center concept, just because it’s a
    unique experience. It’s more authentic
    travel, as you could say, and it takes the past and
    brings it into the future. We’re seeing increased
    traffic as we do the rehab. This past year we had
    just under 7,000 cars, carloads that were
    shipped on our line. Our funding that
    we’re receiving, either through the
    state of Minnesota or federal government,
    is a huge investment in this type of
    transportation corridor, which is key to the area. And for us to have that
    kind of investment, we need to make sure
    that we can leverage those dollars for
    future development, whether it’s new manufacturers
    that come out here, I see this as a
    renewable-energy corridor because of the amount of biomass that we have in our
    five-county area. And so personally, right
    now we’re working on several bio-renewable
    fuel projects that are dependent on this
    rail getting restored. And what we’re doing
    is replacing rail that’s from 1880, 1912, which is 80 or 85-pound rail,
    with 115-pound rail. The new train cars are
    286,000 pounds, and so we need a heavier rail for
    them to run on, for safety. – Well, I guess I’m
    kind of a historian by nature, and
    realizing that railroads were the cause of
    many town formations in Minnesota particularly,
    yeah, I did follow the rail industry, and
    if you look at some of the towns where the
    rail has disappeared, you know, the towns are
    kinda disappearing as well. So here, fortunately, we’re able to run a good
    railroad, which in turn injects vibrancy into
    the communities we serve. So, and we continue to do that. – Well, it’s
    allowed the elevator in town here to
    expand, which increases the employment base,
    which brings more families to the communities, which
    increases the schools, and grocery stores,
    retail trade, everything is improved
    because of the rail. – The builders of the
    railroad tended to plant towns anywhere between seven
    to 10 miles apart, basically a day trip
    with a horse and buggy, to bring the grain
    into town, so that’s kinda how the
    towns were planted. We see ourselves as
    renewing the towns’ economic bases, we
    have relationships with the economic development
    agencies, things like that. If we grow jobs in
    south-central Minnesota and grow the communities we
    serve, then we’ve done our job. – [Dana] In 2008, Twin
    Cities and Western was named the Short Line
    Railroad of the Year. With its ability to reach
    the corners of the country, it’s no wonder people enjoy
    being part of this rail service. – [Josh] I don’t know,
    it’s something that not everybody gets to do. You know, you can
    tell people stories about this stuff
    that they don’t know anything about, so
    they’re kinda interested in hearing what you have to say. – [Julie] I believe
    that we will have additional expansion
    happen in the future. Winthrop is an
    excellent example, about 20 miles to the
    east of us, that has had, because the rail’s
    getting closer to that, the community can actually
    see, feel, and touch the improvements, and are
    planning for the future. They’ve added a new
    fertilizer facility, they’ve had a new, um… WinField Ag Solutions
    moved to the community, combining into a larger
    distribution center. The ethanol plant
    expanded, with the hope that the rail would expand. And yeah, UFC’s
    congregated there, so they’ve got great
    things going on. Dairy Farmers of America
    is doing an expansion, they’re all dependent
    on transporting
    their goods by rail. (train horn blares) (diesel train engine rumbles) – Local author
    Brent Olson shares his memories of
    traveling by train. – I like railroads. It’s funny, but even though
    my hometown of Clinton hasn’t even had a railroad
    for 20 years or more, railroads have a large
    place in my memory. An early memory is
    dropping my sister off at the station in
    Willmar for a trip to the West Coast to
    stay with cousins. I can still picture her
    walking across the tracks, carrying a small suitcase
    and a large guitar. It wasn’t long after that, that I had my first
    experience on a train. I was about 12,
    and I was supposed to catch the train
    from Minneapolis to Morris after a
    stay at a church camp. It was my first time
    traveling alone, and I bet it (laughs)
    really showed. A chubby, blond preteen
    clutching his ticket and sitting on the
    edge of his seat must have looked like
    a tempting target to the bum who kept
    coming over to me and telling me
    that if I came out behind the station,
    he would sell me something really
    good, really cheap. Now, I was dumb, but
    maybe not quite that dumb. I tried to ignore
    him, and when I saw a gaggle of nuns come
    in and sit in a swirl of black and white, I
    went and sat with them. That experience didn’t
    turn me into a Catholic, but it did lead me to
    my fondness for nuns. Despite that, I do
    still love trains, possibly because
    when my wife and I were married, we took
    every cent we had in the world and spent it
    on six weeks in Europe. A lot of that time
    was spent on trains, playing an endless game of
    gin rummy and occasionally glancing out the window
    at the passing scenery. The rocking of the cars,
    the chance meetings with interesting
    people, odd foods at train stations
    in odd countries, along with the constant company of a beautiful young
    woman, made the trip something that remains
    green in my memory. I am a lot older now, and contemplating
    another train trip. The odd food isn’t nearly as big a temptation, but
    not having to drive in strange traffic
    is a big incentive. I do still have the same
    traveling companion. Some things, like
    trains, go on forever. Or close enough. – That’s all for this week. For more information,
    go to our Web site, at pioneer.org/postcards. Join us again next
    week on Postcards. – [Voiceover] This program
    on Pioneer Public Television is funded by the Minnesota Arts
    and Cultural Heritage Fund, with money from the
    vote of the people of Minnesota on
    November 4, 2008. Additional support provided by Mark and Margaret Yackel-Juleen in honor of Shalom Hill Farm, a nonprofit rural
    education retreat center in a beautiful prairie
    setting near Windom in southwestern Minnesota,
    shalomhillfarm.org. The Arrowwood Resort
    and Conference Center, your ideal choice for
    Minnesota resorts, offering luxury townhomes,
    18 holes of golf, Darling Reflections Spa, Big Splash Waterpark,
    and much more. Alexandria, Minnesota,
    a relaxing vacation or great location for an
    event, explorealex.com. Easy to get to, hard to leave. (slow orchestral music)

    Who Started World War I: Crash Course World History 210
    Articles, Blog

    Who Started World War I: Crash Course World History 210

    August 27, 2019


    Hi, I’m John Green, this is Crash Course World
    History, and today we continue our discussion of how a regional conflict became World War
    I. We’re also going to look at who started the war and although no one nation is truly
    to blame, some nations are more to blame than others. Like America, for once? Blameless. Well, not
    totally blameless. Largely blameless. Mr. Green, Mr. Green! That’s easy, the Germans
    started the war. Well, Me from the Past, as it happens many
    historians and British politicians would agree with you. I mean, you have an opinion that can be
    defended. And I can’t wait for you to defend it. Uhh… maybe they just, like, really liked war? I’m
    not really in the defending positions business, Mr. Green, I’m more in the like, bold proclamations
    business. Yes, Me from the Past, noted. But it turns
    out, there’s more to life than that. So the topic of who started World War I remains
    one of the most controversial and interesting topics to discuss in World History, not least because,
    you know, we’d like to avoid having another one. But in general, when we talk about World Wars,
    as when we talk about World Cups, we pretty quickly end up discussing Germany. The idea that the root cause of World War
    I was Germany, or more specifically, German militarism, continues to be popular. This
    has been the case ever since the 1960s when this historian, Fritz Fisher, identified Germany
    as the chief cause of the war. But Germany’s guilt for the war was also written into the
    Versailles Peace Treaty, in article 231, and most of you will be familiar with the idea
    that anger over that clause its incumbent debts helped lead to Hitler’s rise. Also, pretty much however you slice it Germany
    was definitely responsible for starting World War II, and looking back that made it more
    plausible that they would have also stated World War I, because, you know, they had a
    history of starting wars. To be fair, the definition of a Western European nation is
    “has a history starting wars.” Unless you’re the Swiss. Cue the Switzereel, Stan! Yeah okay, but the thing is attributing characteristics
    like militarism or authoritarianism to entire national populations is a little problematic.
    Also one nation’s militarism is another nation’s strong national defense, and when you live
    in the country, as I do, that spends more on defense than any other nation, it’s probably
    not that good of an idea to call people militaristic. There’s just something about that broad-brush
    painting of an entire nation sharing a particular characteristic that feels a little bit propaganda-y.
    Also, it wasn’t just Germans who were militaristic in 1914. The idea of “the glory of war” was
    a very popular concept all over Europe, and really there’s no evidence that the German
    people of 1914 were any more or less militaristic than the French or the Russians, They all
    had poetry that celebrated heroic sacrifice and dying for the Mother and/or Fatherland. That’s not usually and. Maybe, though. I’m
    gonna stay open minded. But there’s another problem with the whole
    idea that the Germans were more eager for war than anyone else in Europe. That argument
    relies a lot on the behavior of Kaiser Wilhelm II, the German leader, and the Kaiser did
    make some pretty bellicose and stupid public statements, which in turn made people fear
    that Germans were eager for war. So Wilhelm became kind of a stand-in for German aggression,
    a literal cartoon villain, upon whom the world, especially the English, could project their
    stereotypes. So I would argue that the German character
    isn’t to blame for World War I, and in fact no national character has ever been to blame
    for any war. But I am not going to let the Germans off the hook entirely. So you will remember that Germany offered
    the so-called “blank check” that Germans would always support Austro-Hungarians’ ultimatum
    to Serbia. And in some ways this empowering by Germany’s support encouraged Austria’s
    foreign minister Berchtold to behave as recklessly as possible, under the mistaken impression that
    this is what the Germans wanted him to do. So basically, Austria thought that Germany
    wanted a war, so they were like, “Oh, we’ll just behave really recklessly and we’ll give
    the Germans the war they’ve been so excited about.” But the Germans were offering the
    Austrians the assurance of support in the hopes that it wouldn’t lead to war. So you could argue that in fact most of the
    blame for starting World War I should fall on the shoulders of the Austrians, after all,
    they were the ones who issued the ultimatum to Serbia, and they were the first to declare
    war, although only against Serbia. But, the Germans were the first to declare war on a
    major power, Russia, on August 1st, and the German advance on France through Belgium is
    what brought Britain into the war. And those are pretty solid arguments that Germany turned
    the conflict from, you know, a regional thing in the Balkans, which isn’t unprecedented,
    to like this big pan-European war. But I don’t think we’re done assigning blame,
    because we didn’t just have a pan-European war, we had a world war. Russia. Now you’ll remember that of all the major
    powers, Russia was the first to mobilize its massive army, and it was Russia’s mobilization that
    drew Germany, France, and Britain into the war. Putin is looking at me, isn’t he, Stan. I’m
    just trying to–ah! you so scary! Stan, can you please make Mr. Putin go away,
    I’m just trying to talk about history, I’m not talking about any current conflicts. And it makes me nervous to say this, but there
    was really no good reason for Russia to mobilize in the first place. I mean, when Austria declared
    war on Serbia on July 28th, the Austrians could not mobilize their own troops for two
    weeks, because they were on harvest break. I mean, if we’ve learned anything about agriculture,
    it’s that it’s hard to have a large-scale war without it, so we can’t go to war until
    all the wheat has been farmed. But even if Austria had mobilized and attacked
    immediately, their initial plan was an attack on Belgrade, not Russia, which by the way
    was called somewhat confusingly, Plan B. Now, Vienna did have a plan to mobilize against
    both Serbia and Russia, but they never used it. But even if Austria had launched an all-out
    attack on Russia, Russia had begun its pre-mobilization, the period preparatory to war, on July 25th,
    and while I usually don’t care about dates, with the start of World War I, very important,
    because July 25th was before the Serbs had even responded to the Austrian ultimatum. And just as a general rule, it’s hard to play
    the blameless victim when you’re moving all of your troops to the border. Hey, why are
    you here again, Putin? So here we have Austrians and Germans receiving
    reports of Russian troops massing on their borders, and you know, that seems kind of
    like war. A lot of it comes down to how you understand Russia’s period preparatory to
    war. I mean, do you focus on the “period preparatory”, or do you focus on the “to war”? Regardless,
    Russia became the first power to actually put its war machine into motion. Let’s go to the Thought Bubble. So talking about Russia leads us to some of
    the more meta arguments about the causes of World War I because it’s difficult to understand
    what Russia was doing when it mobilized without trying to understand why they mobilized. After
    all, an Austrian attack on Serbia was hardly an existential threat to Russia, I mean, look
    at the map. Russia’s huge, and at the time, probably had the largest army in Europe, if
    not the world. So why would they care about what was likely to be a skirmish on the Bosnian
    border? Well, here’s where geo-politics and history
    come in. So, looking at the map, you can see that the Balkans are right next to the Dardanelles,
    the straits that give access to the Black Sea. Russia needed to maintain influence there
    in order to ensure traffic through those straits, especially if the Ottomans were going to form
    an alliance with the Germans, which they did. Also, at least in its own estimation, Russia
    was in danger of becoming a laughingstock in European politics: their humiliating loss
    to Japan in the Russo-Japanese War was followed by Russia’s inability to stop Austria from
    annexing Bosnia from the Ottomans in 1908, and that was the event that sparked Serbia’s
    drive to expand its own territory. Its history of prior weakness meant that Russia’s foreign
    policy makers feared that without some decisive action, Russia wouldn’t be taken seriously
    anymore. In the wake of Austria’s ultimatum, Russian
    foreign minister Sazonov concluded that Russia, quote, “Could not remain a passive spectator
    whilst a Slavonic people was being trampled down. If Russia failed to fulfill her historic
    mission, she would be considered a decadent state and would henceforth have to take second
    place among the powers…if at this critical juncture, the Serbs were abandoned to their
    fate, Russian prestige in the Balkans would collapse utterly.” Thanks, Thought Bubble. So judging from what we just learned in the
    Thought Bubble, it was really the Ottomans. If they could have just stopped Austria from
    annexing Bosnia in the first place, none of this would have happened. And if I may go
    a little further back, there wouldn’t have even been an Ottoman Empire without the stupid
    Romans. And of course the Roman Empire was largely dependent upon constant expansion
    and looting, so if only the Gauls could have defeated Caesar, none of this would have happened. In short, no wonder Caesar was assassinated,
    he was about to start World War I in 1900 years. I bring that up because that’s the tricky
    thing about the blame game. You can trace the causes of World War I back a bunch of
    ways. I mean, I can’t think of anyone who you can’t at least partially assign blame
    to – well, I mean except the Mongols. Actually you know what, if they’d just kept
    control of Russia, probably no World War I. Anyway, all of this only scratches the surface
    of the arguments about who’s to blame for World War I. I mean, I haven’t dealt with
    stuff like the alliance system or European imperialism, or you often hear about the naval
    rivalry between Britain and Germany, and then there are the ideological causes, like nationalism,
    and the Social Darwinist thinking that led people to believe that war was a natural and
    inevitable state of human affairs. You can tell all those origin stories of the
    Great War, and they’re important, but ours centers on diplomatic history. There are a
    few reasons for this, first, the decision to go to war was ultimately in the hands of
    a very small group of diplomats. I mean, even in the most democratic countries, Britain
    and France, popular opinion didn’t force mobilization. Also, in most countries that’s still the case.
    It’s still diplomats who decide whether to go to war. So understanding what makes governments
    and diplomats decide to go to war is very important. But looking at the diplomatic causes of the
    war also reveals something to us about the pitfalls of writing history. I mean diplomats
    are famous for keeping pretty detailed records of their dealings, both at the time and in
    retrospect, and then historians have to sift through all these sources and make choices
    about which ones to emphasize. And sometimes, even which ones to believe, because of course,
    often these sources are in direct conflict. Now, I’m no historian, but in creating this
    episode, we had to make choices that many of you will disagree with. Either because
    you don’t think we gave enough evidence or because you don’t like the things that we
    emphasized, and that’s great. It’s these constructive and critical conversations that lead us to
    dig deeper, to consult more primary sources, to read more broadly, and that in turn leads
    to a richer understanding of the world and a more engaged life. All that noted, the alliance system was certainly
    important and I’m sure you’ll be discussing it in your classes, and in comments. Thank you for watching, I’ll see you next
    week. Crash Course is filmed here in the Chad and
    Stacey Emigholz Studio in Indianapolis, and it’s made possible because of these people’s
    hard work and also because of your contributions on Subbable. Subbable is a voluntary subscription
    service that allows you to contribute directly to Crash Course for the monthly price of your
    choice and it allows us to keep Crash Course free for everyone forever, so thank you to
    all of our Subbable subscribers, and thanks to everyone who watches. As we say in my hometown, don’t forget to
    be awesome.

    Photos of German Railroad Artillery During World War 1 (1917-1918)
    Articles, Blog

    Photos of German Railroad Artillery During World War 1 (1917-1918)

    August 27, 2019


    28cm S.K. L/40 “Bruno, operated by a naval artillery battery in Flanders. The photo is from march 1918. 24cm S.K. L/40 “Theodor Karl” E.u.B (Eisenbahn und Bettungsschiessgerüst) dual-role railway gun. It can be fired from both its rail car and a purpose-built fixed mounting off the rails. 24cm “Theodor Karl”, but is the E. model (Eisenbahnlafette), which means it is solely a railway gun. It cannot be dismounted onto a fixed firing platform like a dual role. This model preceded the E.u.B. 17cm “Samuel” (17 cm SK L/40 i.R.L. auf Eisenbahnwagen) Again the 17cm “Samuel” (17 cm SK L/40 i.R.L. auf Eisenbahnwagen) 28 cm K L/40 “Kurfürst” Another view of the 28 cm K L/40 “Kurfürst”

    Saudi Arabia Travel by Train Madina To Makkah Railway Journey 2019
    Articles, Blog

    Saudi Arabia Travel by Train Madina To Makkah Railway Journey 2019

    August 27, 2019


    Traveling Saudi Arabia by Train More than 15 Million Muslims Visit Makkah annually, for performing Hajj and Umra from the different parts of the world. After performing Hajj or Umra pilgrime travel to Madina The City of Prophet Muhammad PBUH The distance between two Holy Cities Makkah & Madina is almost 450 Km by road and 453 Km by Rail via Jeddah Today my journey from Madina to Makkah on Harmain High Speed Railway Saudi Railway operating speed is 300 Km/h Makkah – Madina high speed railway was opened to the public on 11 Oct 2018 Now 4 Trains are running daily between 2 holy cities During the Hajj Season more than 40 Trains run.

    Coal, Steam, and The Industrial Revolution: Crash Course World History #32
    Articles, Blog

    Coal, Steam, and The Industrial Revolution: Crash Course World History #32

    August 27, 2019


    Hi, I’m John Green; this is Crash Course
    World History, and today we’re going to discuss the series of events that made it
    possible for you to watch Crash Course. And also made this studio possible. And made the
    warehouse containing the studio possible. A warehouse, by the way, that houses stuff
    for warehouses. That’s right, it’s time to talk about the Industrial Revolution. Although it occurred around the same time
    as the French, American, Latin American, and Haitian Revolutions – between, say, 1750 and
    1850 – the industrial revolution was really the most revolutionary of the bunch. Past John: No way, dude. All those other revolutions
    resulted in, like, new borders and flags and stuff. Present John: [sigh] We’ve studied 15,000
    years of history here at Crash Course, Me from the Past. And borders and flags have
    changed plenty, and they’re going to keep changing. But in all that time, nothing much changed
    about the way we disposed of waste or located drinking water or acquired clothing. Most people lived
    on or very close to the land that provided their food. Except for a few exceptions, life expectancy
    never rose above 35 or below 25. Education was a privilege, not a right. In all those
    millennia, we never developed a weapon that could kill more than a couple dozen people
    at once, or a way to travel faster than horseback. For 15,000 years, most humans never owned
    or used a single item made outside of their communities. Simon Bolivar didn’t change that and
    neither did the American Declaration of Independence. You have electricity? Industrial Revolution.
    Blueberries in February? Industrial Revolution. You live somewhere other than a farm? Industrial
    Revolution. You drive a car? Industrial Revolution. You get twelve years of free, formal education?
    Industrial Revolution. Your bed, your antibiotics, your toilet, your contraception, your tap
    water, your every waking and sleeping second: Industrial Revolution. [theme music] Here’s one simple statistic that sums it
    up: Before the industrial revolution, about 80% of the world’s population was engaged
    in farming to keep itself and the other 20% of people from starving. Today, in the United States,
    less than 1% of people list their occupation as farming. I mean, we’ve come so far that we don’t
    even have to farm flowers anymore. Stan, are these real, by the way? I can’t tell if
    they’re made out of foam or digital. So what happened? TECHNOLOGY! Here’s my definition: The Industrial Revolution was an increase
    in production brought about by the use of machines and characterized by the use of new
    energy sources. Although this will soon get more complicated, for our purposes today,
    industrialization is NOT capitalism – although, as we will see next week, it is connected
    to modern capitalism. And, the industrial revolution began around 1750 and it occurred
    across most of the earth, but it started in Europe, especially Britain. What happened?
    Well, let’s go to the Thought Bubble. The innovations of the Industrial Revolution
    were intimately interconnected. Like, look, for instance, at the British textile industry:
    The invention of the flying shuttle by John Kay in 1733 dramatically increased the speed
    of weaving, which in turn created demand for yarn, which led to inventions like the Spinning
    Jenny and the water frame. Soon these processes were mechanized using water power, until the
    steam engine came along to make flying shuttles really fly in these huge cotton mills. The most successful steam engine was built
    by Thomas “They Didn’t Name Anything After Me” Newcomen to clear water out of mines.
    And because water was cleared out of those mines, there was more coal to power more steam
    engines, which eventually led to the fancying up of the Newcomen Steam Engine by James “I
    Got a Unit of Power and a University Named After Me” Watt, whose engine made possible
    not only railroads and steamboats but also ever-more-efficient cotton mills. And, for the first time, chemicals other than
    stale urine (I wish I was kidding) were being used to bleach the cloth that people wore
    – the first of which was sulfuric acid, which was created in large quantities only thanks
    to lead-lined chambers, which would’ve been impossible without lead production rising
    dramatically right around 1750 in Britain, thanks to lead foundries powered by coal. And all these factors came together to make
    more yarn that could be spun and bleached faster and cheaper than ever before, a process
    that would eventually culminate in $18 Crash Course Mongols shirts. Available now at DFTBA.com.
    Thanks, Thought Bubble, for that shameless promotion of our beautiful, high-quality t-shirts
    available now at DFTBA.com. So, the problem here is that with industrialization
    being so deeply interconnected, it’s really difficult to figure out why it happened in
    Europe, especially Britain. And that question of why turns out to be one of the more contentious
    discussions in world history today. For instance, here are some Eurocentric reasons
    why industrialization might have happened first in Europe: There’s the cultural superiority
    argument that basically holds that Europeans are just better and smarter than other people.
    Sometimes this is formulated as Europeans possessing superior rationality. By the way,
    you’ll never guess where the people who make this argument tend to come from – unless
    you guessed that they come from Europe. And then, others argue that only Europe had
    the culture of science and invention that made the creation of these revolutionary technologies
    possible. Another argument is that freer political institutions encouraged innovation and strong
    property rights created incentives for inventors. And, finally, people often cite Europe’s
    small population because small populations require labor-saving inventions. Oh, it’s
    time for the Open Letter? An Open Letter to the Steam Engine. But first,
    let’s see what’s in the secret compartment today. Oh, it’s a TARDIS. Truly the apex
    of British industrialization. Dear Steam Engine, You know what’s crazy?
    You’ve really never been improved upon. Like this thing, which facilitates time travel,
    probably runs on a steam engine. Almost all electricity around the world, whether it’s
    from coal or nuclear power, is just a steam engine. It’s all still just water and heat, and
    it speaks to how truly revolutionary the Industrial Revolution was that since then, it’s really
    just been evolution. Best Wishes, John Green So, you may have heard any of those rationales
    for European industrialization, or you may have heard others. The problem with all of
    them, is that each time you think you’re at the root cause it turns out there’s a
    cause of the root cause. To quote Leonardo DiCaprio, James Cameron, and coal mine operators,
    “We have to go deeper.” But, anyway, the problem with these Eurocentric
    why answers, is that they all apply to either China or India or both. And it’s really
    important to note that in 1800, it was not clear that Europe was going to become the
    world’s dominant manufacturing power in the next hundred years. At the time, China,
    India, and Europe were all roughly at the same place in terms of industrial production. First, let’s look at China. It’s hard
    to make the European cultural superiority argument because China had been recording
    its history since before Confucius, and plus there was all that bronze and painting and
    poetry. It’s also kind of difficult to make a blanket
    statement that China was economically inferior to Europe, since they invented paper money
    and led the world in exports of everything from silk to china. I mean, pre-Industrial
    Revolution, population growth was the surest sign of economic success, and China had the
    biggest population in the world. I guess that answers the question of whether they’re
    digital. It’s also difficult to say that China lacked
    a culture of invention when they invented gunpowder, and printing, and paper, and arguably
    compasses. And China had more free enterprise during the Song dynasty than anywhere in the
    world. Some argue that China couldn’t have free
    enterprise because they had a long history of trying to impose monopolies on items like
    salt and iron. And that’s true, but when it comes to enforcing those monopolies, they
    also had a long history of failure. So really, in a lot of ways, China was at least as primed
    for an Industrial Revolution as Britain was. So, why didn’t it happen? Well, Europeans
    – specifically the British – had two huge advantages: First, Coal. When you trace the
    story of improved transportation, or communication, or industrial efficiency, or better chemical
    manufacturing, it always comes back to coal, because the Industrial Revolution was all about
    using different forms of energy to automate production. And England had large supplies of coal that
    were near the surface, which meant that it was cheap to mine, so it quickly replaced
    wood for heating and cooking and stuff. So that encouraged the British to look for more
    coal. The only problem with coal mining, aside from it being, you know, like, deadly and
    everything, is that the coal mines flooded all the time. I guess coal mining is also
    a little problematic for, like, the health of, you know, like, the planet. But, because there was all this incentive
    to get more coal out of the ground, steam engines were invented to pump water out of
    the mines. And because those early steam engines were super inefficient, they needed a cheap
    and abundant source of fuel in order to work – namely, coal, which meant they were much
    more useful to the British than anyone else. So steam engines used cheap British coal to
    keep British coal cheap, and cheap British coal created the opportunity for everything
    from railroads to steel, which like so much else in the Industrial Revolution, created
    a positive feedback loop. Because they run on rails, railroads need steel. And because
    it is rather heavy, steel needs railroads. Secondly, there were Wages. Britain (and to
    a lesser extent the Low Countries) had the highest wages in the world at the beginning
    of the 18th century. In 1725, wages in London were the equivalent of 11 grams of silver
    per day. In Amsterdam, they were 9 grams. In Beijing, Venice, and Florence, they were
    under 4. And in Delhi, they were under 2. It’s not totally clear why wages were so
    high in Britain. Like, one argument is that the Black Death lowered population so much
    that it tightened labor markets, but that doesn’t explain why wages remained low in,
    like, plague-ravaged Italy. Mainly, high wages combined with cheap fuel costs meant that
    it was economically efficient for manufacturers to look to machines as a way of lowering their
    production costs. To quote the historian Robert Allen: “Wages were high and energy was cheap.
    These prices led directly to the industrial revolution by giving firms strong incentives
    to invent technologies that substituted capital and coal for labor.” Ugh, Stan, I’m a little worried that people
    are still going to accuse me of Eurocentrism. Of course, other people will accuse me of
    an anti-European bias. I don’t have a bias against Europe. I love Europe. Europe gave
    me many of my favorite cheeses and cross-country skiing and Charlie Chaplin, who inspired today’s
    Danica drawing. Like, the fact of coal being near the surface
    in Britain can’t be chalked up to British cultural superiority. But the wages question
    is a little different because it makes it sound like only Europeans were smart enough
    to pay high wages. But here’s one last thing to consider: India
    was the world’s largest producer of cotton textiles, despite paying basically the lowest
    wages in the world. Indian agriculture was so productive that laborers could be supported
    at a very low cost. And that, coupled with a large population, meant that Indian textile
    manufacturing could be very productive without using machines, so they didn’t need to industrialize. But more importantly from our perspective,
    there’s a strong argument to be made that Indian cotton production helped spur British
    industrialization. It was cotton textiles that drove the early Industrial Revolution,
    and the main reason that Britain was so eager to produce cottons was that demand was incredibly
    high. They were more comfortable than woolens, but they were also cheaper, because cottons
    could be imported from India at such a low cost. So, Indian cottons created the market and
    then British manufacturers invested in machines (and imported Indian know-how) to increase
    production so that they could compete with India. And that’s at least one way in which
    European industrialization was truly a world phenomenon. For those of you who enjoy such
    highly contentious and thorny, cultural historical debates, good news. Next week, we’ll be
    talking about capitalism. Thanks for watching, I’ll see you then. Crash Course is produced and directed by Stan
    Muller. Our script supervisor is Danica Johnson. The show is written by my high school history
    teacher, Raoul Meyer, and myself. We are ably interned by Meredith Danko. And our graphics
    team is Thought Bubble. Last week’s phrase of the week was “The
    New England Revolution.” That was challenging. If you want to suggest future phrases of the
    week or take a guess at this week’s, you can do so in comments, where you can also ask
    questions about today’s video that will be answered by our team of historians. Thanks for watching Crash Course, and as we
    say in my hometown, don’t forget to be awesome.

    Knocking Out The Hejaz Railway I THE GREAT WAR Week 195
    Articles, Blog

    Knocking Out The Hejaz Railway I THE GREAT WAR Week 195

    August 27, 2019


    The Hejaz Railway was a vital supply and communications line for the Ottoman Empire, connecting Damascus and Medina, and this week, Lawrence of Arabia and the forces of the Arab Revolt take a big chunk of it. I’m Indy Neidell; welcome to the Great War. Last week Germany had renewed its Western
    Front offensives as Operation Georgette, the battle of La Lys, began. It was an immediate success, and by the end
    of the week the Germans were just 8 km from Hazebrouck, their target, with the channel
    ports beyond. The Ottomans were advancing in the Caucasus,
    and there was scandal in the Central Powers when the Sixtus Affair came to light – that
    Emperor Karl had considered selling out his German ally. His Foreign Minister Count Czernin was replaced
    this week. One other thing that I mentioned last week
    actually happens this week: Ferdinand Foch is placed in overall control of all Allied
    armies. He ordered the defense of Hazebrouck to be
    as near as possible to the eastern edge of the Nieppe Forest. By now, they had a pretty solid barrier in
    front of the railway town, but Georgette had now changed its objective – it was now the
    Mount Kemmel – Mount des Cats ridge the Germans wanted to take. Still, by the 14th, they were being increasingly
    disappointed. The left wing of the 6th army, like last week,
    made no progress at Festubert and Givenchy. The attackers wanted to call the attack off,
    and German Quartermaster General Erich Ludendorff agreed said okay – they would instead attack
    the 17th, north of the Nieppe Forest. The British were really worried about losing
    the channel ports at Calais and Boulogne. There were substitute ports like Le Havre
    and Cherbourg, but they were further away and out of range for smaller ships. “Using larger ships would slow down the
    flow of supplies, but would make it impossible to continue to maintain the blockade at Dover,
    the key anchor in the antisubmarine defense” (German 1918 Offensives) On the 15th, to free up forces to fight in
    the Lys valley, the British pulled back their line north of Ypres, giving up all the territory
    won for a quarter of a million casualties at the Battle of Passchendaele last fall. On the 17th came the new German attack, whose
    objective was to separate the British and Belgians. The attacks could have cut off the Ypres Salient
    had they succeeded, but by evening they had failed, with the Belgians driving the Germans
    back almost to their starting positions. The attack was called off at the end of the
    week, and Operation Georgette had basically turned into a battle of attrition. Ludendorff had the strategic imperative of
    defeating the British to win the war – that’s what he thought would do it, and German Chief
    of Staff Paul von Hindenburg had even written in his memoirs (Offensives), “The attack against the British northern
    wing remained the focal point of our operations. I believed the war would be decided if this
    attack was successful. If we reached the channel coast, we could
    lay our hands directly on Britain’s vital arteries. In so doing, we would not only be in the most
    favorable position conceivable for interrupting her maritime communications, but our heaviest
    artillery would be able to bring a segment of the south coast of Britain under fire.” The Germans weren’t the only Central Power
    trying to advance this week. The Ottomans were on the move against the
    Armenians heading toward the Caucasus. Basically by force of circumstances, and not
    true planning, the Armenian forces were better concentrated by now than before, though. Their roughly 15,000 men could actually do
    something against the 25-30,000 Ottomans advancing on them. The Ottomans attacked on the line between
    Novo-Selim and Agadeve on the 19th. Now, here the Armenians had around 9,000 rifles
    on a front of 40 km, so it was spread pretty thin. Still, though the attackers took a mountain
    overlooking Agadeve, fierce counterattacks pushed them back. But by the end of the day, as Turkish reserves
    arrived, the Armenians were in retreat toward Benliahmet. General Lebedinski, in overall command of
    the defenders, was fairly optimistic about continued resistance and told this to the
    Armenian National Assembly at Alexandropol, which voted in favor of continuing the struggle. Thing is, the Transcaucasian Diet, representing
    the Transcaucasian Federation, trying to negotiate peace with the Ottomans in Trabzon, had a
    bit of a different attitude. They had wanted to accept the Ottoman ultimatum
    for territory we saw a couple weeks ago, and they had been telegraphed authority to do
    so from Tiflis, but the telegram must have been delayed or something, because that was
    on the 10th, and on the 12th, the Ottoman commander of the forces approaching Batum
    sent another ultimatum, to surrender the fortress and surrounding area. When the Diet got this new ultimatum, they
    changed their minds and rejected it, so now from the 14th, there was officially a state
    of war, though the commander of Batum fortress did, in fact, surrender. Further to the south there was action in Palestine. On April 13th, there was an attack by the
    Arab Revolt on Simna, west of Maan. After capturing the outpost, they attacked
    Maan station just east of the town two days later. Taking Maan would prevent the Ottomans from
    making flanking attacks on British General Edmund Allenby’s army. Maan though, was strongly fortified with machine
    guns posts and the attackers were forced to withdraw after two days, taking heavy casualties. The British then attacked the Hejaz Railway
    near Tell Shahm, south of Maan, using armored cars, the Egyptian Camel Corps, and tribesmen. The attack was a big success, taking the station
    and destroying hundreds of meters of rail and the bridges there. Lawrence of Arabia was part of all of these
    attacks, laying bricks of gun cotton to the rails and lighting the fuses. The attackers then turned south to the next
    station, Wadi Rethem. (Setting the desert on fire) “Relying on
    the invincibility of the cars again – to small arms fire at least – (Lieutenant-Colonel Alan)
    Dawnay ordered one car forward to the station, which was then demolished with explosive. Its battered remains can still be seen today
    among the sands – the color of old mustard – on the very south of Jordan.” The Times would report the destruction or
    occupation of 53 miles of the railway, a pretty big feat, though both that paper and the War
    office gave credit solely to the men of the Arab Revolt. And as those small attacks continued, Austrian
    Emperor Karl was now planning a big one. I said last week that his Foreign Minister
    Count Czernin was dismissed this week – the 14th – by Karl over the Sixtus Affair. Before his fall, though, he had recommended
    a new offensive against Italy in the late spring, and Karl had agreed, possibly hoping
    it would restore his standing in Germany, damaged by the affair. The Germans would actually insist on the offensive
    in return for food shipments, and German High Command liked the idea as a support for German
    Western Front attacks. For AH, it was a chance to capture some much-needed
    supplies, make Rome negotiate, and have some say in what they saw as impending German victory. They were even going to use similar methods
    of attack to the German ones of Operation Michael, and since they were now getting a
    lot of prisoners of war returned from Russia, who’d left the war, they were bringing their
    army back up to strength and figured they’d attack before Italy could recover any more
    from its defeat last November. And here are a bunch of notes to end the week. On the 14th, French PM Georges Clemenceau
    says France does not recognize the current Russian Bolshevik government. On the 15th, Germans report the occupation
    of Helsinki. Also on the 15th, Greek troops cross Struma
    River and occupy villages in the Seres district on the Macedonian Front, and at the end of
    the week on that front, the Italians attacked at Cerna Bend, but they were repulsed. On April 18th in Britain, the Third Military
    Service Bill receives royal assent. It’s supposed to be the last manpower measure
    of the war. The military age is raised to 50 and if necessary
    to 55. Returned POWs and those who’ve completed
    tours of duty are liable to further service. A national emergency may be declared and all
    exemptions to service withdrawn. And that was the week. The Germans trying and failing to push the
    British back to the Channel, the Armenians being pushed back by the Ottomans in eastern
    Anatolia, but the Ottomans losing in Palestine, and Austria making plans for a renewed offensive
    against Italy. Funny, I said at the beginning of the year
    that Austria-Hungary had decided it would make no new offensives this year, but the
    situation had changed. With Russia out of the war, hundreds of thousands
    of prisoners were returning to their Empire, restoring the army. Thing is, the empire was still starving and
    desperately needed to get or take resources and munitions from someone, and the nations
    of the empire were now demanding autonomy; Karl really needed this – not for a glorious
    victory in battle, not even to win the war, but just for mere survival. That’s how far the Habsburg Empire had fallen. By the way, this time 100 years ago, the Royal
    Air Force was now just a little over two weeks old. Our friend Bismarck explores the foundation
    of this independent Air Force on his channel about military aviation history right here
    – and we highly recommend that you check it out. Our Patreon supporter is Dhruv Kapoor – thank
    you for your ongoing support on Patreon – we could not make this show without you. Don’t forget to subscribe, see you next
    time.

    Articles

    Schwerer Gustav – Rail Super Gun (Behemoth)

    August 26, 2019


    The Schwerer Gustav, Rail Super Gun, World War 2. The Schwerer Gustav was the largest artillery gun ever made. Before the second World War had started, Hitler required a devastating weapon for the invasion of France that could destroy the Maginot Line penetrating at several layers of concrete and steel The Schwerer Gustav was designed in 1934 by the German Arms manufacturer, Krupp. This giant railway gun weighed 1350 tons and had an overall length of 47 point three meters or 155 feet two inches it was mounted on a railway chassis running on specially constructed tracks and had to be Disassembled and assembled to set up even a set of outer tracks were required for the cranes to achieve this its barrel length was 32 and a half meters or 168 inches and could only move up or down at an elevation of 48 degrees with horizontal targeting achieved by a curved tracks the weapon caliber was 80 centimeters or 31 inches and the heavy concrete piercing or High-explosive shells weighed seven tons making them the largest and heaviest shells of any artillery piece in the world The gun could fire over a range of 47 kilometers or 29 miles After a number of shells were fired the barrel would wear away and need replacing the artillery gun required a staggering number of crew 250 crewmen were required to assemble the gun which took three and a half days while 2,500 crewmen were needed to lay the tracks Flak battalions were also a necessity to protect the gun from air attacks as it was highly visible due to its size The Schwerer Gustav would be constructed throughout the 30s But it would not enter service until 1941 there for missing the French invasion the gun would be transported to the Eastern Front and used at the siege of Sevastopol where 4,000 men were required to set it up in position It fired 300 shells at several enemy positions including Soviet fortresses and ammunition magazines After this the Schwerer Gustav was transported to Leningrad, but the attack was canceled It is unknown whether there was a second gun constructed or whether it was a nickname by the German artillery crew but in 1942 Dora as it became known was operational at Stalingrad, but withdrawn by the Germans During 1942 the Germans proposed to construct a new version of the gun mounted on a self-propelled platform that could move without Railway tracks called the landcruiser P. 1500 monster, however the idea was eventually scrapped as The war was coming to an end the Schwerer Gustav some sources say, was destroyed by the Germans to prevent capture on the 14th of April 1945 and it’s ruins studied by Soviet specialists Overall the Schwerer Gustav was quite an impractical weapon demanding a large number of crew and setup to become operational Subscribe for more World War 2 videos get your copy of simple history World War 2 today Thank you guys for all your support on the simple history YouTube channel if you enjoyed please consider visiting our patreon page there You can show us your support for the channel by donating and make a huge difference in what we’re able to create for you Plus you can get early access on upcoming videos, so let’s keep it growing, and thank you for being part of this amazing community

    Donation Decisions: An Inside Look
    Articles, Blog

    Donation Decisions: An Inside Look

    August 26, 2019


    [ Matt Anderson ] I’m Matt Anderson.
    I’m standing in one of the collection storage spaces at the Minnesota
    Historical Society. Since its establishment in 1849, the Society
    has collected objects, books, maps, fine art, posters, manuscript materials
    and government records. While some materials, government records for
    example, come into our holdings on fixed schedules set by government
    agencies, much of what we have comes to us in the form of donations
    from the public. Space, time and resources are limited and acquiring
    an item into the collection isn’t quite as simple as taking it and putting it into
    a display case or onto a storage shelf. Several steps are involved. The typical
    donation begins when a donor submits an on line form about the object.
    The curator reviews the form and can also make a decision then and there.
    But if the object has an interesting story, if it isn’t duplicated in the
    existing collection, if it’s in good condition and if it has strong ties
    to the State of Minnesota, then arrangements will be made to
    bring the item to the History Center. During the meeting the curator asks
    the donor for information about the object and then issues a temporary
    deposit receipt which the donor signs. This form gives the Society temporary
    custody of the object while it’s evaluated. After meeting with the
    donor, the curator may conduct additional research or compare the
    item with other pieces in the collection. If the object still has strong potential,
    then it’s taken to the acquisitions committee for formal approval.
    This committee consisting of curators, librarians, exhibit developers and other
    specialists, listens as the curator makes the case for the object,
    explaining its story, its significance, how it compliments other materials
    in the Society’s holdings and how it might be used for exhibit or study
    purposes. The committee then debates over and votes on the item.
    If a majority is in favor, then the object will become a part of the collection.
    After the positive vote, the curator writes a catalogue record for the object
    noting what it is, how it was used, the nature of its significance and the name
    and contact information of the donor. The curator then sends a deed of gift
    form to the donor. This form transfers legal ownership for the object to
    the Minnesota Historical Society. The donor signs the paper and the
    returned document is placed into the Society’s permanent file.
    The collections manager then assigns a permanent accession
    number to the object and passes it on to a volunteer who labels the item
    with that number. This identification number follows the object forever
    and ties it to its computer catalogue record and its paper file. A photograph
    of the object is then taken both for inventory purposes and for use in
    the Society’s public re-assessable web-based catalogue. Finally, the
    collections manager finds a permanent home for the object among the shelves
    and cabinets in the climate controlled storage rooms. There, the new
    acquisition stays safe and secure until needed for research or exhibit
    purposes. As you can see, a good deal of careful thought goes into deciding
    what we take for the permanent collection and the typical donation
    passes through many hands. We take these steps to ensure that the
    collection is of high quality and that limited space and resources are used
    prudently. Not everything can be added to our holdings but the process helps
    to ensure that those items we do take will be available to future generations
    as they explore Minnesota’s past.