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.

Inspector General's Report At Department of Justice Mimics Libertarian and Conservative Concerns

Above the Law recently summarized a report by the inspector general of the Department of Justice.  The conclusions reached sound like they came from the pages of Reason and other outlets.

It notes that every dollar spent on prisons is a dollar not spent on enforcement and prevention efforts.  It quotes the assistant attorney general who called prison costs "unsustainable."  In addition to Above the Law's analysis, it is interesting to find the opportunity cost argument used by the government.  Perhaps the sequester made some agencies realize that even a federal budget is finite.

Part of the prison cost will require some rethinking.  The writer explains that quite a few prisoners of means live in cells on the taxpayers' dime well into old age.  Could other options be available for non violent felons besides prison, at least in these circumstances.

The American Bar Association warned in 1998 that overfederalization "strains the fabric of the federal and state system."  It also noted that "there are powerful reasons for the fundamental limitations on federal criminal law."  General police power over day to day crime, according to constitutional law, is better left under the control of the states.  State courts can lose their importance, while federal courts become overburdened.  The ABA cites a number of other hazards of putting more police power in the hands of the federal government.

The inspector general warns that these chickens have come home to roost.  The federal government now can prosecute over 4,000 criminal offenses in federal law.  Add to that 10-100,000 possible federal regulations that could carry federal criminal penalties.  Moving back to state prosecutions of criminal law can "alleviate the budget crisis posed by the federal prison system."

Reevaluating federal prosecution of criminal law is the first step.  Next comes rethinking the mindset that allowed and encouraged this overreach in the first place.  An unrestrained federal leviathan is rampaging through our society.  Curbing the law enforcement prerogatives of this beast is one step toward restoring the proper proportion of power.

Six Fictional Characters From the Mountain State

1.  Clarice Starling

This is one of the most compelling West Virginia born characters ever created.  In Silence of the Lambs her country origins emerge as a powerful part of her anxieties about dealing with superiors and the FBI world itself.  ATF ranked her as the sixth best protagonist in the last hundred years of film.

Her accent was a little off, but Foster was extremely convincing as a West Virginia native character.  her defining role.

2.  Aunt Bee

Francis Bavier had few other roles that anyone today would remember.  But she did get to portray one of American culture's most iconic characters.  The Andy Griffith Show's Aunt Bee was the perfect example of small town grandmotherly love and concern.  In real life, it has been said that she was a little more wild than the kindly woman seen on TV.  On the show, she hailed from Morgantown.  This was the actual hometown of co-star Don Knotts.

3. Harry Powell

This is one of the most disturbing characters to ever make it to the big screen.  Much of the credit goes to Robert Mitchum's portrayal of the dangerous con man/preacher in Night of the Hunter.

Love tattooed on one hand, hate on the other.  Powell seduces a widow on the chance of finding an ill gotten $10,000.  When she discovers the ruse, he kills her.

The plot only gets more diabolical from here.

4.  Connie Mills

The Connie Mills character from The Mothman Prophecies is a breath of fresh air for West Virginia film fans.  She is professional, strong, intelligent, attractive, yet down to earth.  She seems at home in the fake Point Pleasant seen in the film.

5.  Ray Gillette

This is one of the most interesting and hilarious characters ever drawn from West Virginia that manages to not be used to abuse the state.  In the FX show Archer, Ray Gillette is an openly gay field agent.

His backstory includes Olympic gold medals, experience as a Marshall University cheerleader, and former preacher.  The episode "Bloody Ferlin" shows him going home to save his brother from a corrupt sheriff, or so he thinks.  "Ferlin" is set in southern West Virginia and manages to be somewhat accurate wirthout being openly insulting.

The Gillette character and the Ferlin portrayal definitely lead you to think that there is or are West Virginia natives working on this show.

6.  Jennifer Elizabeth Marlowe

Jennifer Elizabeth Marlowe, the beautiful blonde played by Loni Anderson (pre Burt Reynolds) was a smackdown to a slew of stereotypes, not just West Virginians.  She is the receptionist at a struggling Cincinnati radio station called WKRP, but happens to be the smartest one of the bunch.  She uses her charms to attract wealthy older men's attention and money.  One never sees them, but their costly gifts generally show up in the lobby.  After years of West Virginia hicks and ditzy blond bombshells, her character was pretty well drawn.

Ukraine Continues Tilt Toward Russia

In the Middle Ages, Kiev served as the capital of Russia.  Now it serves independent Ukraine in that capacity.  Over time, Russia and Ukraine separated culturally, linguistically, and nationally.  Now Kiev once again looks to Russia for leadership and support.

Ukraine in terms of size is about the size of Texas or France.  Next to the North American Great Plains, its soil potentially can produce more than any region on Earth.  Its 45 million people live in a state of chronic underdevelopment.  The nation suffers from severe corruption and holds the fifth lowest international credit rating.

Twenty years of independence from the old Soviet Union brought disastrously bad government to a nation with energy reserves, a seaport, and food production capacity that could easily provide for a continent.

Ukraine naturally shied away from Russia at first.  Russia dominated the old Soviet Union which in turn terrorized Ukraine.  Stalin ripped away from the land tens of millions of innocent farmers and others.  Over the USSR's entire history, Ukrainian language and culture were stifled.

Ties to Europe and the United States grew.  Ukraine wanted to participate in institutions such as the European Union and NATO.  Economic instability in the past several years has made help from the EU come with conditions.  These include applying to the IMF and signing a free trade agreement.

Full free trade with Europe would help Ukraine develop itself.  It can cheaply produce enough food to sell to all of Europe.  France, Germany, and other countries, however, continue to cling to agricultural subsidies.  For Ukraine to get ahead, it needs to be able to exploit its competitive advantages in land and cheap labor.  A free trade pact would merely open the door to European manufactures without helping Ukraine develop its agricultural sector.  Some in the United States have floated the idea of a bailout, but with the US and the EU experiencing their own debt crises, this will not happen.

Enter Vladimir Putin and Russia.

Putin seems to have figured out what Britain learned after the American Revolution.  Gain influence over an independent nation's economy and get the benefits of colonialism without the costs of administration.  Britain, the United States, Japan, and others have all adopted that lesson at some point after hard lessons learned about war, conquest, and colonialism.

Russia has extended its hand to Ukraine, offering a trade deal and other forms of assistance.  This will tie Ukraine more strongly to the nation that served as its overlord during Czarist and Soviet times.

Many in Ukraine see this as too risky.  Thousands have rioted in protest against rising Russian influence.  Russian ties to Belarus have resulted in the near merger of the two states.  This will likely not change Ukraine's official position.

Putin will continue to channel efforts into building an informal empire dependent on Moscow.  This is a less risky strategy than China's new belligerence in the Far East, but it is no less important.

As for Ukraine, its potential remains untapped.  But a country the size of France with oil, gas, and food capability is not a forgettable part of the world's balance of influence.

The EPA's War On Common Sense

I rarely post something in the first person, but sometimes it's needed.

A couple of days ago, I was warming up my wife's car.  I didn't check the gas when I started the car and it ran out.  I figured, no problem, I'll just go get a gas can, get a gallon of gas, then put it in, right?

I go to the store and buy a gas can.  They are a lot more expensive than they used to be, but I chalked it up to inflation.  Then I get to the gas station and open it up.  It looks like some kind of system that belongs on the space shuttle, I mean, that used to belong on the space shuttle when we used such things.  I put the gallon in anyway.

When I got home, I tried using the can.  The nozzle system was more complicated than I ever dreamed and all I accomplished was spilling about a pint of gasoline onto the ground.

At this point, I figured out that this must be the EPA's fault.  The private sector is best known for selling products that are easy to use and get easier over time.  The gas can used to be simple, a nozzle and a vent in the back.  It operated on the same principle as canned juice.  Open both ends for a smooth and easy pour.

Now it works on impossible to discern engineering principles.  As sure as I had just ruined my leather gloves by accidentally spilling gasoline all over the place, I smelled an EPA rat here.

Sure enough, I was right.  Long story short, the EPA forced mind numbing, California originating, standards on gas cans to do what?  Prevent spillage.  Apparently, all over the country, people are spilling gas from these stupid things.  I spilled more gas with the new can than in 40 years of life combined.

They also have a tendency to inflate in hot weather and rupture, spewing gas everywhere.  Why?  They are airtight.

And I still couldn't get gas in my car.  But my daughter came to the rescue.  She and her friends had run out of gas months before.  They also couldn't work the gas can, so they came up with a good solution.

Cut the bottom off of a water bottle and get a coat hanger.  Use the upside down bottle as a funnel while the coat hanger opens the tank.  Take the entire nozzle apparatus off the can and pour the gas out directly.  No muss, no fuss.  And try to find a safe place to dispose of the bottle and hanger.

Or, figure out where racing teams buy their gas cans.  They still use the old style.

Thanks EPA.  One more thing that you have done to make everyone's life a little more frustrating.  Now I will have to remember you more often than when my low flow toilet backs up.

Columnist From DC Paper For the Homeless Blasts "Partisans of the Left", Promotes Free Market

The Republican Party and many conservative groups have shied away from inner cities in the past.  Collectively, they may see little point in confronting what they feel will be universal hostility.  As individuals, few want to go to speak at events where they may be derided for the duration.

Are either one of these fears based in reality?  One DC columnists' writings suggest not.

Jeffrey McNeill writes an opinion column for Washington DC's Street Sense.  Through much of 2013, his work shows growing affinity for free markets while feeling disgust and disdain for "partisans of the left."

McNeill's most recent column, "A Critique of Liberalism," begins by citing studies showing black Americans to be more socially conservative than many Tea Party advocates.  "Truth is," he writes, "a conservative vein runs deep in the black community."  McNeill condemns what he calls "victim rhetoric" and explains "as a minority, I yearn for a new black leader to emerge, someone who will inspire a new generation . . . to be independent and self-reliant."

He then cites Malcolm X, Marcus Garvey, and West Virginia's Booker T. Washington as examples.

"Latte liberals" draw much of his ire.  McNeil describes them as standing up for the little guy until they "go off to their suburban homes pontificating about what others might do for humanity."  Their "social theories border on arrogance."

McNeill discusses his own struggles with how these ideas brought him into conflict "with those I once agreed with."  A summer 2012 piece of his angrily decried anti-Obama conservatives as racist.  While McNeill refuses to call himself conservative, he does call free enterprise "harsh and cruel (but) it is the ticket out of poverty."

The Republican Party and conservative groups would do well to closely look at McNeill's writings.  He came from "some of the worst projects" in New Jersey and Philadelphia, but saw "miracles" such as single mothers, addicts, and others getting off welfare, overcoming obstacles, educating themselves, and becoming successful in life.

A message of self-reliance never falls on deaf ears.  Many people strive to do for themselves.  The inner cities are oppressed by poverty in part because government restrictions, regulations, taxes, fees, and other burdens always kill entrepreneurial initiative in the poorest areas.  Prosperity cannot take root so hope dies. Free market advocates can bring a powerful message to the inner city if they will but go.  McNeill's writings are proof that many will listen.

Street Sense is a newspaper published in Washington DC for the benefit of the homeless.  Vendors write for and sell the paper to earn money.  All are homeless and struggling.

West Virginia's Sole Obamacare Provider Has 1/20th Expected Participation Rate

Is Obamacare collapsing?  West Virginia may be a part of its demise.

The state's Democratically dominated executive and legislative branches enthusiastically signed on for the Obamacare exchange plan.  Only one provider, Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield, is available.

West Virginia Metro News reports that only 1,200 of the expected 20-25,000 participants have been registered.  They also have concerns that not enough healthy and young people are interested in the program.

Obamacare's success hinges on young people paying out more and using less care.  Many have chosen to take the tax penalty rather than pay for insurance they do not think they will need.

Some conservatives fear that Obamacare collapse was not only predictable, but planned. They believe that the ultimate goal is a nationalized health care system with mediocre care for the masses and high quality only available for those who can pay in cash. It is unlikely, however, that voters will trust the same people who bungled Obamacare to make further drastic changes.

House Republicans have offered to meet with the president to discuss solutions, according to The Hill.  The White House has, thus far, brushed them off.

West Virginia Citizens' Defense League Releases First Round of Candidate grades.

The West Virginia Citizens' Defense League, a group dedicated to fighting for Second Amendment rights, released its grades of candidates running in 2014.  These were not endorsements, but ratings based upon return of a survey and record.  

For United States Senate, the WVCDL gave both Shelley Moore Capito and Pat McGeehan an A+ rating.  Capito's House of Representatives and McGeehan's House of Delegates voting record on gun rights was spotless.  The WVCDL noted that Capito repeated some of its arguments in the days after the Sandy Hook shooting.

Natalie Tennant received an F for supporting gun control schemes and previous statements.

So far, WVCDL has only rated two candidates for the 2nd Congressional District.  Alex Mooney received an A+ for a strong record of defending gun rights at the legislative level.  Meshea Poore of Charleston received the dreaded F- rating, along with the admonition "DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS CANDIDATE."

The group also handed out grades for state legislators.  In the Eastern Panhandle, Craig Blair, Gary Howell, Allen Evans, Dave Sypolt, Larry Faircloth, John Overington, Larry Kump, Jason Barrett, Michael Folk, and Eric Householder all received A+ ratings.  John Unger only earned an A, but the WVCDL expected him to rise to A+ at the end of this session.

Senator Joe Manchin is not running, but WVCDL marked its displeasure with the Democrat by criticizing statements made supporting his gun proposals.

WVCDL rated many Democrats among its A+ grades, indicating that West Virginia's stance on full Second Amendment rights remains a bipartisan affair.