Growth in West Virginia's Eastern Panhandle Comes From Virginia Prosperity and Maryland Folly

Despite the economic slowdown, despite the persistent problems of state tax and regulation policy, West Virginia's Eastern Panhandle continues to see strong growth.

Two factors contribute to the growth. One is spillover from Virginia's business friendly system. Multiple outlets consistently rank Virginia as the friendliest state for business growth.  The cluster of Northern Virginia counties within 90 minutes of Washington DC saw the most spectacular development. According to the State Journal Winchester, mere miles from Hampshire County, rocketed from 134 to 41 on the best performing cities list.

Winchester, population of near 30,000, and other growing cities along the Interstate 81 corridor, are technically suburbs of Washington.  Those who can afford to do so are streaming through the gaps and over the mountains into West Virginia, colonizing exurbs.  

Eastern Panhandle and Potomac Highlands counties are benefiting from Virginia's prosperity.

Other counties reap from the folly of their northern neighbor, Maryland.

Maryland's anti-business policies and crackdown on personal liberty drive people south of the Potomac.   According to US Census Bureau statistics, West Virginia counties bordering Maryland tend to have population and jobs growth.  The Maryland counties have either losses or growth that lags behind their cross river brethren in the Mountain State.  

Either way, Eastern Panhandle representatives need to keep pushing Charleston to reform regulatory and tax laws to continue the growth.  Jefferson, Berkeley, Morgan, Hampshire, Hardy, Pendleton, Mineral, and Grant counties are poised to reap the benefits.

Pornography as a Symptom of the Decline of Masculinity?

National Review today published a powerful indictment of the fate of masculinity.  It lay buried at the end of a lengthy description of a pornography convention coupled with analysis of what this means for culture.  In its own right, the piece bore deep into social questions often left untouched and introduced readers to an entire subculture.  But should Kevin Williamson use this as another yet another obituary on the fate of the American Man?

"The future is female."  Williamson laments.  He sees marriage evaporating.  Many others see the academic driven opportunities as more appropriate for females than males.Williamson's words seem to echo another thinker's fear about what modern times might do to the modern man.

"A life of slothful ease, a life of that peace which springs merely from lack of either desire or of power to strive after great things" has afflicted American men, according to one writer. He worries that parents have taught their boys "that ease, that peace, is to be the first consideration."  America, should it continue along this path will "rot by inches in ignoble ease within our borders."

Hopefully the writing gave it away.  This was not a modern assessment of the masculine.  Almost 115 years ago, Teddy Roosevelt warned the nation.  It, and especially its men, threatened to soften.  And this only two generations removed from the great national test of the Civil War.

Roosevelt feared that the ease brought by modern wonders of his time might soften men, dulling their ambition and work ethic.

Obviously it did not.  Great decades lay ahead.  The free society that encouraged Roosevelt's narrow social circle to pursue ease and comfort spurred others to make their own fortunes.  Surrounded by dandies, Roosevelt at the time did not see the big picture.  A nation full of men and women willing to fight for fortune and success.

Williamson describes the general stereotype of the youngest generation of adult men.  And stereotypes rarely pop into existence without some small basis of reality.  But narrow views and the worries of older men about the generation that is to replace them may limit the picture.

The youngest adult generation has grown up in a country with broken schools and no guarantees.  College does not guarantee a spot in IBM management school.  It guarantees only debt for most. And even that in exchange for a curriculum high on social engineering and declining relevance or even intellectual stimulation.

 Nothing that has happened in this century has inspired any faith that government can handle any problem.  The youth have less faith in government than almost any group born and raised in the last hundred years.

Less reliance on the government and Big Business must translate into more reliance on self.  Even as government seeks to supplant parents and institutions of faith with itself, it reveals its base incompetence.  If you're going to do something right, you have to do it yourself.

On top of that is the core of this generation, not college kids living in their mom's basements, but tens of thousands of men who have served their country on the other side of the world.  They bring work ethic, toughness, and perspective beyond anything learned in a classroom.

Fundamentally, things do not change.  Men worth marrying will be married, as will many who are not.  Ambition to do better in life will remain, so long as individuals may rationally hope that their efforts can lead to it.  The older generation always worries about the younger.

In actuality, the 21st century should be a revival for masculinekind.  So many in the last few decades dropped axes, trowels, and hammers to pursue corporate dreams that there is a perpetual shortage of people who have these skills.  The idea that physical labor is beneath people has opened crucial opportunities. Not many women can build a stone or a brick wall.  Men will always have a natural advantage in the realm of physical labor.  The skilled craftsman who can handle physical labor has never been in more demand.  In some parts of the country, one with experience and a good reputation can name his price.

Why go to college when you can make money and build a business right away?  Parents must realize that college is not what it was, nor does it guarantee what it once did.  Encourage entrepreneurship when you can.

And encourage pursuit of the noble and profitable.

Clicks Actually Not the Most Important Media Audience Measurement Statistic

Journalists always brag on number of clicks, if they get them.  But it is not necessarily the most important statistic.

The Charleston Daily Mail until recently had the address www.dailymail.com .  To someone not paying attention, this could have been easily confused with www.dailymail.co.uk    This is the home of the Daily Mail, far and away the most viewed news website in the world.

Obviously there had to be some spillover traffic with people looking for Daily Mail who actually ended up accidentally at Charleston Daily Mail.  So why didn't the paper based in the West Virginia state capital simply rest on their laurels of massive numbers of clicks?

To explain why they made the change, deterring the accidental visitors, Charleston Daily Mail editor Brad McElhinny explained  on Twitter that "they depressed time spent on site figures as they navigated away immediately."

As it would be difficult for the Charleston Daily Mail to find a way to take advantage of the accidental traffic from readers of the Daily Mail,  this move seems to make sense.

What Has Russia Lost So Far In Sochi Debacle?

Russia for centuries has remained obsessed about its image.  It demands and craves respect as a modern, powerful nation, but also struggles with images of what it considers to be embarrassing backwardness.  The Sochi Olympics should have advanced Vladimir Putin's plan to move Russia back to the forefront.  Instead, even before the first event, it is a public relations nightmare.

The first rule of public relations?  Put the best foot forward with the media.  That also may be the second, third, and fourth rule.  This Deadspin assemblage of reports and tweets puts Russia in the worst possible light.  The land of the bear does not come off as strong, resilient, and capable.  Sochi is "a hilarious adventure," looking less like competence and more like a bad prat fall flick. London's Daily Mail shows even more horrors, as well as a picture of the Russian president.

A reporter from one of the world's most prestigious sports-only publications must climb out his window because the hotel is locked down.

Another gets a terse warning not to use the water "because it contains something very dangerous."  Her picture of the water looks like ginger ale or urine.

Whatever happens next will not unring the bell.  When the media of the United States, Europe, and Japan were dumped into accommodations with broken doors, urinesque water, no lobbies, and mysterious bodily fluids, they gleefully reported all the issues.  Being reporters, they dug and quickly found corruption, waste, and abuse of power mostly connected back to Putin. With 70,000 workers on the ground, Sochi may well be ready for the athletes.  But the media sent home jokes and ridicule.

If Russia wants to break free of stereotypes and establish a better image, it should stop reverting to stereotypical images like Potemkin Villages.

For a nation seeking respect, ridicule is the deepest cut.

The obsession with its image in the West dates back to Czar Peter the Great in the late 1600s and early 1700s.  He demanded that Russia modernize along Western lines.  Being a very tactile intellect, Peter worked to bring visible changes, such as factories, newspapers, and western styles of clothes.

Peter established some westernism, but failed overall.  He did not understand that the successes of the West sprang not from copying others, but from a liberty that birthed inquiry and development.  Since then, Russia has vacillated between Slavic nationalism and Westernism, but has only rarely thought to embrace freedom to inspire innovation.  It often finds itself playing catchup in the most visible ways, while lagging behind in others.

That is not to say that other countries have even patterns of growth and development.  Certainly the United States does not.  But most Americans do not see the perception of the world as damaging to economic development or national security in the same way as many Russians.

And Russians have reason to be concerned.  They must compete with Western Europe's manufacturing economy, the shale gas revolution in the United States, keep a close eye on an increasingly nationalistic China, and figure out how to spur diverse growth and expand its population.  Russia has over twice the land of China and one tenth of its population, all the while holding territory that the Chinese still consider their own. It also has innumerable ethnic groups within its borders, many of whom resent Moscow's rule.

Putin's nationalist bluster covers glaring weaknesses and concerns.  So far, the Olympics that were supposed to serve as a crowning achievement have undermined the image of Putin and Russia alike.

The Bizarroworld of College Campus Life and Vaclav Havel

Last year, New York City Police commissioner Ray Kelly cancelled a scheduled talk at Brown University. Students opposed to the city's "stop and frisk" procedures successfully disrupted the event through protest.  According to The Daily Beast this was one of several events halted by the actions of small, but well organized student groups.  Brown University claims to prize " the intellectual exchange that is sparked by a diversity of views and experiences" but caves into left wing rage.

The article goes on to explain how liberals who "accept basic norms of fair play" have been shoved aside by hate filled leftists who see the world as totalitarian and aim to impose those values on campuses.  Its author explained how, as a staunch left wing student, he wanted to see a Marxist reviewer savage Dinesh D'Souza's accounts of campus tyranny.  Instead he was shocked by the reviewer's agreement with the conservative thinker.  American liberals and conservatives disagree on much, but they do generally agree with the principles expressed in the Bill of Rights.

Angry campus leftists, however, loathe experiencing speech that is not their own.  But instead of avoiding it, they work as hard as possible to prevent it.

This happens also at the student level.  National Review this morning posted a piece on "microaggression."  Dr. Derald Sue, Columbia University psychologist, explains that it is speech or actions perpetuated by a majority against a minority individual in everyday life.  This includes slights, discomfort, and anything else that may make the recipient feel "socially marginalized."  Last November, according to the article, a group of students filed a complaint against a professor.  He committed "microaggression" by correcting a capitalization error.

Fordham University has actively moved on this issue, training faculty on how to avoid microaggression and encouraging students to describe instances of abuse.

When asked, Sue said that microaggression lay in the eye of the recipient.  If a person feels slighted, they are, in other words.

Colleges and universities were established for two purposes, to expand the mind and train for useful occupations.  Campus speech policies, giving into hateful protesters and cancelling speeches, giving credibility to silliness like microaggression will close the student mind, not expand it.

Vaclav Havel in the late 1970s penned "The Power of the Powerless."  The Czech dissenter and playwright looked to describe to a westerner the reality of life behind the Iron Curtain.  He said that this was not the classical dictatorship of an individual or a small clique.  Eastern Europe suffered from the dictatorship of bureaucracy.  Although few were slaughtered in the same way as in Stalin's time, innumerable small punishments could be wielded.  Each could drastically affect employment, social position, education, or something else important to the person.  No one would risk offending the system, which he described as "post-totalitarian."

Havel said that in such a situation "the social phenomenon of self-preservation is subordinated to something higher, to a kind of blind automatism which drives the system."  Those caught in it are not regarded as individually worthy, simply a collective reason for the institution to exist.

The most basic revolt against the numbing of this system is what Havel calls "living within the truth."  One ignores orthodoxy and ideology, "rejects the ritual and breaks the rules of the game." The consequences of living within the truth? "The bill is not long in coming. He will be relieved of his post . . . his pay will be reduced . . .his superiors will harass him . . . his fellow workers will wonder about him."

Within most colleges, those who break the rules of the game could go before the social justice Star Chamber.  Guilt or innocence decided by a stacked committee, very little right of true due process or appeal.

Willingness to let people live within the truth means that someone's sensibilities may be offended.  Better they learn in college that the real world doesn't and shouldn't care about offending you.  Better that real and perceived slights be ignored, confronted, or forgiven depending on the situation.  Better than individuals, especially on campus, experience an atmosphere of free speech and inquiry, rather than help perpetuate an intellectual environment with the placidity and quiet of a graveyard.

Appeasing Iran Seen As a Step Towards More Mideast Nations Pushing For Nukes

Obama's lack of a foreign policy has so far resulted in a chaotic Libya, contributed to an unending Syrian civil war, discouraged Israel, and encouraged the terror linked Muslim Brotherhood.  Instability and unpredictability mark not only the behavior of groups in the region, but also US policy.

Experts told the Washington Free Beacon that this could bring disastrous consequences.  First, Iran aspires to Great Power status.  Although it lags in productivity and capital, nuclear weapons would raise it above its neighbors.  A state that once launched masses of its own citizens in suicide rushes at modern weapons cannot be trusted to be predictable with these weapons in hand.

Should Iran obtain them, other powers will as well.  Saudi Arabia most certainly will develop its own.

Other countries will adapt. Turkey has already negotiated pacts with Iran.  The NATO member, once an imperial power in the region, borders Iran.  Fear of its growing influence will doubtless pull states into its orbit.

This is the predictable result of a weak and disoriented foreign policy on the part of the United States.

There may be no solution at this point.

Senator Stephen Benton Elkins: Carpetbagger or Savior?

West Virginia is closing in on the 120th anniversary of a milestone achievement in the life of one of its most important figures.  In early 1895, the West Virginia State Legislature chose Stephen Benton Elkins to represent the state in the United States Senate.

Elkins did not have to win in a popular vote.  Before 1913, legislatures chose senators.  His career, however, had been remarkable.  Elkins had helped to build one of the most powerful coal companies in the United States, extended railroads deep into the West Virginia countryside, and had served under President Benjamin Harrison as Secretary of War.  Since 1888, he had guided the once lowly state Republican Party to the brink of decades of political dominance.

He officially came to West Virginia in early 1888.  The Republican Party paper Wheeling Intelligencer rhetorically rolled out the red carpet, announcing his arrival almost like royalty.  Civil War veteran and POW Nathan Goff of Clarksburg had capably led the party through much of the 1880s while a congressman.  Elkins' arrival coincided with a tightly contested Goff run for governor.  When Goff lost, many state Republicans switched their allegiance to Elkins.

Goff handled the shift with grace, likely consoled by appointment to the federal bench and eventual elevation to the US Senate.  Meanwhile, Elkins and his regional allies strained to make the party and county Republican committees and clubs more active and effective.  Elkins recruited Preston County newspaper editor W. M. O. Dawson to help run the day to day affairs of the state party.  With the onset of free public school in West Virginia in the 1860s, experience and knowledge of the new media environment was crucial to helping build coming Republican majority.

Not everyone supported the new party leadership.  In 1890, rumors swirled of an Elkins run for Congress.  One Preston County Republican promised future congressman Alston Gordon Dayton that "If Elkins is to be the nominee . . . there will be many 'stay at homes' when election day rolls around."  Despite Goff's quiet acceptance and willingness to work with Elkins, his former allies resented the new guard.  They expected to be ignored and rejected by the newly minted West Virginia, but more often than not Elkins extended his hand to former Goff men willing to accept it.

Elkins' businesslike administration of the state party built on the prior work of the charismatic Goff.  By 1894, the GOP had gained ascendancy in voter registrations, fundraising, and elected offices.  West Virginia remained a Republican state until 1932.

Unlike his father-in-law Henry Gassaway Davis who was a powerful Democrat from West Virginia, but spent most of his time at a Maryland residence, Elkins embraced his new state.  In 1890, he built for himself and his family the beautiful mansion Halliehurst.  Not long before construction, the site of the home was near wilderness.  Starting in 1890, the Randolph County city bearing his name grew up around his home and the new railroad connection.

On reaching the Senate, Elkins kept his eye on both state and national issues.  During the 1896 presidential campaign, Elkins resisted considerable pressure by William McKinley advocates on the West Virginia and national level.  While he could have gained personally by joining the McKinley bandwagon, Elkins was trying to obtain federal funds to dredge the Monongahela River.  Other presidential aspirants sat in the Senate and Elkins feared antagonizing them.  He explained "You know what is pending here and the reasons that move me to my opinion . . . Hope you can trust my judgment."  He won the improvements and also ensured that a new United States Weather Service tracking station would be built in the state.

In national and foreign affairs, Elkins also had influence.  In 1898, newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst conferred with Elkins on ideas about national war policy.  Several years later, Elkins authored legislation that ended the use of free passes by railroads to buy influence with politicians, editors, and others.

Rivals in his day and leftist historians later harped on Elkins' origins.  John Alexander Williams called him New York's senator in West Virginia.  In his personal and public correspondence, however, Elkins demonstrated his love for the state, concern for its people, and willingness to work very hard for the betterment of his adopted home and its Republican Party.  West Virginia owes Elkins for much of its early 20th century prominence and prosperity.

He was certainly no opportunistic carpetbagger, looking for short term gains with plans to abandon his new home.  Elkins brought his family to West Virginia to serve his new state and to grow along with it.

Unfortunately, Democratic machine rule cancelled out many of his achievements.

But now it is a new century and a new day for West Virginia Republicans.  It is only right to occasionally honor the transplant from New York who worked so hard and did so much good for the Mountain State.

Red China: A 21st Century Imperial Anachronism

Even though the most recent reports indicate that Chinese economic momentum is slowing, many still see it as a colossus that could outpace the United States in production and influence sometime this century.  China, however, faces considerable challenges.  Rapid industrialization has polluted entire regions.  Rivers have grown unusable, some large cities are too hazardous for  life.  Corruption and debt hamper its growth, just as they did France before its Revolution.  

China also must face a serious anachronism.  Despite its repeated revolutionary convulsions over the past century, it remains a multinational empire filled with ethnic groups chafing under government control.

This makes it resemble some of the polyglot empires facing trouble before World War I.  The Ottoman Empire, dominated by ethnic Turks, kept an uneasy control over Christian Greeks and Slavs.  It also ruled clans and tribes of Arabs, Kurds, Jews, and other groups.  Czarist Russia strained to control Muslims in Central Asia, Catholic Poles, Protestant Christians in Scandinavia and along the Baltic. Austria-Hungary tried to split power between its two major ethnic groups under one ruling family, but mainly alienated the other 13 peoples.

Decades later, the "nationalities problem" erupted under Gorbachev to help drive the Soviet Union into the dustbin of history.

China has to face this problem too, which may explain why the past year has seen them following in the path of the empires of old.  Trying to prop up internal unity by gaining risky external successes against old rivals. 

According to the 2000 Chinese census, published in the CIA World Factbook, 91 percent of the country's population is Han Chinese.  While this may look overwhelming, it must be remembered that the remaining nine percent add up to 140 million people, approximately the same population as the Russian Federation.  

Also, as the map shows, Han Chinese are concentrated into the eastern part of the country.  The southwest contains the formerly independent, Buddhist, and oft persecuted Tibetans.  The resentment of northwestern Muslims, mostly Turkic Uighurs, against the atheist regime occasionally boils over.  In the last few weeks, Chinese authorities imprisoned a prominent Uighur academic and advocate. 

Inner Mongolians side by side with independent Mongolia.  Traditionally this is a recipe for discontent. Three years ago, authorities feared the effects of major protests against Chinese rule.  Manchuria in the northeast has a high concentration of Han, but has traditionally been considered a separate people from the rest of China.  Much like Sicilians often do not consider themselves to be true Italians.

Significant divisions exist between the non Han 140 million.  But an economic downturn combined with the continued repressive policies of Beijing could unite them in hostility.  

China's aggressive moves against Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam, and the United States in the past year follow the pattern of the old imperial multinational states.  Concerns about economic decline and ethnic upheaval push their attention outward.  Although the imperial power usually fears the effect of war, it assumes the risk anyway, gambling that it will emerge stronger in the long run.  Unfortunately, such risks often do actually lead to war.  

Regardless of how strong China actually is, or is estimated to be, these kinds of actions have historically pointed to a perception of weakness.  China may perceive itself to be weakening relatively or absolutely.  Or think that it is vulnerable on other fronts.  Multinational empires tended in the past to believe that external shows of strength, aggression, and even bullying, would protect it externally and domestically.

And China is weakening.  Since 2010, each of its major ethnic groups have pushed back against government persecution and abuse.  Its economy, while certainly growing, likely was not developing nearly as fast as reported.  Authoritarian and totalitarian states accidentally encourage falsehood in economic reports because officials fear reporting unpleasant truth.  China also pours resources into ridiculous mammoth projects, much as the old Soviet Union, to try and prove its advancement.  

Most economic forecasts for 2014 predict problems for the Chinese economy.

Knowing the history of states in the situation and condition of 21st century China is helpful in predicting how to respond to emerging problems.  China may be pushing to join the modern economies, but it still is weighed down by problems of decades and even centuries ago.  

West Virginia University Joins Over 100 Schools Protesting Israel Boycott

Last December, the American Studies Association, which describes itself as the oldest American history and cultural organization in the nation, voted to boycott Israeli academic and other institutions.  This sparked protest from over 100 colleges and universities against its action.

West Virginia University interim president Gordon Gee, formerly of Ohio State and other schools, condemned the ASA's action.  In a press release today, Gee reminded the ASA that "lively and varied discussions often lead to innovation, discoveries, and leadership."  He then said "we strongly oppose the boycott" and urged all institutions of higher learning "to remain places where divergent ideas are encouraged and exchanged freely."

WVU joins colleges such as Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Stanford, and others condemning the boycott.  Four universities withdrew from the association altogether.

Indianapolis Star, UK's Daily Mail Report Cases of Possession in Gary, Indiana

It seems like the stuff of cable television and Hollywood films both good and bad.  But a case of demonic possession has now been reported by one of the most respected newspapers in Indiana and the most read news site in the world.

The Indianapolis Star, in existence for 111 years, two time winner of the Pulitzer Prize, published an exhaustive story about the possible torment and possession of a mother and her three children.

What makes this story different than typical tabloid fodder is the credibility of the sources coming forward.  These include Captain Charles Austin of the Gary Police Department and a veteran Roman Catholic priest.  Official Department of Child Services and medical records also form part of the story.  Each source reports unexplainable phenomena such as threatening voices over the radio, a young boy walking backwards up a wall, and other signs.

A hoax of this magnitude would require local cross agency coordination and respected local figures willing to risk their reputations for a story bound to make international headlines. It would have to be a good enough tale to hoodwink a reporter from one of Indiana's papers of record.

The story has a happy ending.  After police supervised exorcisms, the involvement of psychologists, and child protection officials, the children and their mother are together, safe, and living in another city.

Whether one believes or not, from many different angles, this is a story worth reading.

A Short History of Ukraine

Protests and civil violence have rocked the Eastern European nation of Ukraine for several days now.  The Texas sized country of nearly 45 million is physically one of the largest in Europe.  Its plains have some of the world's best farming soil outside of North America.

Here is a brief description of its history.

In the early Middle Ages, Slavic tribes resided on the Dnieper River, a stream flowing roughly from north to south and emptying into the Black Sea.  By the 800s, the kingdoms and principalities of Scandinavia had grown rich from both plunder and trade.  They traded with those too powerful to plunder, like the Byzantine Empire.

A Swedish trading nation called the Varangians began using the river system in what is now Russia and Ukraine to build commercial ties with the rich Byzantine Empire which straddled the Balkans and Middle East.  The Byzantines were the remaining rump of the old Roman Empire, much more compact, but still rich and still formidable.

The Varangian trade with the Byzantines drew more Slavs and Varangians to the river banks.  Some combination of the two formed a state around the town of Kiev.  Originally the state was called the Kievan Rus.

No one can say for certain how much of the original state was Nordic and how much was Slavic.  Regardless, Slavs quickly dominated the early state.  In the 800s and 900s, Kiev grew into a wealthy trading state, extending their rule along the rivers and to the east.  It traded heavily with the Byzantine Empire and established dynastic connections with the impoverished European kingdoms emerging in central and western Europe.

Modern observers would find the early structure of Kievan rule unnecessarily complicated since they did not practice true primogeniture.  The Grand Prince ruled at Kiev.  Brothers, sons, or cousins could rule under him at other prominent cities.  Succession was complicated and sometimes contentious.  Hostile groups from the flatlands and Caucasian Mountains to the east often tried to play different princes off against each other.

One of the momentous moments in the history of Kievan Russia came during the reign of Grand Prince St. Vladimir the Great.  He ruled from 980-1015, modern calendar.  During his rule, he determined that his state ought to be Christian.  By this time, however, Christianity was very close to its first major permanent schism.  St. Vladimir had to choose between the Pope of what would be the Roman Catholic Church and the Emperor controlled Patriarch in Constantinople.  Vladimir may have stacked the deck.  He sent emissaries to describe each church to him so that he could decide.  Some went to the glittering capital of Constantinople to survey what would become the Eastern Orthodox Church.  They saw the mighty St. Sophia Church set in a dynamic metropolis.  Others went to examine the Western church in not Rome, but the Holy Roman Empire. Its poverty had not yet produced the fantastic cathedrals that would appear later in the Middle Ages.

St. Vladimir tied the fortunes of his nation to the East, selecting Orthodoxy.  This would form one of many barriers between Russia and the West for centuries.

Kiev met its ruin in the 1200s when the Mongols came.  Kiev chose to resist and was annihilated much as Carthage in the Third Punic War.  A papal nuncio to China who had seen Kiev intact wrote back on seeing the devastation.  His letter recounted the leveling of numerous beautiful churches and other buildings.  All that remained of the once thriving metropolis was a few mud huts and a few hundred Slavic slaves under the Mongol yoke.  To the east of the city, he saw endless fields of bleaches bones and skulls.

The Mongols controlled Eastern Europe until the 1400s.  Toward the end of its rule, some Russian cities started to assert themselves.  Chief among these was Moscow.  One of its successes lay in convincing the Orthodox patriarch to move the office of Metropolitan (analogous to Catholic Archbishop) from Kiev to Moscow.  That gave the future Russian capital spiritual predominance in Eastern Europe.  When it freed itself of the Mongols, it became the only Christian ruled leadership city in Orthodoxy.  That happened because Constantinople finally succumbed to the Muslim Ottoman Empire.

By now, Russian civilization had split into three parts.  The country around Kiev now had the name "Little Russia," or Ukraine.  To its north sat Belarus or "White Russia."  Moscow expanded to the north and east, becoming the center of "Great Russia."  But Ukraine was not yet fated to come under the rule of Russia.

As the Middle Ages closed and the modern era commenced, the great power in the East was Poland.  This Roman Catholic Slavic state united with the also Catholic Germanic state of Lithuania.  Through the 1400s until the 1700s, this state ruled a vast area of plains and swamps.  During the early 1600s, it even aspired to conquer Russia itself.  Southern Ukraine fell into the hands of the Ottoman Turks who controlled the northern coast of the Black Sea.

From the rule of Peter the Great down to the end of the 18th century, Russia and its czars labored to gradually bring Ukraine under its own imperial rule.  Despite the changes in government, Ukraine developed its own culture and language.  It remembered the traditions of old Kiev and took pride in its heritage.

World War I ushered in significant changes.  First, the Germans steamrolled Russian forces and in 1918 made Ukraine a protectorate under its guidance.  This short lived situation dissolved with the German defeat in November, leaving Ukraine to the ravages of the Russian Civil War and eventually Bolshevism.

The Communist Soviet Union exacted a devastating toll from Ukraine.  Stalin, who had run press gangs in the city of Tsaritsyn, later Stalingrad, now Volgograd, determined that Ukraine's wealthy and productive peasants must surrender their lands.  The peasants, as they had done under the czars, resisted.  They burned their homes, slaughtered and ate their livestock, and denied the Soviets the fruit of their labors.  Stalin ordered millions rounded up and shipped off to the open plains of Siberia where most froze to death.  Resulting famine killed millions more.

When Hitler invaded in 1941, many Ukrainians welcomed his Wehrmacht as liberators.  Instead, they found the Germans more ruthless than Stalin.  Hitler's Einstatzgruppen teams rounded up professionals and other leaders to be massacred, often by burning churches around them.  Hitler's defeat brought more suffering.  The Soviets demanded from British and American allies the return of all expatriates, many of whom had fled the Communists right after World War I.  Shamefully, British and American officials approved the "return" of these people, most of whom suffered torture and death.

Ukraine's own Nikita Khrushchev  succeeded Stalin as Soviet leader.  His schemes and risky policies, however, led to his being removed from power.

Communist control led to disaster when a series of foolish decisions led to the late 1980s meltdown of the Ukraine located Chernobyl nuclear power plant.  Soviet authorities for days refused to order a mass evacuation, exposing hundreds of thousands to contamination.  Even today, Ukraine and Belarus still suffers high levels of cancer and birth defects as a result.  Chernobyl broke down what was left of loyalty to the Communist system.

In 1991, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia seceded from the Soviet Union, marking the end of its existence.  Ukraine since has wavered between its former Russian masters and would be Western mentors.  In the meantime, it has allowed its system to grow increasingly corrupt and authoritarian.  The present and future is unclear.  The resources and strength of the people, however, mean it still has potential to thrive.

Lincoln Day Dinners Set in Mineral, Putnam, and Monon

Putnam County's Lincoln Day Dinner is scheduled for Thursday April 3rd at 6 PM at Putnam County Community Center in Hurricane.

Mineral County's Lincoln Day Dinner is scheduled for Friday April 25th at 6 PM at the Keyser Moose Lodge

Monongalia County's will be on May 1.  Shelley Moore Capito will speak.  All other information TBA

I will be happy to publicize more information and updates as they come in.

Review: A. J. P. Taylor's The Struggle For Mastery In Europe: 1848-1918

Alan John Percival Taylor has been dead for almost a quarter century.  His near 600 page work on the decades leading up to World War I will turn 60 this year.  Furthermore, Taylor was born into a family of Communists and remained a committed socialist his entire life.

Nevertheless, The Struggle For Mastery In Europe is worth reading for anyone looking to gain information and insight into the murky and twisting turns taken by each major power leading up to the war.

In his writings, Taylor despised pomp and loved irony.  No one knows if he would have laughed at the fate of his work and genre.  Taylor wrote of leaders, their accomplishments, and, most often and pleasurably, their blunders.  Past generations of historians embraced the "Great Man Theory," but Taylor was more comfortable with the "Great Clumsy Man Theory."  In his world, leading men stumbled more often than calculated.  Success usually came either by accident or by skillful definition after the fact.

Modern left wing academics, however, despise the emphasis on individuals, male or female, skillful or blundering.  They interpret history as a flowing tide in which all people ride.  If there had not been a George Washington, they theorize, someone else with a different name would have done the same thing.  Leftist historians concentrate heavily on the story of the common man (not a bad thing, necessarily) and care much less for traditional diplomatic, political, or military history.

Taylor's work does not reflect agreement with these leftists.  In fact, Struggle returns again and again to the powerful impact of Napoleon III on the second half of the 19th century.

Leftists generally do not refer to him, or even remember him.  After his death, conservatives more often celebrated his contribution to scholarship.  The American Conservative magazine last September trumpeted that "A. J. P. Taylor Is History."

Struggle combines Taylor's best attributes of thorough research and telling as much of the story as possible.  He uses dry humor and generalizations more than most academics would like.  His work, however, goes much more in depth than most studies.

In this book, the reader gets a twisting turning tale that somehow ends up coherent and even entertaining.  An endless parade of royalty, ministers of state, ambassadors, generals, and others march past. It takes talent to collect all of the varied moves of diplomacy and its actors in one nation, much less all of Europe's Great Powers of the time.

Repeated themes include the discord between traditional empires and what Taylor called "revolutionary" national states.  He appreciated the oddness of traditional empires such as Austria-Hungary and Russia ending up allied to nationalist Germany and France.  This interpretation encouraged him to pry into the uncomfortable relations that afflicted these alliances right down to the end of World War I.

The main theme, however, is that wars come about through a logical, rational process.  This notion earned him scorn when his Origins of the Second World War ended up explaining Hitler as a traditional power politics player instead of an abnormal malevolent beast.  Taylor even discusses how Europe by World War I had come to see war as abnormal and irrational, something to be cured instead of understood.  His explanations of each nation's conduct leaves the reader understanding how each nation could have stumbled into the pit.

Likely, Taylor would have rather have a reader understand war in this way.  If war is understood as the culmination of a logical process, it can be better averted.  Wars happen because of reasonable decisions, they just don't fall out of the sky.

Not one commoner, however, makes an appearance.  Smaller nations receive some mention, but not much specific description.  Even Japan and the United States only assume bit parts in this production.  There is no use crying over who got excluded because the title explains all.  Common people, Japan, the United States, Portugal, etc. had almost no say in the unfolding of this story.

Taylor, like many writers and speakers, had a talent for the wry remark.  Unlike most, his wit formed the tip of the iceberg of research and knowledge that lay beneath.  Most of the footnotes in his works come from primary sources in vastly separated locations.  New scholars, consider this was a time prior to electronic communications of any sort.

Most importantly, Taylor's work remains mostly objective.  Any interpretations or themes rely on copious evidence to back them up.

Struggle is an excellent book that describes the machinations of diplomats and leaders during these decades.  When combined with Robert Massie's Dreadnought: Britain, Germany, and the Coming of the Great War , one can get a very complete and powerful look at the story.  Massie's work, which will be reviewed later, combines the Taylorian history with stunningly deep personal profiles of the major figures involved.

How Pro-Life Voters Are Gaining In Importance and Influence

The 2014 election cycle is setting in.  Primary races are gearing up.  Some issues, like free silver and Medicare coverage of prescription drugs, lie in history.  Others never fade.

Abortion has remained one of the most divisive social and political issues and will likely remain so.  Signs indicate, however, that the pro-life side has pulled even with abortion supporters and may soon pull ahead.

The West Virginia Second District Congressional race demonstrates the issue's importance.  Charleston area Republican candidate Charlotte Lane, long known for favoring abortion rights, issued a recent and very public mea culpa.  She apologized for her previous support of abortion and pledged to oppose it from this point on.  That could come from personal conviction.  It could stem from the fact that Eastern Panhandle based candidate  Alex Mooney has a long and very public record aggressively fighting for the pro-life cause.  Regardless, it illustrates trends within West Virginia and around the nation.

During the tenure of a liberal, abortion supporting president, pollsters have seen more Americans opposing the practice.  Last summer for the first time in decades, support for abortion dipped below 50 percent.  Rasmussen, often criticized as leaning conservative, published that 46 percent identified as pro choice, 43 percent as pro life.  The Gallup Poll showed a different result.  Forty-eight percent opposed abortion while support for the practice was set at five points lower.

Immigration will likely tip this balance even further against abortion.  National Catholic Register's Peter Jesserer Smith reported that Hispanic groups are only now tapping their potential to support the pro-life cause.  Over half of Hispanics oppose abortion and many are first generation migrants from countries that strongly oppose the practice.  Most still identify with a Roman Catholic faith that staunchly opposes abortion. 

The groups have formed to counter efforts by those such as Planned Parenthood to crack into the Hispanic culture to promote pro-abortion ideals.  One such attempt is a telenovella aimed at Hispanic teens called East Los High.  Planned Parenthood plays a major role in shaping the storytelling on the program.  

This type of message, however, has grown rare on mainstream television and motion pictures.  Characters advocating abortion are almost always sinister and selfish characters.  Keeping the baby, regardless of circumstances, is portrayed as the virtuous choice.  Modern technology has nullified the old arguments that an unborn child is not human.  

The changing social currents on other major social conservative issues have strengthened the hand of those opposed to abortion.  Gay marriage at one point attracted much more support and attention among conservative groups.  As state legislatures and courts have acted, however, opposition to gay unions has declined considerably.  Abortion opponents will have more resources as gay marriage opposition dissipates.

For the foreseeable future, which in politics means the next two major elections, abortion will remain an important issue that divides constituencies.  Conservatives can take heart, however, that as on issues of small government and taxes, they know that more and more people are with them.

And Now Some Good Numbers For the Mountain State . . .

Last week, a Mercatus study forecast ominous signs for the West Virginia state government's future finances. It articulated concerns about the state's ability to pay its obligations in the near and long term future.  West Virginia, however, sits on a much more secure position than many other states, including some of the nation's largest and most prosperous.

A Washington Examiner study shows that the Mountain State's economically conservative policies of gradual tax reduction and paying down liabilities have benefited.   The state sits at 39th in unfunded pensions and total debt.  For debt per person, the state ranks higher, at 29th.

This is a ranking where being lower is better.

Credit, in part, goes to Governors Manchin and Tomblin for imposing common sense.  Manchin to a great extent and Tomblin to a lesser kept the lid on spending and gradually reduced the taxes that harmed the least able to pay.

They also took advantage of a boom in coal production and revenues that started under Bush, but is now grinding to a halt under the onerous policies of Obama's EPA.  Gas production continues to rise, but not fast enough to replace falling tax revenues from coal.

Mercatus concerns center around the state's need to address the problem of prosperity.  Manchin and Tomblin rightly deserve credit for helping to keep the state's financial position sound, but they did not take the opportunity to enact enough needed reforms.  The state needs to change its business regulation and tax regime so that small business has opportunity to start and a fighting chance to survive.  Economic observers praise the state's personal liberty, but blast the lack of economic freedom.

A state that ranks near the bottom for business friendliness and freedom cannot prosper.  With the federal government assaulting the state's main industry, the Governor and Legislature need to look at ways to unleash West Virginia's entrepreneurial spirit.

With Coal and Renewable, "All of the Above" Makes More Sense Than Zero Sum Game

Since 1960, according to the World Bank,  the United States has almost tripled its per capita rate of electricity consumption.  Although Americans produce goods more efficiently than ever, the nation still needs to expand energy production. Higher production means lower energy prices, which gives the United States a greater advantage in retaining and expanding needed manufacturing jobs.

This makes the zero sum argument advanced by some circles very perplexing.  Many pro renewable energy (which includes, wind, solar, hydroelectric, etc.) see expansion of coal, oil, or gas as a defeat for their side. Conversely, any obstacle put in the way of coal, they see as a victory for progress.  This may stem from the notion that any figure that supports expanding coal production and jobs must be anti-renewable.  This is far from the truth.

West Virginia Republicans have for years embraced the "all of the above" ideal of energy.  Support whatever works in a given area.  Leading the way has been Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito, current US Senate candidate.  One of the nation's strongest defenders of coal and toughest critics of Obama's Environmental Protection Agency, Capito has voted to support temporary renewable energy tax credits as well as research into geothermal, landfill gas harvesting, and other innovative power production ideas.

Within the state, Delegate Gary Howell has backed the Intrastate Coal and Use Act.  This would strengthen state laws against EPA regulation of coal facilities that only sell their product within state lines.  Howell also, however, has studied the potential of wind energy for 30 years.  Wind energy production in certain parts of West Virginia drives development.  Said Howell of a wind project in his district, "I want to see growth in my community.  I want to see jobs brought into my community."

And it is not just Mountain State Republicans.  Before 2012's Iowa caucuses, six Republican presidential candidates autographed a wind turbine in that state, signifying support for innovation.

That being said, all renewable energy sources combined are dwarfed by reliance on coal alone.  For the foreseeable future, renewable sources must supplement, not replace, traditional sources of energy production.  Any profitable production, however, helps to return the US to the energy production dominance enjoyed until just after World War II.

America needs to emphasize energy.  The environment is better off if America burns its coal in plants that, even prior to the new standards, operated more cleanly than almost any nation on Earth.  Refining oil drilled in the Dakotas instead of the Middle East enhances US security.  Using and exporting natural gas drives down the world prices of that commodity, taking away some of Russia's leverage.

Each part of the US should explore how it can most safely and efficiently develop energy to its advantage.  Some parts of West Virginia should keep producing coal.  Ridgetops, however, are perfect places to put turbines.  The desert southwest should keep building solar farms to take in as much of the sun's bounty as possible.  Volcanic activity in the Northwest may be perfect for harvesting geothermal.  Even the vast landfills of the Northeast might be able to provide energy producing gasses.

West Virginia Republicans have for years publicly endorsed common sense solutions on national energy policy.  Liberals and leftists may try to tar them as a one trick pony, but the record indicates otherwise. Also, cutting back on tried and true sources of cheap energy is counterproductive.

West Virginia's Budget Situation May Not Be As Secure As We Thought

The Mercatus Center at George Mason University released a study this week that rated states' financial conditions.  West Virginia, which has done relatively well in the past decade, actually rates as one of the worst states in the nation in terms of solvency.

This study does not rate what has been done in the past, but speculates on both the near future and the next several years.  It asked:

Can a state easily access enough cash to pay its bills?

Can it consistently create enough revenue to pay its bills?

Can it cover long term obligations?

Can it continue to provide an adequate level of services?

According to Mercatus, West Virginia's financial position is fairly fragile.  Some of the reasons stem from the severe drop in coal production due to Obama Administration policies.  The state also shot itself in the foot by signing up for the expansion of Medicaid encouraged by the federal government.  Initially federal money would cover the costs, but eventually the state must assume the burden.

Revenues are dropping but the state has expanded its entitlement burden without considering the cost. Obama's bad policy and state Democrats' poor judgment threaten to undo the financial security West Virginia has enjoyed for the past several years.

Clearly the state needs leadership that is not tied so tightly to the Democratic Party.

The Ghost of Census' Yet to Come Predicts West Virginia Loses a Congressional Seat

Most people know about the three spirits in Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol.  Dickens is a stubborn and self-destructive man on many levels.  To save him from a miserable, lonely death, the spirits come to offer what later gets called "tough love."

Those who just flew in from the moon and are unfamiliar with the plot can check this out.

The Washington Post this week played the part of the grim Ghost of Census Yet to Come.  It projected that by 2060, West Virginia, among other states, will relatively or absolutely decline in population to the point that it will lose another seat in Congress.

Ebeneezer Scrooge asked the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come, when showed his miserable fate of dying alone, if these were events fated or changeable.  The Ghost grimly refused to reply.

Scrooge did not accept his possible fate.  he changed his ways.  So ought West Virginia.  Experts know what builds development, productivity, wealth, and population.  Reform the court system, weed out unnecessary regulations, licenses, and fee requirements, resist the temptation to raise the minimum wage, enact fair tax practices for all rather than special deals for a few.

The question is, will West Virginia enact these measures or drift down the road to irrelevance in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College?

(Almost) 149th Anniversary of McNeill's Rangers' Raid on Cumberland (Story Told in Pictures!)

Sometimes things happen in war that are so gutsy that people on all sides tip their hat.

One such event was McNeill's Rangers' raid on Cumberland, one of the most daring of its kind in American military history.

By winter of 1865, the Confederacy was about to throw in the towel.  Ulysses S. Grant's army slowly constricted around Robert E. Lee at Petersburg.  But a number of Confederate groups remained free.

Like the partisan ranger unit commanded by Lieutenant Jesse McNeill

This unit specialized in causing mischief around Hampshire and Hardy counties.  Lee had one general order, though.  Go steal a lot of these as much as possible.

But in February of 1865, Jesse and his compadres had a different idea.  Pull a crazy stunt that would resound in the annals of war.  Kidnap three of the enemy's general officers.

They moved north from their bases near Moorefield, crossed the shallow and not very broad Potomac and went into the Maryland city of Cumberland

In Cumberland they aimed to kidnap three generals.  Two were staying at a swank hotel in town.

They got captured.

The third believed in sharing the privations of his troops, even in the bitter cold of a mountain winter.  He smartly slept in a freezing tent surrounded by thousands of freezing soldiers.  Safe and sound.

Maybe that's why Rutherford B. Hayes ended up president!

The other two ended up captured.

One was this man

He looked just as perturbed the whole time he was in captivity.  Brigadier General Benjamin Kelley was not a man who enjoyed a good prank.  Maybe because a wound he suffered early in the war never healed and ended up incapacitating him in the 1870s.

The other was this feller

US Army historians consider George Crook to be one of the best small war commanders in American military history.  He knew how to wage war in mountains, hollows, forests, and remote lands.  Crook treated enemies, both Confederate and Indian, fairly, but always fought hard.

Crook delighted his captors by congratulating them on a job well done and joining their gentle mocking of the scowling Kelley.

Getting the generals out was no easy task.  Mountain winters look like this

Although the capture was a humiliation for the Union, especially General Kelley, it produced no lasting effect.  It did not get Grant away from Richmond and it did not net Lee anymore beef.

But it did leave lasting memories of daring and bravado remembered in the Potomac Highlands down to today.

West Va. Governor Earl Ray Tomblin and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio: Symbols of Division

http://www.wvva.com/story/24400444/2014/01/08/transcript-of-gov-tomblins-state-of-the-state-address

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/nyregion/complete-text-of-bill-de-blasios-inauguration-speech.html?_r=0

Above are links to the State of the State Address of Governor Earl Ray Tomblin of West Virginia and Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City.  Read the two addresses.  They seem to come from men of different countries, cultures, and traditions.  Hard to believe that these come from men of the same political party in similar roles, in the same country.

Governor Tomblin proudly touted a record of avoiding tax increases, holding the line on spending, and building up a near $1 billion rainy day fund.  He noted the soon to be developed factories in the state that would create coal and natural gas by products.  Tomblin promised to hold schools accountable and promised modest raises for teachers.  Shout outs to veterans and the Boy Scouts of America punctuated his relatively short talk that was built around gardening metaphors.

Bill de Blasio comes from the wing of the Democratic Party that thinks the EPA had better monitor one's gardening.  He praises Sandinistas, not fiscal conservatism.  He fights to gobble up more wealth from the most heavily taxed producers in the nation.  He picks fights with horse drawn carriages instead of teacher unions wary of school ratings.

Governor Tomblin is a relic.  He is a Democrat, there is no doubt of that.  Tomblin approved the federally encouraged expansion of Medicaid. This is expected to hit the budget hard, but his administration plans to make cuts in other areas to face the shortfall. Regulations and tort problems still bedevil development, but Tomblin's wing of the state party understands that social programs need a productive private sector to function.

He also comes from the old school. The Mingo County politics of his youth functioned a lot like the old Tammany and Daley metropolitan machines.  They directly rewarded those who supported them, usually illegally.  But they also understood the common man.  They knew he needed cheap food, cheap energy, decent housing, and a decent job.  And that a good economy could make that happen. Old time Democrats had a lot of flaws, but they believed in their country and in many institutions, like the Boy Scouts, that helped to make it great.  Tomblin is not corrupt, but he does still embrace a pragmatic approach. Cato in 2011 gave him the same rating as the GOP governor of Virginia for fiscal responsibility.

Contrasts between Tomblin and de Blasio illustrate how much the national Democratic Party has changed.  It moved in the direction of federal control over not only state and business, but also individual life decisions. They rely on bureaucrats, lawyers, and businesses that benefit from the Byzantine system of regulations and controls.  They have an idea of the way it ought to be, and that way leads to the regimentation of the daily lives of everyone along certain lines.  To keep us from self-inflicted wounds, or what they would perceive to be wounds.

Has the Republican Party changed? Certainly.  It abandoned unquestioning support of big business.  It now has a robust discussion within its ranks about pot legalization and gay marriage.  It has embraced more tightly than so-called liberals the basic philosophy of the Earl Warren Court that it once hated and feared (conservative publications have made a cottage industry out of reporting police abuses.) The party of small government in the past seven years has worked to make itself more consistent.  And on almost every issue it has moved more toward the freedom of the individual rather than diminishing liberty.

Looking at the addresses of the two Democrats, considering the drift of both parties, it is clear that a broad divide exists in the United States.  We are a house divided again between liberty and control.  We have two cultures that have no common foundation, and, at risk of being overly repetitive, these divides even exist within the Democratic Party itself!

Even in West Virginia, Democrats like Tomblin are a dying breed.  Moderate and pragmatic Democratic voters abandon the party for independence or the GOP.  Tearing oneself away from family and community traditions is hard, but so is stomaching what national Democrats have done to jobs and industry in the state.  Eventually a left wing rump will remain after the defections are over.  It will be more loud and shrill, but less effective in influencing the state.

Perhaps the disastrous Obamacare rollout will enable what is left of the Democratic moderates to regain control. Or it may drive them to more extreme dreams of control. Only time will tell

Ford Introduces the Future

Ford today unveiled a glimpse at the future of automobiles and the power that might get us from point A to point B.

Its latest concept car, described in Christian Science Monitor, features breakthrough hybrid technology combining batteries, a gasoline engine, and solar power.  The difference between Ford and other automakers is that this car carries the panels in its roof.

Engineers have to tackle the problem of cramming enough solar cells into the roof of the car to make it go.  They bolstered its capabilities by putting a concave plastic cover over the cells.  This acts as a lens to concentrate solar energy into the cells.

It takes seven hours to fully charge in sunlight, but can also be plugged in conventionally.  During optimal conditions, 75 percent of its power could come from the sun.

Solar panels should grow more efficient as technology advances. Paradoxically, all that stands in the way of progress is government support.  Subsidies encourage the status quo, which currently means solar panels that are not economically feasible in most situations.  They are either too expensive, or not efficient enough.  Market pressures would encourage more developments that could make them more prevalent in business, home, or automobile use.

Solar power is one of the few renewable energy sources that has a lot of promise.  If we can only refrain from giving it too much help, it could eventually fulfill the potential predicted of it.

Very Sobering Thought As We Embark on a New Year

Consider the situation as the 14th year opens in the new century.

The US economy is still recovering from a financial disaster in the previous decade.  It is also experimenting with new institutions that expand government control over the economy.

International terrorism struck hard at the United States early in the new century and also hit multiple European states.

The world's power structure has shifted powerfully in a short period of time.  Just a few years prior, a hegemonic power benevolently monitored the world.  It interfered imperfectly at times, but worked hard to maintain a balance between promoting world stability and self-interest.  It faced strong competition from rising powers across the globe, both economically and militarily.  Despite this, it has reoriented its military to confront low intensity conflicts on the periphery, rather than a mass war of nations.

Germany, poised to assume a much more powerful position on the European continent.  Russian expansion into Eastern Europe raises questions about the nature of its imperialism.  Terrorists, however, threaten to destabilize the country despite its attempts to grow into a respected nation militarily and economically.

Japan is once again restive and finds itself in confrontation with Far Eastern neighbors.

Technological advances have revolutionized ways of life and raised standards of living at an astonishing pace over the previous generation.

Although tensions abound throughout the world, few see any danger of a major war in the near future.

The year?  1914.  Seven months into the year came the most destructive war in history in terms of immediate and future impact.  It not only killed millions and consumed untallyable resources, it also served as the midwife of Soviet Communism and National Socialism.  These movements massacred tens of millions of innocents in their own right.

Czars, Kaisers (technically they are the same word), kings, presidents, prime ministers, and chancellors could not fathom the impact of the summer spiral that sucked in all the worlds' Great Powers eventually. Only the United States and Japan came through relatively unscathed.  America expanded its economy and decided in 1920 to abandon internationalism and "return to normalcy."  Japan added German colonies to its slowly growing empire. Meanwhile:

Russia descended into a horrific civil war that brought the murderous Bolsheviks to power.  They eventually murdered over 30 million of their own people under Lenin and Stalin.

Germany lost its ruling family, tried a democracy, and tumbled into Nazi totalitarianism.

France withstood the hell of a war of attrition on its own territory, killing millions of young men and destroying the northern part of the country.

Britain suffered more casualties per capita than any nation.  Its shell shock kept it from rising in time to meet the challenge from Hitler.

Italian chaos invited Mussolini's fascists.

Austria-Hungary disintegrated entirely.

It was not just Russia, Germany, and other countries that revolutionized in a span of five years, it was the world.  World War I brought the United States to the forefront, but also unleashed great evils.

Be prepared for an onslaught of World War I reflection and revision.  Niall Fergusson about a decade ago argued that Britain fought on the wrong side, that it should have stood beside the Germans to maintain the traditional balance of power in Europe.  This comes from the benefit of hindsight that tells us Russian population and resources wedded to ideology produced a powerful and long lasting threat to the continent.  Britain rarely exercised great judgment in its reactions to events and never attempted foresight.  Many spoke of the rise of Russia and America, but few pondered when or how that might happen.

Others will accept the immediate postwar analysis that the war sprung from some sort of madness of civilization.  At first glance, the sheer destruction and length of the war might reflect international insanity.

But that's not true.  If insanity or evil, like Hitler's drive to power, lay at the core of World War I, it could be safely consigned to history.  In reality though, World War I is much more terrifying than World War II because it resulted from each nation acting through its own logic and responding to lessons it learned from history.

Britain dominated the 19th century after the defeat of Napoleon.  For much of that time, it remained more interested in expanding its markets than its empire.  Except for three or four years of the American Civil War, it had the largest navy on earth.  Britain also dominated industrial production.  Most countries, especially the US, mildly resented British dominance.  Its world leadership, however, edged international relations toward more civility while restraining practices like piracy and slavery.

France remained hobbled by a hatred of Germany after their 1871 defeat and an unwieldy republican government that encouraged chronic domestic crises.

Germany did not exist as a nation until 1871.  Prussia plus several minor German states equaled the largest country on the continent besides Russia.  Under Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, it comfortably expanded production and trade, built the most impressive army, and enjoyed its unassailability.  No one wanted to challenge the Germans and, between the 1870s and the end of Bismarck's tenure, the Germans seemed content.  The young Kaiser William II in the 1890s found Bismarck's restrained policies anachronistic.  Envious of Britain and his royal cousins there, William wanted an empire of something besides islands and deserts.  Unfortunately, he resolved on boorish aggressive moves to obtain it.

Russia and Austria-Hungary struggled to bring centuries old dynasties into the modern industrial age.  Russia had the upper hand in the era of nationalism because of its dominant ethnic population.  Austria-Hungary contended with 15 different groups, most wanting equal treatment and recognition.  Their economies could not compete with Germany, Britain, or the United States.  Their struggles led them to seek external successes to build public pride.  Unfortunately, they faced off against each other trying to build influence in the Balkans.

Japan and the United States gradually gobbled island empires and developed their own industry.  Both expanded their regional power at the expense of defeatable nations.

Italy doesn't count.

France and Britain lurched from friendship in the 1850s to frenemies in the 1870s, to near war in the 1890s, then back to friendship.  Competition for colonial lands spurred animosity between the two and war could have happened had Kaiser William not abandoned Bismarck's approach.  William's strategy of brinksmanship was designed to bully France and Britain into begging him for an accomodation.  All it did was to push them together.

German prewar policy was based on a calculation of force and pressure, not nihilism and ideology like the Nazis.  It was not particularly defensible, but it also was not too much of a departure from traditional European practice, either.

Friendships coalesced into alliances.  France and Russia concluded an ironclad pact as did Germany and Austria-Hungary.  Britain had no direct obligation to anyone except Belgium, but worked with France on joint planning.  The war started, as most know, when Russian supported Serbia was associated with a terror attack on Austria-Hungary's ruling family.  Austria-Hungary eventually attacked, drawing Russia against it.  Germany protected her ally by attacking Russia's ally France, who wanted nothing to do with the war.  But previous French animosity left Germany convinced that she had to be neutralized in any conflict with Russia.  Britain wanted nothing to do with the war, but Germany's attack plan took her through Belgium, so...

A chain of logic led to war.  If the fact that it led to such a horrible event was omitted, the decisions would not look remarkably stupid (or remarkably intelligent either!)

Does 2014 look much different?

Economic instability

Persistent international terrorism

Relative decline of a hegemonic power

Rise of states opposed to the status quo (China, Iran, among others)

China is actively challenging a neighbor with whom it has long historical emnity (as Germany did with France) Like a hundred years ago, the disputes that China is picking are silly but must receive a response.

International agreements tie powers to smaller countries.  Where North Korea goes, China may have to follow regardless of how insane it is.  Germany's only friend in 1914 was Austria-Hungary.  China's is North Korea.

Digital age technology, like the industrial revolution, has changed nations, economies, militaries, and ways of life beyond recognition to someone thirty years ago.

The US military increasingly realigns to fight in Afghanistan or some other distant and unpleasant place.  Its shrinking, but still well-equipped and highly professional force resembles Britain's "thin red line" of 1914 relative to the size and population of each nation.

The seeds of a world war are planted today.  We cannot keep ignoring international problems such as the behavior of China.  Responding to China's belligerence with more belligerence will not help, but neither will accommodation and weakness.  The United States needs to build a firm economy at home to demonstrate strength and stability.  It also needs a wise foreign policy approach to handle the Far East sensibly.

Lessons from a hundred years ago are relevant now.  War can happen if today's Great Powers blunder into it as they did then.

Working Smart and Hard For Local Development: College Educations Are Overprioritized

The Mineral County Development Authority yesterday began advertising for a new executive director.  Requirements include a bachelors' degree in business, economics, or a related field or at least seven years of related experience.  

In the past year, experts have started realizing that the priority reflected in this ad is backwards. Real world experience should count more than paper earned by sitting in a series of classrooms.  This is more true now than ever before, considering the changing priorities of higher education.

The digital age means that people can bypass the traditional four year college degree and find low cost or even free training on their own.  Want to be a reporter? The Douglas Reynolds National Center of Business Journalism offers several free webinars per year to teach newsgathering and writing.  Last summer, Business Insider published descriptions of 12 companies offering training in fast growing fields that cost much less than most four year degrees.

Higher education defenders will say that basic training courses are fine, but one needs college courses to understand the big picture of how the economy works.  Not so.  Many colleges and universities have embraced left wing economic agendas.  Positions like West Virginia University's BB&T endowed chair in free market studies are few and far between.  As higher education watchdog groups like Young America's Foundation point out, courses pushing Marxism and government control of the economy are much more common.

Want an education of how the market works?  Read Milton and Rosa Friedman's Free to Choose.  Or watch his series of videos on You Tube.  Another fine work is the 130 word A Capitalist Manifesto by Gary Wolfram.  Also very accessible is Friedrich Hayek's Road to Serfdom which explains how government can ruin an economy and devolve into tyranny from its own best intentions.  Ten videos and a few hundred pages are much cheaper and much more educational than tens of thousands spent for a four year degree.

Even more importantly, many people at a surprisingly young age learn very quickly about business and economics without ever setting foot in a college.  How?  By working in a family business or starting their own.  Nothing teaches like experience.  Investing the effort and resources, taking the risks, developing judgment, all of these are key elements in building a sound economic mind.  

Mike Rowe, famous for hosting and narrating shows like Deadliest Catch, argues against "propaganda" employed by colleges and universities to increase student populations. He says that pushing college education "worked for colleges, that's fore sure.  Enrollments soared."  But high unemployment among graduates and trillion dollar student debt show that it is not the right fit for a lot of people.  Three million jobs are there for the taking, but colleges do not prepare the young for actual work.

On a side note, it is amazing that the current presidential administration tries to make economic policy without relying on a single individual with such experience.

Experience and the right education teach that economic development revolves around a very simple principle, competitive advantage.  West Virginia economic development fails because it tries to ignore that simple truth.  Elaborate webs of regulations and licensing requirements, too many taxes and fees, and a court system stacked against business all conspire to outstrip the advantages of location, low costs, and available workforce.  Only the worse situations created by Maryland and northern Virginia counties have helped West Virginia's Eastern Panhandle grow as it has.  Their higher taxes, ridiculous zoning and environmental laws, among other things, have made their economic climate conducive mainly to government and non profits.  The private sector in Maryland, outside of the service sector near Washington, is near death.  West Virginia is only attractive in relative terms.  

But our state does not take the steps necessary to make the right changes.  We do not reform our court system.  We do not cut regulations.  We have relied too much in the past on huge tax breaks to targeted industries that usually skip town as soon as the breaks are over.  Meanwhile established businesses in the state have to shoulder their burden.

This is why when local governments advertise for economic development officials, they need to list like this: "Seven years of business experience mandatory.  Understanding of basic free market economics plus state and local business conditions necessary.  Four year degree in economics or business helpful, but not needed."

Two Very Different "Men of the Year" and How They Define Our Times

The US magazine Time and the UK newspaper the Times both selected very different men of the year for 2013.  Each reflects ascendant spirits with very different worldviews.

Time magazine chose Pope Francis.  The Times selected Russian president Vladimir Putin.

In some ways, this is amazingly Augustinian.  St. Augustine wrote of the division between the City of Man and the City of God.    Vladimir Putin has emerged as a near czar of an expanding informal Russian Empire.  He follows the early 19th century British model of using economics to influence and profit from other nations. But he also follows a very Russian path of controlling border nations to keep the homeland secure.  In this way, Third Rome very much resembles the first.

Pope Francis, known as Jorge Mario Bergoglio before March 13, has emerged as a Catholic Father for his times.  The Cold War needed, for example, the iron tough, theologically sound, and eternally compassionate Pope John Paul II.  No pope since the Middle Ages had the impact of the man Catholics and many other Christians call "John Paul the Great" (a moniker not bestowed on a Pope since the 600s.)  His leadership made the Roman Catholic Church a mighty fortress again, regaining credibility and luster after the tragic World War II years.

The 21st Century, however, challenges Christianity in a different way.  Many are lost and want to be found.  While the Church certainly will not abandon doctrine, Francis has pointedly emphasized love, forgiveness, and compassion for the vulnerable.  This may not look like power, but it works effectively in contrast.  John Paul II's expression of these sentiments helped the Polish Pope bring down the Eastern Bloc.  Francis' message will thrive in places such as Cuba, where Communism lost credibility years ago.  Or Africa where Christians face determined Islamic expansionists.  The Christian faith at its core remains the simplest and most profound way to make sense of man's place in the world.  Pope Francis, agree or disagree with the details of some of his pronouncements, is a powerful ambassador of faith.  He senses that the world is changing and seeks to adapt Catholic teaching to it without abandoning fundamental foundations of faith.

Power matters to Putin, too.  He has gradually absorbed Belarus, convincing that impoverished republic to cede sovereign right after sovereign right.  Before Christmas, he offered a bailout to corrupt and struggling Ukraine.  Historically Belarus is "White Russia," Russia proper is "Great Russia," and Ukraine is "Little Russia."  Ukraine, however, is where Russia began.  Russian nationalism craves respect and seeks to ground its actions in tradition and history.  Putin's slow moves westward reflect these old habits.

But how well grounded is that power?  Russia has relied heavily on natural gas revenues to fund its return to world prominence.  The United States, however, as reported by the Washington Free Beacon, could undermine Putin's plans.  As West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Texas sprout gas wells that rely on cheap hydrofracturing techniques, they threaten to undercut Russian dominance of this market in the Eastern Hemisphere.  In the same way that late 20th century Middle Eastern oil was cheaper for Americans to buy abroad than produce at home, so US gas undermines Russia and depresses prices in the entire gas market.

Unless Russia can diversify or convince Obama to shut off the tap, the moment in the sun carved out by Putin for Russia could be brief.

Putin's hard nosed domestic approach runs counter to Francis' preaching as well.  The Russian president is essentially conservative in the European sense (not, I repeat, not the American. Or the British, for that matter.)  European conservatives emphasize order above liberty.  They prefer control and predictability in both domestic and international affairs.  Russia particularly has feared the advance of uncontrolled social movements regardless of whether they were ruled by the czar or the Politboro.

These two men both qualify as "Man of the Year" for different reasons.  And there is no reason to think that their influence and appeal will diminish in the next 12 months.  What should be troubling for the United States is that neither figure needs to account for America in any way in terms of his ideals, values, or morality. We are no longer a major part of their conversation.  Whether one sees the US as a powerful example of a Judeo-Christian republic or a force for liberty and natural rights, the demise of America under Obama is underscored by the emergence of these men.

Michigan the Latest to Chip Away At Federal Supremacy

Last week while most continued to enjoy Christmas with family and friends, the Michigan state legislature enacted significant legislation.  It nullified part of an act of Congress.

Michigan targeted section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act which provided for indefinite detention of US citizens.  Governor Rick Snyder, while signing the legislation, noted that even a warrant for detention could not be enforced in Michigan.  Supporters say that the Michigan legislation reaffirms both 5th Amendment rights of due process and 10th Amendment protections of state sovereignty.

This follows on the heels of a South Carolina bill annulling Obamacare within that state.  It passed major hurdles this month and is expected to land on Governor Nikki Haley's desk in January.  There is no doubt that she will sign the legislation.

Nullification has returned from the history books into the undercurrent of state politics.  The doctrine originated with arch slavery defender John C. Calhoun, but was applied to a destructive tariff in the 1830s. Northerners resurrected the ideal while searching for ways to strike down the notorious Fugitive Slave Act in the 1850s.

It was never stricken down by any court of law or force of arms.  Congressional action repealing the Tariff of Abominations in the 1830s placated South Carolina, which suspended the nullification acts.

The main obstacle to nullification lies in the Supreme Court case of McCullough v. Maryland.  This case placed broad limits on the authority of well-established state governments to curtail the actions of weak federal agencies.  After 200 years of federal growth and state weakening, cases arising from nullification acts may be vital to defining down this landmark ruling and carving out a stronger state position.

Acts of nullification generally attack federal authority assumed under the commerce clause. This covers anti-drug actions, the Environmental Protection Agency, and almost any other regulatory part of the Executive Branch. The Constitution states that Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce and has adopted the broadest possible interpretation of it.  Defining down this interpretation is also essential.

The year 2014 will start off with debt crises, foreign crises, and presidential speculation.  Coming up fast, however, is the showdown between federal and state power.