CAMBRIDGE FORECAST GROUP ESSAY: “WHAT HAPPENS WHEN ONE TRIES TO UNDO BYGONE HISTORICAL EVENTS”

June 12, 2010 at 7:28 pm | Posted in Books, Germany, Globalization, History, Military, USA, Zionism | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

history.gif

world.gif

compass.gif

loudspeaker.gif

globeinmoney.jpg

Cambridge Forecast Group Essay:

What Happens When One Tries to Undo Bygone Historical Events

Cheney and Rumsfeld had an obsession: overturn and negate and reverse by new violence, the American defeat In Vietnam. In other words, undo 1975.

The neocon/Rightwing Zionist obsession is to overturn the Algerian victory over the French in 1962 and the American (Eisenhower) aborting of the Suez Invasion of Egypt in 1956.

One deep reason why these two groups found it so easy to become co-dependent, giving us the Iraq War, was this overlapping overturn-the-past shared imperial obsession.

The German scholar Hildebrand shows how the “Wilhelmine Imperialists” around Hermann Goering had the same mania applied to 1914:

Wilhelmine Imperialists: Back to 1914

“Göring was the most prominent of the Wilhelmine Imperialists. This group wanted to restore the German frontiers of 1914, regain the pre-1914 overseas empire, and make Eastern Europe Germany‘s exclusive sphere of influence.”

The German diplomatic historian Klaus Hildebrand in his study of German foreign policy in the Nazi era noted that besides Hitler’s foreign policy program that there were three rival programs supported by factions in the Nazi Party, whom Hildebrand dubbed the agrarians, the revolutionary socialists, and the Wilhelmine Imperialists.[28]

Göring was the most prominent of the Wilhelmine Imperialists. This group wanted to restore the German frontiers of 1914, regain the pre-1914 overseas empire, and make Eastern Europe Germany‘s exclusive sphere of influence. This was a much more limited set of goals than Hitler’s dream of Lebensraum to be carved out with merciless racial wars. By contrast, Göring and the Wilhelmine Imperialist faction were more guided by traditional Machtpolitik in their foreign policy conceptions.[29] Furthermore, they expected to achieve their goals within the established international order. While not rejecting war as an option, they preferred diplomacy and sought political domination in eastern Europe rather than the military conquests envisioned by Hitler. They also rejected Hitler’s mystical vision of war as a necessary ordeal for the nation, and of perpetual war as desirable. Göring himself feared that a major war might interfere with his luxurious lifestyle. Göring’s advocacy of this policy led to his temporary exclusion by Hitler for a time in 1938–39 from foreign policy decisions. Göring’s unwillingness to offer a major challenge to Hitler prevented him from offering any serious resistance to Hitler’s policies, and the Wilhelmine Imperialists had no real influence.[30][31][32]

Göring had some private doubts about the wisdom of Hitler’s policies attacking Poland, which he felt would cause a world war, and was anxious to see a compromise solution. This was especially the case as the Forschungsamt (FA), Göring’s private intelligence agency, had broken the codes the British Embassy in Berlin used to communicate with London. The FA’s work showed that British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was determined to go to war if Germany invaded Poland in 1939. This directly contradicted the advice given to Hitler by Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop (a man whom Göring loathed at the best of times) that Chamberlain would not honor the “guarantee” he had given Poland in March 1939 if Germany attacked that country.

In the summer of 1939, Göring and the rest of the Wilhelmine Imperialists made a last ditch effort to assert their foreign policy program. Göring was involved in desperate attempts to avert a war in by using various amateur diplomats, such as his deputy Helmuth Wohltat at the Four Year Plan organization, British civil servant Sir Horace Wilson, newspaper proprietor Lord Kemsley, and would be peace-makers like Swedish businessmen Axel Wenner-Gren and Birger Dahlerus, who served as couriers between Göring and various British officials.[33] All of these efforts came to naught because Hitler (who much preferred Ribbentrop’s assessment of Britain to Göring’s) would not be deterred from attacking Poland in 1939, and the Wilhelmine Imperialists were unwilling and unable to challenge Hitler despite their reservations about his foreign policy.

28. Hildebrand, Klaus The Foreign Policy of the Third Reich, London: Batsford, 1973 pages 14–21

29. Hildebrand, Klaus The Foreign Policy of the Third Reich, London: Batsford, 1973 pages 14–15

30. Hildebrand, Klaus (1973). The Foreign Policy of the Third Reich. London: Batsford. pp. 14–21.

31. Watt, D. C. (1989). How War Came. London: Heinemann. p. 619.

32. Kershaw, Ian (2000). Hitler: Nemesis. New York: W. W. Norton. pp. 95, 123.

Göring was born on 12 January, 1893 at the Marienbad sanatorium in Rosenheim, Bavaria. His father Heinrich Ernst Göring (31 October, 1839– 7 December, 1913) had been the first Governor-General of the German protectorate of South West Africa (modern day Namibia)[3]

3. Block, Maxine; E. Mary Trow (1971). Current Biography: Who’s News and Why 1941. New York: H. W. Wilson. pp. 327–330.

Hermann Wilhelm Göring (or Goering;[2] German 12 January 1893– 15 October 1946)[1] was a German politician, military leader, and a leading member of the Nazi Party. Among many offices, he was Hitler’s designated successor, and commander of the Luftwaffe (German Air Force).

He was a veteran of the First World War as an ace fighter pilot, and a recipient of the coveted Pour le Mérite (“The Blue Max”). He was the last commander of Jagdgeschwader 1, the air squadron of Manfred von Richthofen, “The Red Baron”.

· a b c d “United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Holocaust Encyclopedia, ”Hermann_Göring Timeline””. Ushmm.org. http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007772. Retrieved 2010-03-12.

· Göring is the German spelling, but the name is commonly transliterated Goering in English and other languages, using ‹oe› as the standard representation of ‹ö›.

Cambridge Forecast Group Essay:

What Happens When One Tries to Undo Bygone Historical Events

banknotes.jpg

CLIMATE CHANGE AND GAME THEORY

June 12, 2010 at 4:15 pm | Posted in Earth, Research, World-system | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

history.gif

world.gif

compass.gif

loudspeaker.gif

globeinmoney.jpg

Review Paper on Climate Change and Game

Theory

Peter Wood (Peter.J.Wood@anu.edu.au)

Climate Change

Sat 6/12/10

Dear Colleagues,

You may be interested in this paper: Climate Change and Game Theory, Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Report 62.

This survey paper, by Peter Wood, examines the problem of achieving global cooperation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Contributions to this problem are reviewed from non-cooperative game theory, cooperative game theory, and implementation theory.

Solutions to games where players have a continuous choice about how much to pollute, games where players make decisions about treaty participation, and games where players make decisions about treaty ratification, are examined. The implications of linking cooperation on climate change with cooperation on other issues, such as trade, is examined. Cooperative and non-cooperative approaches to coalition formation are investigated in order to examine the behaviour of coalitions cooperating on climate change.

One way to achieve cooperation is to design a game, known as a mechanism, whose equilibrium corresponds to an optimal outcome. This paper examines some mechanisms that are based on conditional commitments, and could lead to substantial cooperation.

It is available from:

http://www.crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/publications.php

Kind regards

Peter Wood

Dr Peter J. Wood
Postdoctoral Fellow, Resource Management in Asia-Pacific Program
Crawford School of Economics and Government
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200
AUSTRALIA

Email: Peter.J.Wood@anu.edu.au

Review Paper on Climate Change and Game Theory

http://www.crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/publications.php

Peter Wood (Peter.J.Wood@anu.edu.au)

Climate Change

Sat 6/12/10

banknotes.jpg

CHURCHILL AND THE POLITICAL DINING SOCIETY KNOWN AS “THE OTHER CLUB”

June 12, 2010 at 9:04 am | Posted in History, United Kingdom | Leave a comment

spin-globe.gif

books-globe.gif

globe-purple.gif

history.gif

world.gif

compass.gif

loudspeaker.gif

globeinmoney.jpg

“The Other Club”

The Other Club is a British political dining society founded in 1911 by Winston Churchill and F. E. Smith. It meets to dine fortnightly while parliament is in session. Its members over the years have included many leading British political and non-political people.

Churchill, who in 1910 was Liberal Home Secretary, and barrister and Conservative MP F. E. Smith had not been invited to join the venerable political dining club known just as The Club. Although both had friends in it, the members thought Churchill and Smith too controversial. So they established their own club, to be called by contrast “The Other Club”.

The initial membership was 12 Liberals, 12 Conservatives, and 12 “distinguished outsiders” who were not in politics. With the help of David Lloyd George (then Chancellor of the Exchequer) another non-member of The Club, they put together such a list and the first dinner was on 18 May 1911. The Chief Whips of the two parties were co-secretaries of the club, so that pairs could be arranged, meaning members dinner would not be interrupted by divisions in the parliament.

Twelve rules were written for the club, mostly by F. E. Smith, and they were, and are still, read aloud at each dinner. Churchill said he had contributed the last,

12. Nothing in the rules or intercourse of the Club shall interfere with the rancour or asperity of party politics.[1]

The so-called Birkenhead school ascribes this to Smith. In any case debate was indeed vigorous, and Churchill insisted on attending even at the height of The Blitz in 1940/41.

Election to the club depended on Smith and Churchill believing members to be “men with whom it was agreeable to dine”. After Smith’s death in 1930, Churchill became practically the sole arbiter and election was the greatest honour he could confer on those he considered both estimable and entertaining. Both those characteristics were required, so that many he considered estimable, but not entertaining, were not elected. That included Lord Woolton, Clement Attlee, John Anderson and Lord Halifax.

Anthony Eden was invited to join, but declined since he disliked dining clubs.

Charles Wilson, created Lord Moran, was Churchill’s physician for many years and in the late 1950s asked outright to be elected. This was surprisingly forthright, and Churchill couldn’t hurt his feelings by refusing. After Churchill’s death, Moran published a controversial book Winston Churchill, the Struggle for Survival which offended Churchill’s friends for discussing matters normally confidential between a doctor and patient. The members of the club thus asked him to resign, though he himself saw no reason to.

Churchill met Aristotle Onassis in the South of France and became such friends as to elect him to the club, to the astonishment of other members.

The club continued after Churchill’s death, but there has been no Executive Committee since 1970.

Members

The members over the years, as John Colville put it, reads like an index to contemporary English history. They included,

(This list is incomplete.)

· F.E. Smith

· Lord Kitchener

· Lord Jellicoe

· Lord Trenchard

· Lord Alexander

· Lord Montgomery

· Lord Gort

· Lord Alanbrooke

· Charles Portal

· Lord Moyne

· H. G. Wells

· Arnold Bennett

· A. E. W. Mason

· P. G. Wodehouse

· Brendan Bracken

· Walter Elliot

· William Orpen

· Alfred Munnings

· John Lavery

· Edwin Lutyens

· Bob Boothby

· Herbert Beerbohm Tree

· Lawrence Olivier

· Lewis Douglas

· Duff Cooper

· Lloyd George

· Jan Smuts

· Robert Menzies

· R. B. Bennett

· Lord Camrose

· Lord Beaverbrook

· Lord Rothermere

· Edward Marsh

· Leslie Rowan

· Harcourt Johnstone

· Lord Normanbrook

· Aristotle Onassis

· Roy Jenkins[2]

References

· John Colville, The Churchillians, 1981, ISBN 0-297-77909-5, chapter 1.

· Derek Wilson, “Dark and Light”, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London 1998, ISBN 0-297-81718-3, p.227.

1. Rules of The Other Club at The Churchill Centre

2. Roy Jenkins, Churchill: A Biography, 2001, ISBN 0-374-12354-3, p. xiii.

Further reading

· The Other Club, Colin Coote, Sidgwick & Jackson, 1971. (Quite rare.)

“The Other Club”

The Other Club is a British political dining society founded in 1911 by Winston Churchill and F. E. Smith. It meets to dine fortnightly while parliament is in session. Its members over the years have included many leading British political and non-political people.

banknotes.jpg


Entries and comments feeds.