Skip to main content

The Pope's no to the People's yes: The tide of British history. (6).



 Better ways to kill people.
 

The Tree of Knowledge harvested. For Machine Gun nests and The Mustard Gas.


   
New times call for new ideas. As the only place we ever live in is always a new time, you might think that our best and brightest would be busily intent on producing new ideas to react to the new information of the times. 
     Unfortunately, it is clear that the "educated elite" are most often trained to continue the current systems at all costs. People rise to positions of power because they are prepared to passively agree to whatever it takes to reach that position. Thus, inevitably, in a world where better communication  is paramount, we most often end up with leaders who are our worst and dullest.
    
In 1914, Britain sent an army to war. The popular view of Lions led by Donkeys,* might be rightly questioned by historians, but anyone with any experience of any traditional British institution will recognise the ringing truth of it. The first World War kicked off with tactics of trench warfare that saw the conflict grind to a halt. New ideas were soon in demand. People wanted better killing machines, and very soon they got them.



A British Mark V Tank. Correctly described as male.
 The first new machines rumbled onto the battle-field in 1916.  Someone somewhere had noted their resemblance to a large water tank, and the military, with its natural desire for unclear  description, kept the name. The more evocative landships was deemed no longer fit for purpose. . All sides quickly moved to adopt this new idea, with the French company Renault producing the first modern tank, the Renault FT.  The Russians on the other hand....


Russian Tsar tank: big revolution required.


    

       World War One produced many technological advancements, from tanks to air traffic  control to sanitary towels. Clearly, the rich information  of wartime gives plenty of ideas. Perhaps education shouldn't be so grimly determined to train people for a life of passive consumerism and boredom, but be a lot more concerned with putting people into novel and challenging situations? Also, perhaps we should acknowledge that experiment is vital for progress? That, whether or not necessity is always the mother of invention, the child's ancestors consistently tend to bear the name Failure?


Basic communication. Grunts and Violence.
More complex communication.
Arguments and agreement
                                                 


  








      With the end of the war in 1918, the communication style went from basic Australopithecus,** towards more Homo Sapiens Sapiens. That is to say, negotiations were entered into about war reparations and the re-drawing of certain European boundries. France wished to ensure that she would no longer have to worry about a German threat and the French demands reflected this. Germany was shorn of land the size of Sri Lanka, and lost 7 million people.
   The Treaty of Versailles has often been seen as laying the foundations of Hitler's Reich; in that a German economy weakened by the demands of reparations coupled with a German sense of taking back what was rightfully theirs only served to encourage fascism. But 20th century fascism was an idea whose time had come; whether it was draped in red  or cut by Hugo Boss, this idea was a fashionable hit all across Europe as the twenties became the thirties.
 
   Perhaps we all just needed to try it. To do the experiment, and learn what happens when you attempt to reverse the great communicative tide of history. To learn all the lessons provided by those fascist cnuts.











* Field Marshal Haig, who has been both praised and criticised for his leadership, was seemingly convinced that he was doing God's work. From this alone, It may be assumed that, for Haig, Bela Lugosi was very much dead.


 ** I may be being unfair to Australopithecus here. Ozzie probably relaxed as soon as there was enough food and shelter. Ozzie's finest academies were not being directed towards the development of poison gas, used on the poorest to protect a system designed to mainly benefit those who already lived in the finest homes.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Cleopatra, a cowboy, then screaming!. - How we understand things.

“We, ignorant of ourselves, Beg often our own harms, which the wise powers Deny us for our good; so find we profit By losing of our prayers.”                 “Finish, good lady; the bright day is done, And we are for the Dark. ” ― William Shakespeare, Antony and Cleopatra   Cleopatra, a cowboy, then....screaming!       Presented with this information, how does the brain deal with it? Necessarily, the brain must deal with it as it does with all information:                                 Information -------------> Idea        Consequently, you might sort it out like this:                        Cleopatra   --------------> Queen Of Egypt                        A cowboy   --------------> Tom Mix                       Screaming! --------------> Expressing a strong emotional state         And then, in an example of the fundamentally creative aspect of basic communication, our brains start to fill in the blanks, to describe and e

"And do the other things" - Kennedy, Context and the Matrix.

Around the time of the anniversary of Apollo 11, or of the famous assassination in Dallas, the clip of President John F. Kennedy talking about going to the Moon has often been wheeled out: Ever since I saw this for the first time, maybe 35 years ago, I was always slightly baffled by the phrase: "We choose to go to the Moon and do the other things , not because they are easy, but because they are hard." What does "and do the other things" mean, I wondered? Why did Kennedy just presume his audience would know what these other things were? Or was it some sophisticated rhetorical device that I was unaware of? Should I start using it to give whatever I was saying some much-needed gravitas? However, just last week I happened upon a fuller version of the speech: Clearly then, the other things are referring to the climbing of Everest and the flying of the Atlantic, conquering the challenges necessary for progress.  With context, it is obvious what "and do the other th

A whale is a tree; obviously.

When I was young enough to be sat in school within glancing distance of a small library space that was dominated by a Miffy Wendy house# and contained, in my opinion, far too many Miffy books, yet just old enough to be offended that people would think that I would want to read about Miffy; the cover of one book spoke louder than all of those that surrounded it and thoroughly intrigued me.     The title of this book was: Jonah and the Whale.     Of course, this title referred to the famous Bible story, but at that age (maybe I was five or six) I don't think I knew of it. What I did know was what a whale was: a massive fish*, and that Jonah was someone's name, probably because of Ken Reid's comic character: Jonah . Jonah- not the Biblical one     So, the book's cover was something that drew my interest because, I wondered, why did the cover show an illustration of a man sitting under a tree? It was similar to this: Jonah...and... something.        Why did