Liberalism and Mobilization During World War I

Based on the readings, how did the broad social and military mobilization for the war contradict the liberal civilization that Europe had developed by the last third of the 19th century?

In this essay we will first briefly define what liberalism means, and then explore the influence of liberalism during the late 19th century in Germany, France, Britain, Austro-Hungary, and Russia. After understanding the scope of liberalism, we will look at the consequences of mobilization and how this undermined liberalism.

Liberalism, as explained by history Ralph Raico, is “the term used to designate the ideology advocating private property, an unhampered market economy, the rule of law, constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and of the press, and international peace based on free trade.”

Continue reading…

Individualism and WWI

An exploration of liberty leading up to WWI

“Thinking about the origins of World War I and the earliest stage of the war, where does individualism stand in all this?  What was the status of individual volition and liberty in the face of the European elites that brought about the war?”

The purpose of this essay is to explain the rise of Romanticism and its eventual role in promoting nationalism. The most revealing commentary on any intellectual and philosophical movement is the expression of those ideas through various art forms, so I will be citing visual arts, music, and literary works as examples to support my points.

In the 18th and 19th centuries there was a rediscovery and exploration of what is now called classical liberalism. Intellectuals such as Richard Cantillon, Adam Smith, Richard Cobden, John Baptiste Say, Frederic Bastiat, Turgot, John Locke, and Thomas Jefferson, argued for a political and economic system which freed the individual to pursue their own ends…

Read more…

Here is Ron Paul’s “What If?” speech from Congress. Absolutely brilliant.

And here is a rather chilling history of Iran. Chilling because there is so much I didn’t know our government did. Chilling because everyone is saying we need to bomb Iran. Really? Don’t you know your history?

And every so often I watch this one, just to cheer myself up and get all excited about liberty again. It is so clear and so beautiful in the defense of self-ownership. Must watch.

- Madison knew he wouldn’t have a chance for reelection unless he found some way to unite the country and better his public image.

- The First Bank of the United States had just been disbanded, but the new owner of it (Stephen Girard) was very good friends with Madison’s Secretary of Treasury, Alexander Dallas. Girard funded about 95% of the War of 1812. And Dallas was responsible for getting the Second Bank of the United States approved. You think there’s any connection?

- The state militias in New England did not like the war as they depended heavily on trade with the British Empire. They even considered secession at the Hartford Convention of 1814. Some states refused to support the war and others did but only half-heartedly. And even Madison never questioned their right to secede from the union although it was in his interest that they stayed. At least Madison had more principles than that despot, Lincoln.

Since everything on Wikipedia can be infallibly trusted (*sarcasm*) here is their write-up on Jefferson.

Since we’ve been indoctrinated with the politically correct story, here is the real account of Jefferson and his beliefs by Albert Jay Nock. I suspect he took great pleasure in discovering all the dirty secrets about all the people we have always admired. I just hope he doesn’t do that to Jefferson.

Since the only way we can know what Jefferson thought is by reading his own words, here are the letters and writings of Jefferson, courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Since not everyone has time to read that much, here are some pithy quotes that are supposedly from Jefferson.

HBO probably didn’t intend this, but the most interesting part of the movie for me is the relationship (or lack of one) between Jefferson and Hamilton. I think they were portrayed very well. And George Washington. Adams and Jefferson complain that Washington is a good man and all, but he always defers to Hamilton and lets Hamilton run the show. Adams allows Hamilton and his cronies to form a national army to defeat the French (who haven’t yet attacked…they were just being cautious….yeah right) and  Hamilton comes to Adams with detailed descriptions of the new army uniforms and even some of the technical details like, “When their commander says ______ [I forgot the exact word] the men will turn their head to the right, with their left eye in line with the left row of buttons on their coat and their right eye looking down the row of men beside them.” This borders on being extreme and comical, but it is clear that Hamilton glories in the pomp and show of his new army. And on the other hand you have Jefferson who is accused of promoting anarchy and who sits silently with a secret smile, who never says, “oh, no, we couldn’t have anarchy! Where’s the big central government to save us from chaos!” but who is probably thinking, “little do they know I am an anarchist, and little do they know where this whole Constitution business and central government is going to lead us.”

After my studies of the American Revolution and following years, Jefferson is the only one I can still admire. I’m afraid to read Albert Jay Nock, I suspect he’s going to blast away that one last hero of the Revolution too. And if he doesn’t, Rothbard probably will. But I would like to think, just for a little while, that Jefferson really was a true patriot and one who didn’t compromise.

That’s what I think Adams had difficulty with. He was torn between Hamilton and Jefferson. Sometimes he agreed with Jefferson, sometimes with Hamilton. He didn’t keep Hamilton in his cabinet, but he did sign the horrendous Alien and Sedition Acts. I think Adams had much potential, but somehow failed along the way because he didn’t know quite what he believed. I did respect him very much at the beginning when he argued for the accused British soldiers. He believed that even the British had the right to a fair trial. That is a lesson we would do well to remember.

P.S. Dublin Georgia…not the famous Dublin. Sorry…didn’t want to mislead you there, but it does sound very impressive if I just say Dublin. :)

Yesterday I was working on the first lesson for my online class starting next semester. Exclusive information: If I can get this class prepared in the next few weeks, I might even do another one on American history! So for the first lesson I went back to Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas and the Scholastics. It was very interesting. I had studied Aristotle and Aquinas from a religious perspective so it was fun to find out how their philosophies affected their economic thinking. And then today or tomorrow I’ll be looking at the early Classical school, J.B. Say, Adam Smith, etc…and that should be enlightening. Not many people realize how deeply flawed Adam Smith was. I think that this background on the Austrian school will help the students realize how important Menger was, what a significant development the theory of marginal utility was and so forth.

So…if you’re interested in an online class unmasking some of the lies the government has told us about American history, please let me know. :)