Big events during the interim period between the two world wars. It focuses on the Bolshevik Revolution, the rise and tyranny of Stalin, the Holodomor, the Gulag, and a little on the rise of Hitler (more on this last one in the WWII presentation).
CHAPTER 3
The Rise of the Merchants and the Beheading of a King
Oliver Cromwell was “the greatest Englishman of the seventeenth century,” said Theodore
Roosevelt in the midst of a fiery philippic against the Lord Protector’s foe in Madrid, words
that simultaneously rationalized Washington’s knockout blow against the Spanish Empire,
which had recently been administered in Cuba and the Philippines. Roosevelt was completing
what Cromwell had begun.1 That the embodiment of U.S. imperialism would salute an anti-
monarchist Puritan should be seen as logical. The republicanism that Cromwell foreshadowed
would erupt in 1776. The republicanism that evolved in North America found it difficult at
best to corral the Pan-Europeanism that set it in motion (witness the anti-Catholicism and anti-
Semitism of early nineteenth-century New York, for example). Likewise, Cromwell’s anti-
monarchical project, engaging in bloody anti-Irish pogroms, created the template for
republicans staring down the indigenous and slave revolts in the Americas.
In short, England and the immediately surrounding territories were rocked by internecine
martial conflict between the early 1640s (actually as early as 1639) and the late 1650s, when
Cromwell passed from the scene and the monarchy was restored about a decade after the king
had been beheaded in 1649. In short, 1640 to 1660 transformed the Isles; though Cromwell
died, neither Cromwellian republican nor merchant capital was subdued altogether, and this
led in 1688 to their roaring comeback, when the monarch was placed on a glide path to
becoming a figurehead. The emerging primacy of those captivated with the idea of captivity of
Africans and Native Americans were then to rise on the curious platform of being tribunes of
“enlightenment” and progress, an ideological victory so grand that even those who supposedly
sought to overthrow the capitalist draper in the deceitful finery of republicanism accepted this
fundamental canard.
The losing side in this titanic European conflict had a justifiable fear that they would
become bonded laborers, particularly in the Caribbean, which gave them an incentive to fight
with ferocity, just as it normalized what was unfolding in any case: enslaving Native
Americans and Africans. By 1642 a quarter or even a third of the adult male population in the
regions surrounding London were in arms at one time or another, according to one estimate.
Casualties, as a result, were quite high; as a percentage of the English population, they were
higher than for the British dead during the First World War. The figures for Scotland were
higher, and for England, much higher still. Unremarkably, foreigners found these Europeans to
be rude, aggressive, and violent.2 Testimony from indigenes and Africans doubtlessly would
have been even more denunciatory.
Another estimate claims that 10 percent of all adult males—about 140, 00.
Beginnings of the Cold War from the end of World War II to the end of the Korean War. Had to chop this up some due to size restrictions.
Also note that there's no real text on the slides. Pay attention to the speaker's notes for info.
The U.S. experience in settling the West. Covers Indian wars, rail roads and up to election of 1896. My thanks to Gennie Holcomb for providing framework material for the presentation.
Government Spending and Revenue, 1792-2009Dan Ewert
NOTE: This spreadsheet isn't very good looking at through Slideshare, but you'll find the data and the graphs great when you download it. So download it.
A spreadsheet with figures entered for various aspects of government spending and revenue for the years 1792 to 2009. Subsequent tabs adjust for inflation and categorize different aspects for good comparisons. The last tab has all the graphs for each tab for the entire 217 years and also from 1900 to 2009.
Two different articles about the Iceman published about 15 years apart. The interpretations and theories surrounding him and his death changed drastically in that time. It's a nice illustration for how historical interpretations are not written in stone, but change depending on new evidence.