TheMemoryHole1

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ An in-depth exploration of the energy landscape, particularly focusing on the choices faced by Austin voters regarding their participation in the South Texas Nuclear Project. Over the course of four consecutive nights, each spanning two hours, the program delves into various aspects of energy production and consumption. The program features a mix of both archival material and new content to provide a comprehensive understanding of the issues at hand. Among the highlights are: Archival Footage: Several earlier shows are revisited (programs 4, 14, 20), offering viewers a chance to revisit key discussions and insights related to energy. Speech by Daniel Ellsberg: Viewers are presented with a tape of a speech delivered by Daniel Ellsberg, likely offering perspectives on nuclear energy, its risks, and broader societal implications. Ellsberg, known for his role in the release of the Pentagon Papers, brings a unique perspective to the discussion. Special Report on Lignite Coal: A dedicated segment sheds light on the dangers associated with lignite coal, likely exploring its environmental impacts, health risks, and implications for energy policy. Solar Energy Demonstration: The program showcases a practical demonstration of a working solar collector, underscoring the potential of renewable energy sources as alternatives to traditional fossil fuels and nuclear power. Public Reaction to The China Syndrome: Interviews conducted at a theater gauge the impact of the film The China Syndrome on public opinion regarding nuclear energy. By speaking with individuals who have just viewed the film, the program seeks to understand how it might influence the upcoming referendum. Media Analysis of Three Mile Island Accident: A critical analysis of media coverage surrounding the Three Mile Island accident is included, likely scrutinizing how the incident was portrayed and its implications for public perception of nuclear energy safety. The China Syndrome is a 1979 American disaster thriller film directed by James Bridges and written by Bridges, Mike Gray, and T. S. Cook. The film stars Jane Fonda, Jack Lemmon, Michael Douglas (who also produced), Scott Brady, James Hampton, Peter Donat, Richard Herd, and Wilford Brimley. It follows a television reporter and her cameraman who discover safety coverups at a nuclear power plant. "China syndrome" is a fanciful term that describes a fictional result of a nuclear meltdown, where reactor components melt through their containment structures and into the underlying earth, "all the way to China". The China Syndrome premiered at the 1979 Cannes Film Festival, where it competed for the Palme d'Or while Lemmon received the Best Actor Prize.[3] It was theatrically released on March 16, 1979, twelve days before the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, which gave the film's subject matter an unexpected prescience. It became a critical and commercial success. Reviewers praised the film's screenplay, direction, and performances (most notably of Fonda and Lemmon), while it grossed $51.7 million on a production budget of $5.9 million. The film received four nominations at the 52nd Academy Awards; Best Actor (for Lemmon), Best Actress (for Fonda), Best Original Screenplay and Best Art Direction.[4] Plot While visiting the Ventana nuclear power plant outside Los Angeles, television news reporter Kimberly Wells, her cameraman Richard Adams and their soundman Hector Salas witness the plant going through a turbine trip and corresponding SCRAM (emergency shutdown). Shift Supervisor Jack Godell notices an unusual vibration in his cup of coffee. In response to a gauge indicating high water levels, Godell begins removing water from the core, but the gauge remains high as operators open more valves to dump water. Another operator notices a second gauge indicating low water levels. Godell taps the first gauge, which immediately unsticks and drops to indicate very low levels. The crew urgently pumps water back in and celebrates in relief at bringing the reactor back under control.[a] Adams has surreptitiously filmed the incident, despite being asked not to film for security reasons. Wells' superior refuses her report of what happened. Adams steals the footage and shows it to experts who conclude that the plant came perilously close to meltdown – the China syndrome. During an inspection of the plant before it is brought back online, Godell discovers a puddle of radioactive water that has apparently leaked from a pump. He pushes to delay restarting the plant, but the plant superintendent wants nothing standing in the way of the restart. Godell finds that a series of radiographs supposedly verifying the welds on the leaking pump are identical – the contractor simply kept resubmitting the same picture. He brings the evidence to the plant superintendent, who brushes him off as paranoid, stating that new radiographs would cost $20 million. Godell confronts Royce, an employee of Foster-Sullivan who built the plant, as it was he who signed off on the radiographs. Godell threatens to go to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but Royce threatens him; later, a pair of men from Foster-Sullivan park outside his house. Wells and Adams confront Godell at his home and he voices his concerns. Wells and Adams ask him to testify at the NRC hearings over Foster-Sullivan's plans to build another nuclear plant. Godell agrees to obtain, through Salas, the false radiographs to take to the hearings. Salas' car is run off the road and the radiographs are taken from him. Godell is chased by the men waiting outside his home. He takes refuge inside the plant, where he finds that the reactor is being brought up to full power. Grabbing a gun from a security guard, he forces everyone out, including his friend and co-worker Ted Spindler, and demands to be interviewed by Wells on live television. Plant management agrees to the interview in order to buy time as they try to regain control of the plant. Minutes into the broadcast, plant technicians deliberately cause a SCRAM so they can distract Godell and retake the control room. A SWAT team forces its way in, the television cable is cut, and Godell is shot. Before dying, he feels the unusual vibration again. The resulting SCRAM is brought under control only by the plant's automatic systems, and the plant suffers significant damage as the pump malfunctions. Plant officials try to paint Godell as emotionally disturbed, but are contradicted by a distraught Spindler on live television saying Godell was not crazy and would never have taken such drastic steps had there not been something wrong. A tearful Wells concludes her report and the news cuts to a commercial for microwave ovens. Cast Jane Fonda as Kimberly Wells Jack Lemmon as Jack Godell Michael Douglas as Richard Adams Scott Brady as Herman DeYoung James Hampton as Bill Gibson Peter Donat as Don Jacovich Wilford Brimley as Ted Spindler Richard Herd as Evan McCormack Daniel Valdez as Hector Salas Stan Bohrman as Pete Martin James Karen as Mac Churchill Reception Roger Ebert reviewed it as: ...a terrific thriller that incidentally raises the most unsettling questions about how safe nuclear power plants really are. ... The movie is ... well-acted, well-crafted, scary as hell. The events leading up to the "accident" in The China Syndrome are indeed based on actual occurrences at nuclear plants. Even the most unlikely mishap (a stuck needle on a graph causing engineers to misread a crucial water level) really happened at the Dresden plant outside Chicago. And yet the movie works so well not because of its factual basis, but because of its human content. The performances are so good, so consistently, that The China Syndrome becomes a thriller dealing in personal values.[5] Movie Reviews UK noted the film is: so accurate that, even though they're fictional, they could easily be documentaries...we see the greatest fears of the NIMBY culture unearthed when a nuclear power station almost goes out of control and the men-in-suits cover it up...[unknown] to them, the entire incident is covertly filmed by a visiting TV news-crew. The acting is also credited: The power of this film is more than just the acting, although Lemmon is superb, and more than just the script. It is that this scenario could really happen...atmosphere produced in the plants' control-room is heart-stoppingly intense; characters are uniformly well-acted. I recommend The China Syndrome to everyone as an example of the dangers of money and corruption.[6] John Simon said The China Syndrome was a taut, intelligent, and chillingly gripping thriller till it turns melodramatic at its end. He called the ending both false and bathetic.[7] The film has a rating of 88% on Rotten Tomatoes based on reviews from 40 critics. The critical consensus reads: "With gripping themes and a stellar cast, The China Syndrome is the rare thriller that's as thought-provoking as it is tense".[8] On Metacritic it has a score of 81 based on reviews from 16 critics, indicating "universal acclaim".[9] Box office The film opened in 534 theatres in the United States and grossed $4,354,854 in its opening weekend.[10] Response of nuclear industry The March 1979 release was met with backlash from the nuclear power industry's claims of it being "sheer fiction" and a "character assassination of an entire industry".[11] Twelve days later, the Three Mile Island nuclear accident occurred in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. While some credit the accident's timing in helping to sell tickets,[12] the studio attempted to avoid appearing as if they were exploiting the accident, which included pulling the film from some theaters.[13] Accolades Award Category Recipient Result Academy Awards[14] Best Actor Jack Lemmon Nominated Best Actress Jane Fonda Nominated Best Screenplay – Written Directly for the Screen Mike Gray, T. S. Cook and James Bridges Nominated Best Art Direction Art Direction: George Jenkins Set Decoration: Arthur Jeph Parker Nominated British Academy Film Awards[15] Best Film James Bridges Nominated Best Actor in a Leading Role Jack Lemmon Won Best Actress in a Leading Role Jane Fonda Won Best Screenplay Mike Gray, T. S. Cook and James Bridges Nominated Cannes Film Festival[16] Palme d'Or James Bridges Nominated Best Actor Jack Lemmon Won David di Donatello Awards Best Foreign Actor Won[b] Directors Guild of America Awards[17] Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Motion Pictures James Bridges Nominated Golden Globe Awards[18] Best Motion Picture – Drama Nominated Best Actor in a Motion Picture – Drama Jack Lemmon Nominated Best Actress in a Motion Picture – Drama Jane Fonda Nominated Best Director – Motion Picture James Bridges Nominated Best Screenplay – Motion Picture Mike Gray, T. S. Cook and James Bridges Nominated National Board of Review Awards[19] Top Ten Films 4th Place National Society of Film Critics Awards Best Actor Jack Lemmon 4th Place Satellite Awards Best Classic DVD Nominated Writers Guild of America Awards[20] Best Drama Written Directly for the Screen Mike Gray, T. S. Cook and James Bridges Won See also Chernobyl (miniseries) Nuclear and radiation accidents and incidents Explanatory notes The sequence of events in the movie is based on events that occurred in 1970 at the Dresden Generating Station outside Chicago. In that case, the indicator stuck low and the operators responded by adding ever more water. Tied with Dustin Hoffman for Kramer vs. Kramer. References "The China Syndrome". Sunnycv.com. Archived from the original on February 27, 2014. Retrieved February 26, 2014. "Box Office Information for The China Syndrome". Box Office Mojo. Retrieved January 28, 2012. "Festival de Cannes: The China Syndrome". Festival-cannes.com. Archived from the original on January 18, 2012. Retrieved May 24, 2009. "The China Syndrome (1979): Awards". Movies & TV Dept. The New York Times. 2012. Archived from the original on October 18, 2012. Retrieved June 27, 2018. Ebert, Roger (January 1, 1979). "The China Syndrome Movie Review (1979)". Chicago Sun-Times. Archived from the original on January 20, 2021. Retrieved December 30, 2013. "The China Syndrome (1979)". Film.u-net.com. Archived from the original on July 18, 2013. Retrieved December 30, 2013. Simon, John (1982). Reverse Angle. Crown Publishers Inc. p. 377. ISBN 9780517544716. "The China Syndrome". Rotten Tomatoes. Archived from the original on January 20, 2021. Retrieved July 23, 2022. "The China Syndrome". Metacritic. Pollock, Dale (June 20, 1979). "UA Puts Four-Day 'Rocky II' B. O. At $8.1 Million". Daily Variety. p. 1. Burnham, David (March 18, 1979). "Nuclear Experts Debate 'The China Syndrome'". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 2, 2021. "The China Syndrome: Special Edition". Dvdverdict.com. Archived from the original on November 11, 2013. Retrieved December 30, 2013. Movies That Shook the World, American Movie Classics 2006. "The 52nd Academy Awards". Oscars. Archived from the original on May 22, 2019. Retrieved February 21, 2019. "Film in 1980". BAFTA. Archived from the original on August 8, 2014. Retrieved February 21, 2019. "The China Syndrome". Festival De Cannes. Archived from the original on February 22, 2019. Retrieved February 21, 2019. "32nd Annual DGA Awards". Directors Guild of America. Archived from the original on November 30, 2020. Retrieved February 21, 2019. "Winners & Nominees: China Syndrome, The". Golden Globes. Archived from the original on December 30, 2020. Retrieved February 21, 2019. "1979 Award Winners". National Board of Review. Archived from the original on February 22, 2019. Retrieved February 21, 2019. "Writers Guild Award Winners 1995–1949". Writers Guild Awards. Archived from the original on January 25, 2021. Retrieved February 21, 2019. External links The China Syndrome at IMDb Edit this at Wikidata The China Syndrome at the TCM Movie Database The China Syndrome at AllMovie The China Syndrome at the American Film Institute Catalog vte Films directed by James Bridges The Baby Maker (1970) The Paper Chase (1973) September 30, 1955 (1977) The China Syndrome (1979) Urban Cowboy (1980) Mike's Murder (1984) Perfect (1985) Bright Lights, Big City (1988) vte Michael Douglas Career history Accolades Producer One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) The China Syndrome (1979) Romancing the Stone (1984) The Jewel of the Nile (1985) Flatliners (1990) Made in America (1993) The Rainmaker (1997) One Night at McCool's (2001) It Runs in the Family (2003) The Sentinel (2006) Beyond the Reach (2014) Flatliners (2017) Related Bigstick Productions Further Films The Bryna Company Family Kirk Douglas (father) Diana Dill (mother) Anne Buydens (stepmother) Joel Douglas (brother) Peter Douglas (half-brother) Eric Douglas (half-brother) Brenda Vaccaro (partner) Catherine Zeta-Jones (second wife) Cameron Douglas (son) Thomas Melville Dill (maternal grandfather) Nicholas Bayard Dill (maternal uncle) vte Anti-nuclear movement in the United States General Anti-nuclear groups in the US California movement Great Peace March Nuclear history of the United States Nuclear power in the US Canceled nuclear reactors in the US Nuclear weapons and the US Protests in the US Anti-nuclear advocates in the US Organizations and groups Abalone Alliance Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility Clamshell Alliance Committee for Nuclear Responsibility Corporate Accountability International Critical Mass Energy Project Friends of the Earth Greenpeace USA Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Mothers for Peace Musicians United for Safe Energy Nevada Desert Experience Nuclear Control Institute Nuclear Information and Resource Service Physicians for Social Responsibility Plowshares movement Ploughshares Fund Public Citizen Shad Alliance Sierra Club Three Mile Island Alert Women Strike for Peace Kings Bay Plowshares People Daniel Berrigan William J. Bichsel Bruce G. Blair Larry Bogart Helen Caldicott Barry Commoner Norman Cousins Frances Crowe Carrie Barefoot Dickerson Paul M. Doty Bernard T. Feld Randall Forsberg John Gofman Paul Gunter John Hall Jackie Hudson Sam Lovejoy Amory Lovins Bernard Lown Arjun Makhijani Gregory Minor Hermann Joseph Muller Ralph Nader Graham Nash Linus Pauling Eugene Rabinowitch Phil Radford Bonnie Raitt Carl Sagan Martin Sheen Karen Silkwood Thomas Louis Vitale Harvey Wasserman Victor Weisskopf Main protest sites Black Fox Bodega Bay Diablo Canyon Indian Point Lawrence Livermore Montague Naval Base Kitsap Nevada Test Site Rancho Seco Rocky Flats San Onofre Seabrook Shoreham Three Mile Island Trojan Vermont Yankee White House Peace Vigil Y-12 Weapons Plant Yankee Rowe Books Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free Conservation Fallout: Nuclear Protest at Diablo Canyon Contesting the Future of Nuclear Power Critical Masses: Opposition to Nuclear Power in California, 1958–1978 The Cult of the Atom The Doomsday Machine (book) Fallout: An American Nuclear Tragedy Killing Our Own Licensed to Kill? The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Shoreham Power Plant Making a Real Killing: Rocky Flats and the Nuclear West Nuclear Implosions: The Rise and Fall of the Washington Public Power Supply System Nuclear Politics in America We Almost Lost Detroit Films Atomic Ed and the Black Hole The China Syndrome Countdown to Zero Dark Circle Nuclear Tipping Point Silkwood Categories: 1979 films1970s disaster films1970s thriller filmsAmerican disaster filmsAmerican thriller filmsAnti-nuclear filmsColumbia Pictures filmsFilms about journalistsFilms about televisionFilms about whistleblowingFilms directed by James BridgesFilms produced by Michael DouglasFilms set in CaliforniaFilms shot in Los AngelesThree Mile Island accidentFilms about nuclear accidents1979 drama films1970s English-language films1970s American films The South Texas Project Electric Generating Station (also known as STP, STPEGS, South Texas Project), is a nuclear power station southwest of Bay City, Texas, United States. STP occupies a 12,200-acre (4,900 ha) site west of the Colorado River about 90 miles (140 km) southwest of Houston. It consists of two Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors and is cooled by a 7,000-acre (2,800 ha) reservoir, which eliminates the need for cooling towers. History 1971–1994 On December 6, 1971, Houston Lighting & Power Co. (HL&P), the City of Austin, the City of San Antonio, and the Central Power and Light Co. (CPL) initiated a feasibility study of constructing a jointly-owned nuclear plant. The initial cost estimate for the plant was $974 million[citation needed] (equivalent to approximately $5,700,741,167 in 2015 dollars[5]). By mid-1973, HL&P and CPL had chosen Bay City as the site for the project and San Antonio had signed on as a partner in the project. Brown and Root was selected as the architect and construction company. On November 17, 1973 voters in Austin narrowly approved their city's participation[6] and the city signed onto the project on December 1. Austin held several more referendums through the years on whether to stay in the project or not.[7][8][9] An application for plant construction permits was submitted to the Atomic Energy Commission, now the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), in May 1974 and the NRC issued the permits on December 22, 1975. Construction started on December 22, 1975.[10] By 1978, the South Texas Project was two years behind schedule and had substantial cost overruns.[citation needed] A new management team had been put in place by HL&P in late 1978 to deal with the cost overruns, schedule delays and other challenges.[citation needed] However, events at Three Mile Island in March 1979 had a substantial impact on the nuclear industry including STNP.[citation needed] The new team again moved forward with developing a new budget and schedule. Brown and Root revised their completion schedule to June 1989 and the cost estimate to $4.4–$4.8 billion.[citation needed] HL&P executives consulted with its own project manager and concluded that Brown and Root was not making satisfactory progress and a decision was reached to terminate their role as architect/engineer but retain them as constructor.[citation needed] Brown and Root was relieved as architect/engineer in September 1981 and Bechtel Corporation contracted to replace them.[citation needed] Less than two months later, Brown and Root withdrew as the construction contractor and Ebasco Constructors was hired to replace them in February 1982 as constructor.[citation needed] Austin voters authorized the city council on November 3, 1981 to sell the city's 16 percent interest in the STP.[11] No buyers were found.[citation needed] Unit 1 reached initial criticality on March 8, 1988 and went into commercial operation on August 25.[12] Unit 2 reached initial criticality on March 12, 1989 and went into commercial operation on June 19.[13] In February 1993, both units had to be taken offline to resolve issues with the steam-driven auxiliary feedwater pumps. They were not back in service until March (Unit 1) and May (Unit 2) of 1994.[citation needed] The history of STNP is somewhat unusual since most nuclear plants that were in the early stages of engineering construction at the time of the Three Mile Island event were never completed.[citation needed] 2006–present On June 19, 2006, NRG Energy filed a letter of intent with the NRC to build two 1,358-MWe advanced boiling water reactors (ABWRs) at the South Texas Nuclear Project site.[14] South Texas Nuclear Project Partners CPS Energy and Austin Energy were not involved in the initial letter of intent and development plans.[citation needed] On September 24, 2007, NRG Energy filed an application with the NRC to build two Toshiba ABWRs at the South Texas Nuclear Project site.[14] It was the first application for a nuclear reactor submitted to the NRC since 1979. The proposed expansion would generate an additional 2700 MW of electrical generating capacity, which would double the capacity of the site.[15] The total estimated cost of constructing the two reactors is $10 billion, or $13 billion with financing, according to Steve Bartley, interim general manager at CPS Energy.[citation needed] In October 2009, main contractor Toshiba had informed CPS Energy that the cost would be "substantially greater," possibly up to $4 billion more. As a result of the escalating cost estimates for units 3 and 4,[16] in 2010 CPS Energy reached an agreement with NRG Energy to reduce CPS's stake in the new units from 50% to 7.625%. To that point, CPS Energy had invested $370 million in the expanded plant. CPS Energy's withdrawal from the project put the expansion into jeopardy.[citation needed] In October 2010, the South Texas Project announced that the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) had entered into an agreement with Nuclear Innovation North America (a joint venture between the reactor manufacturer, Toshiba, and plant partner NRG Energy) which was the largest of the two stakeholders in the proposed reactors, to purchase an initial 9.2375% stake in the expansion for $125 million, and $30 million for an option to purchase an additional stake in the new units for $125 million more (resulting in approximately 18% ownership by TEPCO, or 500 MW of generation capacity). The agreement was made conditional upon STNP securing construction loan guarantees from the United States Department of Energy.[17][18][19] On 19 April 2011, NRG announced in a conference call with shareholders, that they had decided to abandon the permitting process on the two new units due to the ongoing expense of planning and slow permitting process. Anti-nuclear campaigners alleged that the financial situation of new partner TEPCO, combined with the ongoing Fukushima nuclear accident were also key factors in the decision.[20] NRG has written off its investment of $331 million in the project.[21] Despite the April 2011 NRG announcement of the reactor's cancellation, the NRC continued the combined licensing process for the new reactors in October 2011.[22] It was unclear at the time why the reactor license application was proceeding. During early 2015 some pre-construction activities were performed on site and initial NRC documents listed the original targeted commercial operational dates as March 2015 for unit 3 and a year later for the other unit.[23] On February 9, 2016 the NRC approved the combined license.[24] Due to market conditions, no construction events occurred at that time. The two planned units do not currently have a planned construction date.[25] On February 15, 2021 during a major power outage that impacted much of the state of Texas, an automatic reactor trip shut South Texas Nuclear Generation Station Unit 1 due to low steam generator levels. According to a Nuclear Regulatory Commission report, the low steam generator levels were due to loss of feedwater pumps 11 and 13. However, Unit 2 and both units at the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant remained online during the power outage. Electricity production South Texas Project Electric Generating Station generated 21,920 GWh in 2022. Generation (MWh) of South Texas Project Electric Generating Station[26] Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total 2001 1,886,321 1,525,367 1,023,965 1,693,902 1,749,601 1,803,826 1,862,368 1,861,391 1,784,413 948,097 1,821,433 1,879,914 19,840,598 2002 1,877,631 1,694,952 1,874,294 1,802,364 1,853,569 1,651,816 1,804,722 1,863,231 1,809,080 961,912 648,839 1,207,192 19,049,602 2003 993,000 858,234 1,167,859 906,020 926,323 897,961 924,414 1,550,300 1,826,511 1,901,587 1,835,032 1,901,300 15,688,541 2004 1,794,208 1,783,984 1,866,066 967,940 1,898,881 1,833,986 1,888,035 1,886,885 1,832,462 1,898,705 1,846,256 1,874,559 21,371,967 2005 1,910,104 1,425,909 1,145,000 1,347,849 1,899,476 1,827,979 1,882,165 1,865,460 1,793,374 961,783 1,812,505 1,917,689 19,789,293 2006 1,918,500 1,734,226 1,916,180 1,848,924 1,902,066 1,835,603 1,894,140 1,889,118 1,754,581 949,107 1,751,295 1,974,529 21,368,269 2007 1,978,523 1,769,752 1,631,719 1,020,990 1,997,207 1,913,083 1,974,291 1,945,127 1,911,186 1,994,784 1,951,698 2,020,923 22,109,283 2008 2,027,749 1,894,252 1,857,380 1,059,644 1,996,808 1,911,071 1,970,008 1,968,743 1,883,018 1,091,075 1,804,680 2,028,321 21,492,749 2009 2,026,109 1,816,781 2,001,913 1,933,642 1,976,442 1,893,260 1,945,400 1,945,673 1,491,904 987,917 1,314,044 2,023,063 21,356,148 2010 1,901,689 1,616,544 1,878,021 959,782 1,894,264 1,905,405 1,965,866 1,889,669 1,908,067 2,000,442 1,180,689 2,026,343 21,126,781 2011 2,019,203 1,831,865 2,010,915 1,022,733 1,722,511 1,919,280 1,972,583 1,862,971 1,922,238 1,926,927 1,161,050 993,620 20,365,896 2012 1,000,676 932,122 954,597 1,191,768 1,996,956 1,916,509 1,972,364 1,968,957 1,917,986 1,618,514 1,046,510 2,027,134 18,544,093 2013 1,129,541 907,783 1,001,457 1,214,363 1,800,887 1,909,913 1,972,700 1,929,852 1,755,607 1,457,708 1,482,475 1,265,570 17,827,856 2014 1,996,545 1,803,728 1,467,789 949,590 965,031 1,819,148 1,938,482 1,937,255 1,886,353 1,964,871 1,929,852 1,993,023 20,651,667 2015 1,994,899 1,798,046 1,876,998 944,816 1,633,328 1,873,563 1,924,005 1,921,588 1,870,805 1,474,997 931,979 1,155,529 19,400,553 2016 1,867,890 1,853,605 1,971,083 1,899,518 1,791,929 1,869,512 1,921,476 1,921,320 1,863,053 1,199,327 1,551,143 1,984,447 21,694,303 2017 1,982,755 1,781,424 1,496,196 941,003 1,947,349 1,872,796 1,915,879 1,922,021 1,874,558 1,951,826 1,911,553 1,984,116 21,581,476 2018 1,990,840 1,791,895 1,716,130 1,026,669 1,948,056 1,862,498 1,926,877 1,926,702 1,862,974 1,104,073 1,542,275 1,988,643 20,687,632 2019 1,989,139 1,794,419 1,977,848 1,907,580 1,952,400 1,865,069 1,923,822 1,916,348 1,861,164 1,076,425 1,746,675 1,982,408 21,993,297 2020 1,981,132 1,854,898 1,386,851 1,267,605 1,965,407 1,887,512 1,941,500 1,925,033 1,879,619 1,963,043 1,910,507 1,995,650 21,958,757 2021 1,991,790 1,680,259 1,600,163 1,269,956 1,955,134 1,730,291 1,933,495 1,927,320 1,879,819 1,211,341 1,688,551 1,986,885 20,855,004 2022 1,996,621 1,804,682 1,990,353 1,908,367 1,953,488 1,870,425 1,924,485 1,927,102 1,859,877 1,164,373 1,533,211 1,986,901 21,919,885 2023 1,981,393 1,794,205 1,496,119 1,181,761 1985 whistleblowing case Nuclear whistleblower Ronald J. Goldstein was a supervisor employed by EBASCO, which was a major contractor for the construction of the South Texas plants. In the summer of 1985, Goldstein identified safety problems to SAFETEAM, an internal compliance program established by EBASCO and Houston Lighting, including noncompliance with safety procedures, the failure to issue safety compliance reports, and quality control violations affecting the safety of the plant.[citation needed] SAFETEAM was promoted as an independent safe haven for employees to voice their safety concerns. The two companies did not inform their employees that they did not believe complaints reported to SAFETEAM had any legal protection. After he filed his report to SAFETEAM, Goldstein was fired. Subsequently, Goldstein filed suit under federal nuclear whistleblower statutes.[citation needed] The U.S. Department of Labor ruled that his submissions to SAFETEAM were protected and his dismissal was invalid, a finding upheld by Labor Secretary Lynn Martin. The ruling was appealed and overturned by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that private programs offered no protection to whistleblowers. After Goldstein lost his case, Congress amended the federal nuclear whistleblower law to provide protection for reports made to internal systems and prevent retaliation against whistleblowers.[27][page needed] Ownership The STPEGS reactors are operated by the STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). Ownership is divided among Constellation Energy at 44 percent, San Antonio municipal utility CPS Energy at 40 percent and Austin Energy at 16 percent.[28] Surrounding population The Nuclear Regulatory Commission defines two emergency planning zones around nuclear power plants: a plume exposure pathway zone with a radius of 10 miles (16 km), concerned primarily with exposure to, and inhalation of, airborne radioactive contamination, and an ingestion pathway zone of about 50 miles (80 km), concerned primarily with ingestion of food and liquid contaminated by radioactivity.[29] In 2010, the population within 50 miles (80 km) of the station was 254,049, an increase of 10.2 percent since 2000; the population within 10 miles (16 km) was 5,651, a 2.4 percent decrease. Cities within 50 miles include Lake Jackson (40 miles to the city center) and Bay City.[30] Seismic risk The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's estimate of the risk each year of an earthquake intense enough to cause core damage to the reactor at South Texas was 1 in 158,730, according to an NRC study published in August 2010.[31][32] Reactor data The South Texas Generating Station consists of two operational reactors. A two reactor expansion (Unit 3 and Unit 4) was planned but later cancelled. Reactor unit[33] Reactor plant type Capacity (MW) Construction started Electricity grid connection Commercial operation Current license expiration Net Gross South Texas-1 Westinghouse 4-loop PWR 1280 1354 22 December 1975 30 March 1988 25 August 1988 20 August 2047 South Texas-2 11 April 1989 19 June 1989 15 December 2048 South Texas-3 (cancelled)[34] ABWR 1350 1400 License terminated (2018)[35] South Texas-4 (cancelled)[36] See also flagTexas portaliconEnergy portalNuclear technology portal List of largest power stations in the United States Largest nuclear power plants in the United States List of power stations in Texas References Johnston, Louis; Williamson, Samuel H. (2023). "What Was the U.S. GDP Then?". MeasuringWorth. Retrieved November 30, 2023. United States Gross Domestic Product deflator figures follow the MeasuringWorth series. NextAxiom, A message from (2023-07-05). "U.S. nuclear capacity factors: Resiliency and new realities". American Nuclear Society -- ANS. Retrieved 2023-07-05. "Reactor Details". PRIS. 1975-12-22. Retrieved 2023-07-05. "Reactor Details". PRIS. 1975-12-22. Retrieved 2023-07-05. 1634–1699: McCusker, J. J. (1997). How Much Is That in Real Money? A Historical Price Index for Use as a Deflator of Money Values in the Economy of the United States: Addenda et Corrigenda (PDF). American Antiquarian Society. 1700–1799: McCusker, J. J. (1992). How Much Is That in Real Money? A Historical Price Index for Use as a Deflator of Money Values in the Economy of the United States (PDF). American Antiquarian Society. 1800–present: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. "Consumer Price Index (estimate) 1800–". Retrieved February 29, 2024. "General Municipal Election: November 17, 1973" City of Austin "General Municipal Election: August 14, 1976" City of Austin "General Municipal Election: January 20, 1979" City of Austin "General Municipal Election: April 7, 1979" City of Austin Power Reactor Information System of the IAEA: South Texas "General Municipal Election: November 3, 1981" City of Austin "PRIS - Reactor Details". pris.iaea.org. Retrieved 2021-02-17. "PRIS - Reactor Details". pris.iaea.org. Retrieved 2021-02-17. "EPC Next Step In CPS Energy's Evaluation of Nuclear Option" CPS Energy "NRG Files First Full Application for U.S. Reactor" Bloomberg.com "$6.1 million spent to end nuclear deal" Express News CPS Energy STNP Expansion Termination Article "TEPCO Partners in STP Expansion" STP Press Release "CPS Energy sees need for new STP units". World Nuclear News. June 30, 2009. Retrieved 2009-06-28. "Nuclear cost estimate rises by as much as $4 billion". October 28, 2009. Retrieved 2009-10-28. "NRG ends project to build new nuclear reactors". The Dallas Morning New. April 19, 2011. Archived from the original on 2016-04-09. Retrieved 2015-03-14. Matthew L. Wald (April 19, 2011). "NRG Abandons Project for 2 Reactors in Texas". New York Times. "Licensing Board to Conduct Hearing Oct. 31 in Rockville, Md., on South Texas Nuclear Project New Nuclear Reactor Application" (PDF). US NRC Press Releases. US Federal Government. Retrieved 13 October 2011. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (October 29, 2013). "STP 3 & 4 Environmental Report-1.1.2.7 Proposed Dates for Major Activities". South Texas Project Units 3 & 4 COLA (Environmental Report), Rev. 10. Retrieved February 23, 2015. http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1331/ML13311B781.pdf "Regulators approve new nuclear reactors near Houston". 10 February 2016. feds-approve-new-nuclear-reactors-near-houston fuelfix.com,2016/02/09 "Electricity Data Browser". www.eia.gov. Retrieved 2023-01-07. Kohn, Stephen Martin (2011). The Whistleblower's Handbook: A Step-by-Step Guide to Doing What's Right and Protecting Yourself. Guilford, CT: Globe Pequot Press. pp. 116–18. ISBN 9780762774791. "About Us" South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company "Backgrounder on Emergency Preparedness at Nuclear Power Plants". Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Retrieved 2019-12-22. "Nuclear neighbors: Population rises near US reactors". NBC News. 2011-04-14. Retrieved 2023-07-05. Bill Dedman, "What are the odds? US nuke plants ranked by quake risk," NBC News, March 17, 2011 http://www.nbcnews.com/id/42103936 Accessed April 19, 2011. "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-05-25. Retrieved 2011-04-19. Power Reactor Information System of the IAEA: „United States of America: Nuclear Power Reactors- Alphabetic“ Power Reactor Information System of the IAEA: „Nuclear Power Reactor Details – SOUTH TEXAS-3“ https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/col/south-texas-project.html Issued Combined Licenses for South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4 by the NRC Power Reactor Information System of the IAEA: „Nuclear Power Reactor Details – SOUTH TEXAS-4“ Sources "Milestones". South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company. Retrieved Jul. 14, 2005. "CenterPoint Energy Historical Timeline". CenterPoint Energy. Retrieved Jul. 14, 2005. External links Energy Information Administration page vte Nuclear power in the United States NRC Region I (Northeast) Beaver Valley Calvert Cliffs FitzPatrick Ginna Hope Creek Limerick Millstone Nine Mile Point Peach Bottom Salem Seabrook Susquehanna NRC Region II (South) Browns Ferry Brunswick Catawba Farley Harris Hatch McGuire North Anna Oconee Robinson Sequoyah St. Lucie Summer Surry Turkey Point Vogtle Watts Bar NRC Region III (Midwest) Braidwood Byron Clinton Cook Davis–Besse Dresden Enrico Fermi LaSalle Monticello Palisades Perry Point Beach Prairie Island Quad Cities NRC Region IV (West) Arkansas Callaway Columbia Comanche Peak Cooper Diablo Canyon Grand Gulf Palo Verde River Bend South Texas Waterford Wolf Creek Converted Fort St. Vrain Midland Somerset Zimmer Closed ANPP MH-1A ML-1 PM-1 PM-3A SL-1 SM-1 SM-1A Big Rock Point Connecticut Yankee Crystal River CVTR DAEC EBR I EBR II Elk River Fermi 1 Fort Calhoun Fort St. Vrain Hallam Hanford Site Humboldt Bay Indian Point Kewaunee La Crosse Maine Yankee Millstone Unit 1 Oyster Creek Pathfinder Pilgrim Piqua Rancho Seco San Onofre Saxton Shippingport Shoreham Sodium Reactor Experiment Three Mile Island Trojan Vallecitos Vermont Yankee Yankee Rowe Zion Cancelled (incomplete list, whole plants only) Allens Creek Atlantic Bailly Barton Bell Bend Bellefonte Black Fox Blue Hills Bodega Bay CFPP, Idaho Cherokee Clinch River Douglas Point Erie Forked River Galena Greene County Hartsville Haven Lee Levy County Marble Hill MM-1 Montague Offshore Sears Isle South River Stanislaus Summer-2/3 Sundesert Victoria WPPSS 1 and 4 3 and 5 Yellow Creek Future North Anna-3 Turkey Point-6/7 Under construction Vogtle-3/4 Regions of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Anti-nuclear movement in the United States Nuclear history of the United States Nuclear reactor accidents in the United States Nuclear safety in the United States Categories: Energy infrastructure completed in 1988Energy infrastructure completed in 1989Buildings and structures in San AntonioBuildings and structures in Matagorda County, Texas1976 establishments in TexasNuclear power stations with proposed reactorsNuclear power plants in TexasNuclear power stations using advanced boiling water reactorsNuclear power stations using pressurized water reactorsCPS EnergyNRG Energy

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is the domestic intelligence and security service of the United States and its principal federal law enforcement agency. An agency of the United States Department of Justice, the FBI is also a member of the U.S. Intelligence Community and reports to both the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence.[3] A leading U.S. counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and criminal investigative organization, the FBI has jurisdiction over violations of more than 200 categories of federal crimes.[4][5] Although many of the FBI's functions are unique, its activities in support of national security are comparable to those of the British MI5 and NCA; the New Zealand GCSB and the Russian FSB. Unlike the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which has no law enforcement authority and is focused on intelligence collection abroad, the FBI is primarily a domestic agency, maintaining 56 field offices in major cities throughout the United States, and more than 400 resident agencies in smaller cities and areas across the nation. At an FBI field office, a senior-level FBI officer concurrently serves as the representative of the director of National Intelligence.[6][7] Despite its domestic focus, the FBI also maintains a significant international footprint, operating 60 Legal Attache (LEGAT) offices and 15 sub-offices in U.S. embassies and consulates across the globe. These foreign offices exist primarily for the purpose of coordination with foreign security services and do not usually conduct unilateral operations in the host countries.[8] The FBI can and does at times carry out secret activities overseas,[9] just as the CIA has a limited domestic function; these activities generally require coordination across government agencies. The FBI was established in 1908 as the Bureau of Investigation, the BOI or BI for short. Its name was changed to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 1935.[10] The FBI headquarters is the J. Edgar Hoover Building in Washington, D.C. The FBI has a List of the Top 10 criminals. Mission, priorities and budget FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (.pdf file) Mission The mission of the FBI is to "protect the American people and uphold the Constitution of the United States".[2][11] Priorities Currently, the FBI's top priorities are:[11] Protect the United States from terrorist attacks Protect the United States against foreign intelligence operations, espionage, and cyber operations Combat significant cybercriminal activity Combat public corruption at all levels Protect civil rights Combat transnational criminal enterprises Combat major white-collar crime Combat significant violent crime Budget In the fiscal year 2019, the Bureau's total budget was approximately $9.6 billion.[12] In the Authorization and Budget Request to Congress for fiscal year 2021,[13] the FBI asked for $9,800,724,000. Of that money, $9,748,829,000 would be used for Salaries and Expenses (S&E) and $51,895,000 for Construction.[2] The S&E program saw an increase of $199,673,000. History Background In 1896, the National Bureau of Criminal Identification was founded, providing agencies across the country with information to identify known criminals. The 1901 assassination of President William McKinley created a perception that the United States was under threat from anarchists. The Departments of Justice and Labor had been keeping records on anarchists for years, but President Theodore Roosevelt wanted more power to monitor them.[14][page needed] The Justice Department had been tasked with the regulation of interstate commerce since 1887, though it lacked the staff to do so. It had made little effort to relieve its staff shortage until the Oregon land fraud scandal at the turn of the 20th century. President Roosevelt instructed Attorney General Charles Bonaparte to organize an autonomous investigative service that would report only to the Attorney General.[15] Bonaparte reached out to other agencies, including the U.S. Secret Service, for personnel, investigators in particular. On May 27, 1908, Congress forbade this use of Treasury employees by the Justice Department, citing fears that the new agency would serve as a secret police department.[16] Again at Roosevelt's urging, Bonaparte moved to organize a formal Bureau of Investigation, which would then have its own staff of special agents.[14][page needed] Creation of BOI The Bureau of Investigation (BOI) was created on July 26, 1908.[17] Attorney General Bonaparte, using Department of Justice expense funds,[14] hired thirty-four people, including some veterans of the Secret Service,[18][19] to work for a new investigative agency. Its first "chief" (the title is now "director") was Stanley Finch. Bonaparte notified the Congress of these actions in December 1908.[14] The bureau's first official task was visiting and making surveys of the houses of prostitution in preparation for enforcing the "White Slave Traffic Act" or Mann Act, passed on June 25, 1910. In 1932, the bureau was renamed the United States Bureau of Investigation. Creation of FBI The following year, 1933, the BOI was linked to the Bureau of Prohibition and rechristened the Division of Investigation (DOI); it became an independent service within the Department of Justice in 1935.[18] In the same year, its name was officially changed from the Division of Investigation to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). J. Edgar Hoover as FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, FBI director from 1924 to 1972 J. Edgar Hoover served as FBI director from 1924 to 1972, a combined 48 years with the BOI, DOI, and FBI. He was chiefly responsible for creating the Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory, or the FBI Laboratory, which officially opened in 1932, as part of his work to professionalize investigations by the government. Hoover was substantially involved in most major cases and projects that the FBI handled during his tenure. But as detailed below, his tenure as Bureau director proved to be highly controversial, especially in its later years. After Hoover's death, Congress passed legislation that limited the tenure of future FBI directors to ten years. Early homicide investigations of the new agency included the Osage Indian murders. During the "War on Crime" of the 1930s, FBI agents apprehended or killed a number of notorious criminals who committed kidnappings, bank robberies, and murders throughout the nation, including John Dillinger, "Baby Face" Nelson, Kate "Ma" Barker, Alvin "Creepy" Karpis, and George "Machine Gun" Kelly. Other activities of its early decades focused on the scope and influence of the white supremacist group Ku Klux Klan, a group with which the FBI was evidenced to be working in the Viola Liuzzo lynching case. Earlier, through the work of Edwin Atherton, the BOI claimed to have successfully apprehended an entire army of Mexican neo-revolutionaries under the leadership of General Enrique Estrada in the mid-1920s, east of San Diego, California. Hoover began using wiretapping in the 1920s during Prohibition to arrest bootleggers.[20] In the 1927 case Olmstead v. United States, in which a bootlegger was caught through telephone tapping, the United States Supreme Court ruled that FBI wiretaps did not violate the Fourth Amendment as unlawful search and seizure, as long as the FBI did not break into a person's home to complete the tapping.[20] After Prohibition's repeal, Congress passed the Communications Act of 1934, which outlawed non-consensual phone tapping, but did allow bugging.[20] In the 1939 case Nardone v. United States, the court ruled that due to the 1934 law, evidence the FBI obtained by phone tapping was inadmissible in court.[20] After Katz v. United States (1967) overturned Olmstead, Congress passed the Omnibus Crime Control Act, allowing public authorities to tap telephones during investigations, as long as they obtained warrants beforehand.[20] National security Beginning in the 1940s and continuing into the 1970s, the bureau investigated cases of espionage against the United States and its allies. Eight Nazi agents who had planned sabotage operations against American targets were arrested, and six were executed (Ex parte Quirin) under their sentences. Also during this time, a joint US/UK code-breaking effort called "The Venona Project"—with which the FBI was heavily involved—broke Soviet diplomatic and intelligence communications codes, allowing the US and British governments to read Soviet communications. This effort confirmed the existence of Americans working in the United States for Soviet intelligence.[21] Hoover was administering this project, but he failed to notify the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of it until 1952. Another notable case was the arrest of Soviet spy Rudolf Abel in 1957.[22] The discovery of Soviet spies operating in the US motivated Hoover to pursue his longstanding concern with the threat he perceived from the American Left. Japanese American internment In 1939, the Bureau began compiling a custodial detention list with the names of those who would be taken into custody in the event of war with Axis nations. The majority of the names on the list belonged to Issei community leaders, as the FBI investigation built on an existing Naval Intelligence index that had focused on Japanese Americans in Hawaii and the West Coast, but many German and Italian nationals also found their way onto the FBI Index list.[23] Robert Shivers, head of the Honolulu office, obtained permission from Hoover to start detaining those on the list on December 7, 1941, while bombs were still falling over Pearl Harbor.[24][better source needed] Mass arrests and searches of homes (in most cases conducted without warrants) began a few hours after the attack, and over the next several weeks more than 5,500 Issei men were taken into FBI custody.[25] On February 19, 1942, President Franklin Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, authorizing the removal of Japanese Americans from the West Coast. FBI Director Hoover opposed the subsequent mass removal and confinement of Japanese Americans authorized under Executive Order 9066, but Roosevelt prevailed.[26] The vast majority went along with the subsequent exclusion orders, but in a handful of cases where Japanese Americans refused to obey the new military regulations, FBI agents handled their arrests.[24] The Bureau continued surveillance on Japanese Americans throughout the war, conducting background checks on applicants for resettlement outside camp, and entering the camps (usually without the permission of War Relocation Authority officials) and grooming informants to monitor dissidents and "troublemakers". After the war, the FBI was assigned to protect returning Japanese Americans from attacks by hostile white communities.[24] Sex deviates program According to Douglas M. Charles, the FBI's "sex deviates" program began on April 10, 1950, when J. Edgar Hoover forwarded to the White House, to the U.S. Civil Service Commission, and to branches of the armed services a list of 393 alleged federal employees who had allegedly been arrested in Washington, D.C., since 1947, on charges of "sexual irregularities". On June 20, 1951, Hoover expanded the program by issuing a memo establishing a "uniform policy for the handling of the increasing number of reports and allegations concerning present and past employees of the United States Government who assertedly [sic] are sex deviates." The program was expanded to include non-government jobs. According to Athan Theoharis, "In 1951 he [Hoover] had unilaterally instituted a Sex Deviates program to purge alleged homosexuals from any position in the federal government, from the lowliest clerk to the more powerful position of White house aide." On May 27, 1953, Executive Order 10450 went into effect. The program was expanded further by this executive order by making all federal employment of homosexuals illegal. On July 8, 1953, the FBI forwarded to the U.S. Civil Service Commission information from the sex deviates program. Between 1977 and 1978, 300,000 pages, collected between 1930 and the mid-1970s, in the sex deviates program were destroyed by FBI officials.[27][28][29] Civil rights movement During the 1950s and 1960s, FBI officials became increasingly concerned about the influence of civil rights leaders, whom they believed either had communist ties or were unduly influenced by communists or "fellow travelers". In 1956, for example, Hoover sent an open letter denouncing Dr. T. R. M. Howard, a civil rights leader, surgeon, and wealthy entrepreneur in Mississippi who had criticized FBI inaction in solving recent murders of George W. Lee, Emmett Till, and other blacks in the South.[30] The FBI carried out controversial domestic surveillance in an operation it called the COINTELPRO, from "COunter-INTELligence PROgram".[31] It was to investigate and disrupt the activities of dissident political organizations within the United States, including both militant and non-violent organizations. Among its targets was the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, a leading civil rights organization whose clergy leadership included the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr..[32] The "suicide letter",[33] mailed anonymously to King by the FBI The FBI frequently investigated King. In the mid-1960s, King began to criticize the Bureau for giving insufficient attention to the use of terrorism by white supremacists. Hoover responded by publicly calling King the most "notorious liar" in the United States.[34] In his 1991 memoir, Washington Post journalist Carl Rowan asserted that the FBI had sent at least one anonymous letter to King encouraging him to commit suicide.[35] Historian Taylor Branch documents an anonymous November 1964 "suicide package" sent by the Bureau that combined a letter to the civil rights leader telling him "You are done. There is only one way out for you." with audio recordings of King's sexual indiscretions.[36] In March 1971, the residential office of an FBI agent in Media, Pennsylvania was burgled by a group calling itself the Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI. Numerous files were taken and distributed to a range of newspapers, including The Harvard Crimson.[37] The files detailed the FBI's extensive COINTELPRO program, which included investigations into lives of ordinary citizens—including a black student group at a Pennsylvania military college and the daughter of Congressman Henry S. Reuss of Wisconsin.[37] The country was "jolted" by the revelations, which included assassinations of political activists, and the actions were denounced by members of the Congress, including House Majority Leader Hale Boggs.[37] The phones of some members of the Congress, including Boggs, had allegedly been tapped.[37] Kennedy's assassination When President John F. Kennedy was shot and killed, the jurisdiction fell to the local police departments until President Lyndon B. Johnson directed the FBI to take over the investigation.[38] To ensure clarity about the responsibility for investigation of homicides of federal officials, Congress passed a law in 1965 that included investigations of such deaths of federal officials, especially by homicide, within FBI jurisdiction.[39][40][41] Organized crime An FBI surveillance photograph of Joseph D. Pistone (aka Donnie Brasco), Benjamin "Lefty" Ruggiero and Edgar Robb (aka Tony Rossi), 1980s In response to organized crime, on August 25, 1953, the FBI created the Top Hoodlum Program. The national office directed field offices to gather information on mobsters in their territories and to report it regularly to Washington for a centralized collection of intelligence on racketeers.[42] After the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO Act, took effect, the FBI began investigating the former Prohibition-organized groups, which had become fronts for crime in major cities and small towns. All the FBI work was done undercover and from within these organizations, using the provisions provided in the RICO Act. Gradually the agency dismantled many of the groups. Although Hoover initially denied the existence of a National Crime Syndicate in the United States, the Bureau later conducted operations against known organized crime syndicates and families, including those headed by Sam Giancana and John Gotti. The RICO Act is still used today for all organized crime and any individuals who may fall under the Act's provisions. In 2003, a congressional committee called the FBI's organized crime informant program "one of the greatest failures in the history of federal law enforcement."[43] The FBI allowed four innocent men to be convicted of the March 1965 gangland murder of Edward "Teddy" Deegan in order to protect Vincent Flemmi, an FBI informant. Three of the men were sentenced to death (which was later reduced to life in prison), and the fourth defendant was sentenced to life in prison.[43] Two of the four men died in prison after serving almost 30 years, and two others were released after serving 32 and 36 years. In July 2007, U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner in Boston found that the Bureau had helped convict the four men using false witness accounts given by mobster Joseph Barboza. The U.S. Government was ordered to pay $100 million in damages to the four defendants.[44] Special FBI teams FBI SWAT agents in a training exercise In 1982, the FBI formed an elite unit[45] to help with problems that might arise at the 1984 Summer Olympics to be held in Los Angeles, particularly terrorism and major-crime. This was a result of the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, Germany, when terrorists murdered the Israeli athletes. Named the Hostage Rescue Team, or HRT, it acts as a dedicated FBI SWAT team dealing primarily with counter-terrorism scenarios. Unlike the special agents serving on local FBI SWAT teams, HRT does not conduct investigations. Instead, HRT focuses solely on additional tactical proficiency and capabilities. Also formed in 1984 was the Computer Analysis and Response Team, or CART.[46] From the end of the 1980s to the early 1990s, the FBI reassigned more than 300 agents from foreign counter-intelligence duties to violent crime, and made violent crime the sixth national priority. With cuts to other well-established departments, and because terrorism was no longer considered a threat after the end of the Cold War,[46] the FBI assisted local and state police forces in tracking fugitives who had crossed state lines, which is a federal offense. The FBI Laboratory helped develop DNA testing, continuing its pioneering role in identification that began with its fingerprinting system in 1924. Notable efforts in the 1990s An FBI agent tags the cockpit voice recorder from EgyptAir Flight 990 on the deck of the USS Grapple (ARS 53) at the crash site on November 13, 1999. On May 1, 1992, FBI SWAT and HRT personnel in Los Angeles County, California aided local officials in securing peace within the area during the 1992 Los Angeles riots. HRT operators, for instance, spent 10 days conducting vehicle-mounted patrols throughout Los Angeles, before returning to Virginia.[47] Between 1993 and 1996, the FBI increased its counter-terrorism role following the first 1993 World Trade Center bombing in New York City, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and the arrest of the Unabomber in 1996. Technological innovation and the skills of FBI Laboratory analysts helped ensure that the three cases were successfully prosecuted.[48] However, Justice Department investigations into the FBI's roles in the Ruby Ridge and Waco incidents were found to have been obstructed by agents within the Bureau. During the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, Georgia, the FBI was criticized for its investigation of the Centennial Olympic Park bombing. It has settled a dispute with Richard Jewell, who was a private security guard at the venue, along with some media organizations,[49] in regard to the leaking of his name during the investigation; this had briefly led to his being wrongly suspected of the bombing. After Congress passed the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, 1994), the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA, 1996), and the Economic Espionage Act (EEA, 1996), the FBI followed suit and underwent a technological upgrade in 1998, just as it did with its CART team in 1991. Computer Investigations and Infrastructure Threat Assessment Center (CITAC) and the National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) were created to deal with the increase in Internet-related problems, such as computer viruses, worms, and other malicious programs that threatened U.S. operations. With these developments, the FBI increased its electronic surveillance in public safety and national security investigations, adapting to the telecommunications advancements that changed the nature of such problems. September 11 attacks September 11 attacks at the Pentagon During the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center, FBI agent Leonard W. Hatton Jr. was killed during the rescue effort while helping the rescue personnel evacuate the occupants of the South Tower, and he stayed when it collapsed. Within months after the attacks, FBI Director Robert Mueller, who had been sworn in a week before the attacks, called for a re-engineering of FBI structure and operations. He made countering every federal crime a top priority, including the prevention of terrorism, countering foreign intelligence operations, addressing cybersecurity threats, other high-tech crimes, protecting civil rights, combating public corruption, organized crime, white-collar crime, and major acts of violent crime.[50] In February 2001, Robert Hanssen was caught selling information to the Russian government. It was later learned that Hanssen, who had reached a high position within the FBI, had been selling intelligence since as early as 1979. He pleaded guilty to espionage and received a life sentence in 2002, but the incident led many to question the security practices employed by the FBI. There was also a claim that Hanssen might have contributed information that led to the September 11, 2001, attacks.[51] The 9/11 Commission's final report on July 22, 2004, stated that the FBI and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) were both partially to blame for not pursuing intelligence reports that could have prevented the September 11 attacks. In its most damning assessment, the report concluded that the country had "not been well served" by either agency and listed numerous recommendations for changes within the FBI.[52] While the FBI did accede to most of the recommendations, including oversight by the new director of National Intelligence, some former members of the 9/11 Commission publicly criticized the FBI in October 2005, claiming it was resisting any meaningful changes.[53] On July 8, 2007, The Washington Post published excerpts from UCLA Professor Amy Zegart's book Spying Blind: The CIA, the FBI, and the Origins of 9/11.[54] The Post reported, from Zegart's book, that government documents showed that both the CIA and the FBI had missed 23 potential chances to disrupt the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The primary reasons for the failures included: agency cultures resistant to change and new ideas; inappropriate incentives for promotion; and a lack of cooperation between the FBI, CIA, and the rest of the United States Intelligence Community. The book blamed the FBI's decentralized structure, which prevented effective communication and cooperation among different FBI offices. The book suggested that the FBI had not evolved into an effective counter-terrorism or counter-intelligence agency, due in large part to deeply ingrained agency cultural resistance to change. For example, FBI personnel practices continued to treat all staff other than special agents as support staff, classifying intelligence analysts alongside the FBI's auto mechanics and janitors.[55] Faulty bullet analysis For over 40 years, the FBI crime lab in Quantico had believed that lead alloys used in bullets had unique chemical signatures. It was analyzing the bullets with the goal of matching them chemically, not only to a single batch of ammunition coming out of a factory, but also to a single box of bullets. The National Academy of Sciences conducted an 18-month independent review of comparative bullet-lead analysis. In 2003, its National Research Council published a report whose conclusions called into question 30 years of FBI testimony. It found the analytic model used by the FBI for interpreting results was deeply flawed, and the conclusion, that bullet fragments could be matched to a box of ammunition, was so overstated that it was misleading under the rules of evidence. One year later, the FBI decided to stop conducting bullet lead analyses.[56] After a 60 Minutes/The Washington Post investigation in November 2007, two years later, the Bureau agreed to identify, review, and release all pertinent cases, and notify prosecutors about cases in which faulty testimony was given.[57] Technology In 2012, the FBI formed the National Domestic Communications Assistance Center to develop technology for assisting law enforcement with technical knowledge regarding communication services, technologies, and electronic surveillance.[58] January 6th United States Capitol attack An FBI informant, who participated in the January 6, 2021 attack on democratic institutions in Washington D.C. later testified in support of the Proud boys, who were part of the plot. Revelations about the informant raised fresh questions about intelligence failures by the FBI before the riot. According to the Brennan Center, and Senate committees, the FBI's response to white supremacist violence was "woefully inadequate". The FBI has long been suspected to have turned a blind eye towards right-wing extremists while disseminating "conspiracy theories" on the origin of COVID-19.[59][60][61] Organization Organizational structure FBI field divisions map Organization chart for the FBI as of July 15, 2014 Redacted policy guide for the Counterterrorism Division (part of the FBI National Security Branch) The FBI is organized into functional branches and the Office of the Director, which contains most administrative offices. An executive assistant director manages each branch. Each branch is then divided into offices and divisions, each headed by an assistant director. The various divisions are further divided into sub-branches, led by deputy assistant directors. Within these sub-branches, there are various sections headed by section chiefs. Section chiefs are ranked analogous to special agents in charge. Four of the branches report to the deputy director while two report to the associate director. The main branches of the FBI are:[62] FBI Intelligence Branch Executive Assistant Director: Stephen Laycock FBI National Security Branch Executive Assistant Director: John Brown FBI Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services Branch Executive Assistant Director: Terry Wade FBI Science and Technology Branch Executive Assistant Director: Darrin E. Jones FBI Information and Technology Branch Executive Assistant Director: Michael Gavin (Acting) FBI Human Resources Branch Executive Assistant Director: Jeffrey S. Sallet Each branch focuses on different tasks, and some focus on more than one. Here are some of the tasks that different branches are in charge of: FBI Headquarters Washington D.C. National Security Branch (NSB)[2][63] Counterintelligence Division (CD) Counterterrorism Division (CTD) Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate (WMDD) High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG) Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) Intelligence Branch (IB)[2] Directorate of Intelligence (DI) Office of Partner Engagement (OPE) Office of Private Sector FBI Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services Branch (CCRSB)[2][64] Criminal Investigation Division (CID) Violent Crime Section (VCS) Child Exploitation Operational Unit (CEOU) a joint unit between the FBI and U.S. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) - Located in Boston Mass. Violent Crimes Against Children Section (VCACS)[65] Major Case Coordination Unit (MCCU)[66] Cyber Division (CyD) Critical Incident Response Group (CIRG) International Operation Division (IOD) Victim Services Division Science and Technology Branch (STB)[2][64][67] Operational Technology Division (OTD) Laboratory Division (LD) Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIA) Division Other Headquarter Offices Information and Technology Branch (ITB)[2][68][64] IT Enterprise Services Division (ITESD) IT Applications and Data Division (ITADD) IT Infrastructure Division (ITID) IT Management Division IT Engineering Division IT Services Division Human Resources Branch (HRB)[2][64] Training Division (TD) Human Resources Division (HRD) Security Division (SecD) Administrative and financial management support[2] Facilities and Logistics Services Division (FLSD) Finance Division (FD) Records Management Division (RMD) Resource Planning Office (RPO) Inspection Division (InSD) Office of the Director The Office of the Director serves as the central administrative organ of the FBI. The office provides staff support functions (such as finance and facilities management) to the five function branches and the various field divisions. The office is managed by the FBI associate director, who also oversees the operations of both the Information and Technology and Human Resources Branches. Senior staff[62] Deputy director Associate deputy director Chief of staff Office of the Director[62] Finance and Facilities Division Information Management Division Insider Threat Office Inspection Division Office of the Chief Information Officer Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA) Office of Diversity and Inclusion Office of Equal Employment Opportunity Affairs (OEEOA) Office of the General Counsel (OGC) Office of Integrity and Compliance (OIC) Office of Internal Auditing Office of the Ombudsman Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) Office of Public Affairs (OPA) Resource Planning Office An FBI agent at a crime scene Rank structure The following is a listing of the rank structure found within the FBI (in ascending order):[69][failed verification] Field agents New agent trainee Special agent Senior special agent Supervisory special agent Assistant special agent-in-charge (ASAC) Special agent-in-charge (SAC) James Comey speaks at the White House following his nomination by President Barack Obama to be the next director of the FBI, June 21, 2013. FBI management Deputy assistant director Assistant director Associate executive assistant director Executive assistant director Associate deputy director Deputy chief of staff Chief of staff and special counsel to the director Deputy director Director Legal authority FBI badge and service pistol, a Glock Model 22, .40 S&W caliber The FBI's mandate is established in Title 28 of the United States Code (U.S. Code), Section 533, which authorizes the Attorney General to "appoint officials to detect and prosecute crimes against the United States."[70] Other federal statutes give the FBI the authority and responsibility to investigate specific crimes. The FBI's chief tool against organized crime is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The FBI is also charged with the responsibility of enforcing compliance of the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964 and investigating violations of the act in addition to prosecuting such violations with the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). The FBI also shares concurrent jurisdiction with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in the enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. The USA PATRIOT Act increased the powers allotted to the FBI, especially in wiretapping and monitoring of Internet activity. One of the most controversial provisions of the act is the so-called sneak and peek provision, granting the FBI powers to search a house while the residents are away, and not requiring them to notify the residents for several weeks afterward. Under the PATRIOT Act's provisions, the FBI also resumed inquiring into the library records[71] of those who are suspected of terrorism (something it had supposedly not done since the 1970s). In the early 1980s, Senate hearings were held to examine FBI undercover operations in the wake of the Abscam controversy, which had allegations of entrapment of elected officials. As a result, in the following years a number of guidelines were issued to constrain FBI activities. Information obtained through an FBI investigation is presented to the appropriate U.S. Attorney or Department of Justice official, who decides if prosecution or other action is warranted. The FBI often works in conjunction with other federal agencies, including the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in seaport and airport security,[72] and the National Transportation Safety Board in investigating airplane crashes and other critical incidents. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) has nearly the same amount of investigative manpower as the FBI and investigates the largest range of crimes. In the wake of the September 11 attacks, then–Attorney General Ashcroft assigned the FBI as the designated lead organization in terrorism investigations after the creation of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. HSI and the FBI are both integral members of the Joint Terrorism Task Force. Indian reservations FBI Director James Comey visiting the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation in North Dakota in June 2016 The federal government has the primary responsibility for investigating[73] and prosecuting serious crime on Indian reservations.[74] There are 565 federally recognized American Indian Tribes in the United States, and the FBI has federal law enforcement responsibility on nearly 200 Indian reservations. This federal jurisdiction is shared concurrently with the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Justice Services (BIA-OJS). Located within the FBI's Criminal Investigative Division, the Indian Country Crimes Unit (ICCU) is responsible for developing and implementing strategies, programs, and policies to address identified crime problems in Indian Country (IC) for which the FBI has responsibility. — Overview, Indian Country Crime[75] The FBI does not specifically list crimes in Native American land as one of its priorities.[76] Often serious crimes have been either poorly investigated or prosecution has been declined. Tribal courts can impose sentences of up to three years, under certain restrictions.[77][78] Infrastructure The J. Edgar Hoover Building, FBI headquarters FBI Mobile Command Center, Washington Field Office The FBI is headquartered at the J. Edgar Hoover Building in Washington, D.C., with 56 field offices[79] in major cities across the United States. The FBI also maintains over 400 resident agencies across the United States, as well as over 50 legal attachés at United States embassies and consulates. Many specialized FBI functions are located at facilities in Quantico, Virginia, as well as a "data campus" in Clarksburg, West Virginia, where 96 million sets of fingerprints "from across the United States are stored, along with others collected by American authorities from prisoners in Saudi Arabia and Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan."[80] The FBI is in process of moving its Records Management Division, which processes Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, to Winchester, Virginia.[81] According to The Washington Post, the FBI "is building a vast repository controlled by people who work in a top-secret vault on the fourth floor of the J. Edgar Hoover Building in Washington. This one stores the profiles of tens of thousands of Americans and legal residents who are not accused of any crime. What they have done is appear to be acting suspiciously to a town sheriff, a traffic cop or even a neighbor."[80] The FBI Laboratory, established with the formation of the BOI,[82] did not appear in the J. Edgar Hoover Building until its completion in 1974. The lab serves as the primary lab for most DNA, biological, and physical work. Public tours of FBI headquarters ran through the FBI laboratory workspace before the move to the J. Edgar Hoover Building. The services the lab conducts include Chemistry, Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), Computer Analysis and Response, DNA Analysis, Evidence Response, Explosives, Firearms and Tool marks, Forensic Audio, Forensic Video, Image Analysis, Forensic Science Research, Forensic Science Training, Hazardous Materials Response, Investigative and Prospective Graphics, Latent Prints, Materials Analysis, Questioned Documents, Racketeering Records, Special Photographic Analysis, Structural Design, and Trace Evidence.[83] The services of the FBI Laboratory are used by many state, local, and international agencies free of charge. The lab also maintains a second lab at the FBI Academy. The FBI Academy, located in Quantico, Virginia, is home to the communications and computer laboratory the FBI utilizes. It is also where new agents are sent for training to become FBI special agents. Going through the 21-week course is required for every special agent.[84] First opened for use in 1972, the facility is located on 385 acres (156 hectares) of woodland. The Academy trains state and local law enforcement agencies, which are invited to the law enforcement training center. The FBI units that reside at Quantico are the Field and Police Training Unit, Firearms Training Unit, Forensic Science Research and Training Center, Technology Services Unit (TSU), Investigative Training Unit, Law Enforcement Communication Unit, Leadership and Management Science Units (LSMU), Physical Training Unit, New Agents' Training Unit (NATU), Practical Applications Unit (PAU), the Investigative Computer Training Unit and the "College of Analytical Studies". The FBI Academy, located in Quantico, Virginia In 2000, the FBI began the Trilogy project to upgrade its outdated information technology (IT) infrastructure. This project, originally scheduled to take three years and cost around $380 million, ended up over budget and behind schedule.[85] Efforts to deploy modern computers and networking equipment were generally successful, but attempts to develop new investigation software, outsourced to Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), were not. Virtual Case File, or VCF, as the software was known, was plagued by poorly defined goals, and repeated changes in management.[86] In January 2005, more than two years after the software was originally planned for completion, the FBI officially abandoned the project. At least $100 million (and much more by some estimates) was spent on the project, which never became operational. The FBI has been forced to continue using its decade-old Automated Case Support system, which IT experts consider woefully inadequate. In March 2005, the FBI announced it was beginning a new, more ambitious software project, code-named Sentinel, which they expected to complete by 2009.[87] The FBI Field Office in Chelsea, Massachusetts Carnivore was an electronic eavesdropping software system implemented by the FBI during the Clinton administration; it was designed to monitor email and electronic communications. After prolonged negative coverage in the press, the FBI changed the name of its system from "Carnivore" to "DCS1000". DCS is reported to stand for "Digital Collection System"; the system has the same functions as before. The Associated Press reported in mid-January 2005 that the FBI essentially abandoned the use of Carnivore in 2001, in favor of commercially available software, such as NarusInsight. The Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division[88] is located in Clarksburg, West Virginia. Organized beginning in 1991, the office opened in 1995 as the youngest agency division. The complex is the length of three football fields. It provides a main repository for information in various data systems. Under the roof of the CJIS are the programs for the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR), Fingerprint Identification, Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS), NCIC 2000, and the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). Many state and local agencies use these data systems as a source for their own investigations and contribute to the database using secure communications. FBI provides these tools of sophisticated identification and information services to local, state, federal, and international law enforcement agencies. The FBI heads the National Virtual Translation Center, which provides "timely and accurate translations of foreign intelligence for all elements of the Intelligence Community."[89] In June 2021, the FBI held a groundbreaking for its planned FBI Innovation Center, set to be built in Huntsville, Alabama. The Innovation Center is to be part of a large, college-like campus costing a total of $1.3 billion in Redstone Arsenal and will act as a center for cyber threat intelligence, data analytics, and emerging threat training.[90] Personnel An FBI Evidence Response Team[clarification needed] Agents in training on the FBI Academy firing range As of December 31, 2009, the FBI had a total of 33,852 employees. That includes 13,412 special agents and 20,420 support professionals, such as intelligence analysts, language specialists, scientists, information technology specialists, and other professionals.[91] The Officer Down Memorial Page provides the biographies of 86 FBI agents who have died in the line of duty from 1925 to February 2021.[92] Hiring process To apply to become an FBI agent, one must be between the ages of 23 and 37, unless one is a preference-eligible veteran, in which case one may apply after age 37.[93] The applicant must also hold U.S. citizenship, be of high moral character, have a clean record, and hold at least a four-year bachelor's degree. At least three years of professional work experience prior to application is also required. All FBI employees require a Top Secret (TS) security clearance, and in many instances, employees need a TS/SCI (Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information) clearance.[94] To obtain a security clearance, all potential FBI personnel must pass a series of Single Scope Background Investigations (SSBI), which are conducted by the Office of Personnel Management.[95] Special agent candidates also have to pass a Physical Fitness Test (PFT), which includes a 300-meter run, one-minute sit-ups, maximum push-ups, and a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) run. Personnel must pass a polygraph test with questions including possible drug use.[96] Applicants who fail polygraphs may not gain employment with the FBI.[97] Up until 1975, the FBI had a minimum height requirement of 5 feet 7 inches (170 cm).[98] BOI and FBI directors Main article: Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI directors are appointed (nominated) by the President of the United States and must be confirmed by the United States Senate to serve a term of office of ten years, subject to resignation or removal by the President at his/her discretion before their term ends. Additional terms are allowed following the same procedure. J. Edgar Hoover, appointed by President Calvin Coolidge in 1924, was by far the longest-serving director, serving until his death in 1972. In 1968, Congress passed legislation, as part of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, requiring Senate confirmation of appointments of future directors.[99] As the incumbent, this legislation did not apply to Hoover. The last FBI director was Andrew McCabe. The current FBI director is Christopher A. Wray, appointed by President Donald Trump. The FBI director is responsible for the day-to-day operations at the FBI. Along with the deputy director, the director makes sure cases and operations are handled correctly. The director also is in charge of making sure the leadership in the FBI field offices is staffed with qualified agents. Before the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act was passed in the wake of the September 11 attacks, the FBI director would directly brief the President of the United States on any issues that arise from within the FBI. Since then, the director now reports to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), who in turn reports to the President. Firearms A Glock 22 pistol in .40 S&W caliber Upon qualification, an FBI special agent is issued a full-size Glock 22 or compact Glock 23 semi-automatic pistol, both of which are chambered in the .40 S&W cartridge. In May 1997, the FBI officially adopted the Glock, in .40 S&W, for general agent use, and first issued it to New Agent Class 98-1 in October 1997. At present, the Glock 23 "FG&R" (finger groove and rail; either 3rd generation or "Gen4") is the issue sidearm.[100] New agents are issued firearms, on which they must qualify, on successful completion of their training at the FBI Academy. The Glock 26 (subcompact 9 mm Parabellum), Glock 23 and Glock 27 (.40 S&W compact and subcompact, respectively) are authorized as secondary weapons. Special agents are also authorized to purchase and qualify with the Glock 21 in .45 ACP.[101] Special agents of the FBI Hostage Rescue Team (HRT) and regional SWAT teams are issued the Springfield Armory Professional Model 1911 pistol in .45 ACP.[102][103][104] In June 2016, the FBI awarded Glock a contract for new handguns. Unlike the currently issued .40 S&W chambered Glock pistols, the new Glocks will be chambered for 9 mm Parabellum. The contract is for the full-size Glock 17M and the compact Glock 19M. The "M" means the Glocks have been modified to meet government standards specified by a 2015 government request for proposal.[105][106][107][108][109] Publications Publication following the January 6 United States Capitol attack The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin is published monthly by the FBI Law Enforcement Communication Unit,[110] with articles of interest to state and local law enforcement personnel. First published in 1932 as Fugitives Wanted by Police,[111] the FBI Law Bulletin covers topics including law enforcement technology and issues, such as crime mapping and use of force, as well as recent criminal justice research, and ViCAP alerts, on wanted suspects and key cases. The FBI also publishes some reports for both law enforcement personnel as well as regular citizens covering topics including law enforcement, terrorism, cybercrime, white-collar crime, violent crime, and statistics.[112] However, the vast majority of federal government publications covering these topics are published by the Office of Justice Programs agencies of the United States Department of Justice, and disseminated through the National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Crime statistics During the 1920s the FBI began issuing crime reports by gathering numbers from local police departments.[113] Due to limitations of this system that were discovered during the 1960s and 1970s—victims often simply did not report crimes to the police in the first place—the Department of Justice developed an alternative method of tallying crime, the victimization survey.[113] Uniform Crime Reports Main article: Uniform Crime Reports The Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) compile data from over 17,000 law enforcement agencies across the country. They provide detailed data regarding the volume of crimes to include arrest, clearance (or closing a case), and law enforcement officer information. The UCR focuses its data collection on violent crimes, hate crimes, and property crimes.[112] Created in the 1920s, the UCR system has not proven to be as uniform as its name implies. The UCR data only reflect the most serious offense in the case of connected crimes and has a very restrictive definition of rape. Since about 93% of the data submitted to the FBI is in this format, the UCR stands out as the publication of choice as most states require law enforcement agencies to submit this data. Preliminary Annual Uniform Crime Report for 2006 was released on June 4, 2006. The report shows violent crime offenses rose 1.3%, but the number of property crime offenses decreased 2.9% compared to 2005.[114] National Incident-Based Reporting System Main article: National Incident-Based Reporting System The National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) crime statistics system aims to address limitations inherent in UCR data. The system is used by law enforcement agencies in the United States for collecting and reporting data on crimes. Local, state, and federal agencies generate NIBRS data from their records management systems. Data is collected on every incident and arrest in the Group A offense category. The Group A offenses are 46 specific crimes grouped in 22 offense categories. Specific facts about these offenses are gathered and reported in the NIBRS system. In addition to the Group A offenses, eleven Group B offenses are reported with only the arrest information. The NIBRS system is in greater detail than the summary-based UCR system. As of 2004, 5,271 law enforcement agencies submitted NIBRS data. That amount represents 20% of the United States population and 16% of the crime statistics data collected by the FBI. eGuardian eGuardian is the name of an FBI system, launched in January 2009, to share tips about possible terror threats with local police agencies. The program aims to get law enforcement at all levels sharing data quickly about suspicious activity and people.[115] eGuardian enables near real-time sharing and tracking of terror information and suspicious activities with local, state, tribal, and federal agencies. The eGuardian system is a spin-off of a similar but classified tool called Guardian that has been used inside the FBI, and shared with vetted partners since 2005.[116] Controversies Main article: List of FBI controversies Throughout its history, the FBI has been the subject of many controversies, both at home and abroad. Files on Puerto Rican independence advocates – Congressman Luiz Gutierrez revealed that Pedro Albizu Campos and his Nationalist political party had been watched for a decade-long period in the 1930s.[117] The Whitey Bulger case – The FBI was, and continues to be, criticized for its handling of Boston criminal Whitey Bulger. As a result of Bulger acting as an informant, the agency turned a blind eye to his activities as an exchange.[118] Latin America – For decades during the Cold War, the FBI placed agents to monitor the governments of Caribbean and Latin American nations.[119] Domestic surveillance – In 1985, it was found that the FBI had made use of surveillance devices on numerous American citizens between 1940 and 1960.[120] Robert Hanssen – In what is described by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) as "possibly the worst intelligence disaster in U.S. history".[121] Hanssen managed to evade the FBI as he simultaneously sold thousands of classified American documents to Soviet intelligence operatives. Viola Liuzzo – Gary Thomas Rowe, an FBI informant who at the time was also an active member of the Ku Klux Klan, assisted in the murder of Viola Liuzzo (a civil rights activist) in 1965, and afterwards, defamatory rumors were spread by the Bureau about the victim.[122][123] Ruby Ridge (1992) was a shootout between the FBI and Randy Weaver over his failure to appear for weapons charges.[124] Waco siege (1993) was a failed raid by the ATF that resulted in the death of 4 ATF agents and 6 Branch Davidians. The FBI and US military got involved with the 51 day siege that followed. The building ended up burning down killing 76 including 26 children. This is what motivated Timothy McVeigh (along with Ruby Ridge) to carry out the Oklahoma City bombing (1995).[125] Associated Press (AP) impersonation case – A Bureau agent, masquerading as an AP journalist, placed surveillance software in the personal computer of a minor. This resulted in a series of conflicts between the news agency and the FBI.[126][127] Stoneman Douglas High School shooting – A statement from the FBI confirmed that it had failed to act on a tip warning of the possibility of the shooting over a month prior to its occurrence, which may have prevented the tragedy outright.[128] Specific practices include: Internal investigations of shootings – A professor of criminal justice at the University of Nebraska Omaha suggested that FBI internal reports found a questionably high number of weapon discharges by its agents to be justified.[129] Covert operations on political groups – Political groups deemed disruptive have been investigated and discredited by the FBI in the aim of "protecting national security, preventing violence, and maintaining the existing social and political order."[130] FBI surveillance since 2010 – In the years since 2010, it has been uncovered by various civil liberties groups (such as the American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU]) that the FBI earmarked disproportionate resources for the surveillance of left-leaning movements and political organizations.[131] The FBI has also committed several breaches of the First Amendment in this time.[132][133] Files on U.S. citizens – The Bureau kept files on certain individuals for varying reasons and lengths of time, notably, Elvis Presley, Frank Sinatra, John Denver. Entrapment - The FBI has been criticized for its use of entrapment, where agent provocateurs attempt to incite individuals into committing illegal acts.[134] Notable critics of FBI entrapment such as Human Rights Watch and the ACLU note that entrapment cases often target impoverished individuals or those with mental or emotional disabilities and that these cases have an adverse effect on marginalized groups.[135][136] Media portrayal Main article: FBI portrayal in media The popular TV series The X-Files depicts the fictional FBI Special Agents Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson) and Fox Mulder (David Duchovny) who investigate paranormal phenomena. The FBI has been frequently depicted in popular media since the 1930s. The bureau has participated to varying degrees, which has ranged from direct involvement in the creative process of film or TV series development, to providing consultation on operations and closed cases.[137] A few of the notable portrayals of the FBI on television are the series The X-Files, which started in 1993 and concluded its eleventh season in early 2018, and concerned investigations into paranormal phenomena by five fictional special agents, and the fictional Counter Terrorist Unit (CTU) agency in the TV drama 24, which is patterned after the FBI Counterterrorism Division. The 1991 movie Point Break depicts an undercover FBI agent who infiltrated a gang of bank robbers. The 1997 movie Donnie Brasco is based on the true story of undercover FBI agent Joseph D. Pistone infiltrating the Mafia. The 2005–2020 television series Criminal Minds, that follows the team members of the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit (BAU) in the pursuit of serial killers. The 2017 TV series Riverdale where one of the main characters is an FBI agent. The 2015 TV series Quantico, titled after the location of the Bureau's training facility, deals with probationary and special agents, not all of whom, within the show's format, may be fully reliable or even trustworthy. The 2018 series FBI, set in NYC that follows the personal and professional lives of the agents assigned to 26 Federal Plaza (NYC FBI field office). FBI's first spin-off titled FBI: Most Wanted (2019), follows the FBI's Fugitive Task Force in chasing down the US's most wanted criminals, and the second spin-off, FBI: International (2021), follows the FBI's International Fly Team that goes where ever they are needed in the world to protect the US's interests. Notable FBI personnel Edwin Atherton Ed Bethune James Comey Alaska P. Davidson Sibel Edmonds W. Mark Felt James R. Fitzgerald Robert Hanssen J. Edgar Hoover Lon Horiuchi John McClurg Richard Miller Robert Mueller Eric O'Neill John P. O'Neill Joseph D. Pistone Melvin Purvis Coleen Rowley Ali Soufan Sue Thomas Clyde Tolson Frederic Whitehurst See also flagUnited States portaliconLaw portaliconPolitics portal Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) Law enforcement in the United States List of United States state and local law enforcement agencies State bureau of investigation United States Marshals Service (USMS) FBI Honorary Medals FBI Victims Identification Project History of espionage Inspector Society of Former Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation References "About: How many people work for the FBI?". FBI. Archived from the original on January 11, 2021. Retrieved January 10, 2021. "FY 2021 Authorization And Budget Request to Congress". United States Justice Department. February 2020. Archived from the original on December 20, 2021. Retrieved January 9, 2021. "Our Strength Lies in Who We Are". intelligence.gov. Archived from the original on August 10, 2014. Retrieved August 4, 2014. "How does the FBI differ from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)?". Federal Bureau of Investigation. Archived from the original on September 4, 2017. Retrieved November 2, 2017. "Federal Bureau of Investigation – Quick Facts". Federal Bureau of Investigation. Archived from the original on October 17, 2011. Statement Before the House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (Archived June 23, 2016, at the Wayback Machine), Federal Bureau of Investigation, March 26, 2014 "FBI gets a broader role in coordinating domestic intelligence activities" (Archived July 16, 2017, at the Wayback Machine), The Washington Post, June 19, 2012 "Overview of the Legal Attaché Program" (Archived March 13, 2016, at the Wayback Machine), Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved: March 25, 2015. Spies Clash as FBI Joins CIA Overseas: Sources Talk of Communication Problem in Terrorism Role (Archived April 18, 2015, at the Wayback Machine), Associated Press via NBC News, February 15, 2005 "A Byte Out of History – How the FBI Got Its Name". FBI. Archived from the original on March 31, 2016. Retrieved February 9, 2021. "Mission & Priorities". Federal Bureau of Investigation. Archived from the original on April 17, 2020. Retrieved January 9, 2021. "Mission & Priorities". Federal Bureau of Investigation. Archived from the original on July 11, 2019. Retrieved July 29, 2019. "FY 2021 Authorization and Budget Request to Congress". justice.gov. Archived from the original on December 20, 2021. Retrieved January 9, 2021. Weiner, Tim (2012). "Revolution". Enemies a history of the FBI (1 ed.). New York: Random House. pp. 11–12. ISBN 978-0-679-64389-0. Findlay, James G. (November 19, 1943). "Memorandum for the Director: Re: Early History of the Bureau of Investigation, United States Department of Justice". Historical Documents from the Bureau's Founding. Los Angeles, CA: Federal Bureau of Investigation. Archived from the original on July 3, 2012. Retrieved August 14, 2012. Bonaparte, Charles Joseph. "Annual Report of the Attorney General of the United States, 1908, p.7". Historical Documents from the Bureau's Founding. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Archived from the original on May 10, 2012. Retrieved August 14, 2012. "In my last annual report I called attention to the fact that this department was obliged to call upon the Treasury Department for detective service, and had, in fact, no permanent executive force directly under its orders. Through the prohibition of its further use of the Secret Service force, contained in the Sundry Civil Appropriation Act, approved May 27, 1908, it became necessary for the department to organize a small force of special agents of its own. Although such action was involuntary on the part of this department, the consequences of the innovation have been, on the whole, moderately satisfactory. The Special Agents, placed as they are under the direct orders of the Chief Examiner, who receives from them daily reports and summarizes these each day to the Attorney General, are directly controlled by this department, and the Attorney General knows or ought to know, at all times what they are doing and at what cost." "FBI founded". HISTORY. Archived from the original on December 20, 2021. Retrieved February 9, 2021. "Timeline of FBI History". Federal Bureau of Investigation. Archived from the original on March 16, 2015. Retrieved March 20, 2015. Langeluttig, Albert (1927). The Department of Justice of the United States. Johns Hopkins Press. pp. 9–14. Greenberg, David (October 22, 2001). "Civil Rights: Let 'Em Wiretap!". History News Network. Archived from the original on March 1, 2011. Retrieved February 15, 2011. Benson, Robert L. "The Venona Story". National Security Agency. Archived from the original on June 14, 2006. Retrieved June 18, 2006. Romerstein, Herbert; Breindel, Eric (2001). The Venona Secrets, Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitors. Regnery Publishing, Inc. p. 209. ISBN 0-89526-225-8. Kashima, Tetsuden. "Custodial detention / A-B-C list". Densho Encyclopedia. Archived from the original on October 20, 2014. Retrieved August 21, 2014. Niiya, Brian. "Federal Bureau of Investigation". Densho Encyclopledia. Archived from the original on October 20, 2014. Retrieved August 21, 2014. "About the Incarceration". Densho Encyclopedia. Archived from the original on August 13, 2014. Retrieved August 21, 2014. "J. Edgar Hoover". Densho Encyclopedia. Archived from the original on November 6, 2014. "FBI and Homosexuality: 1950–1959". OutHistory. Archived from the original on December 4, 2017. "FBI and Homosexuality: 1970–1979". OutHistory. Archived from the original on June 5, 2018. "FBI and Homosexuality: 2010–2019". OutHistory. Archived from the original on December 4, 2017. David T. Beito and Linda Royster Beito, Black Maverick: T.R.M. Howard's Fight for Civil Rights and Economic Power (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009), 148, 154–59. Cassidy, Mike M. (May 26, 1999). "A Short History of FBI COINTELPRO". Monitor.net. Archived from the original on January 18, 2000. Retrieved June 6, 2006. Jalon, Allan M. (April 8, 2006). "A Break-In to End All Break-Ins". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on June 20, 2006. Retrieved June 6, 2006. Gage, Beverly (November 11, 2014). "What an Uncensored Letter to M.L.K. Reveals". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 7, 2015. Retrieved January 9, 2015. Taylor Branch, Pillar of Fire: America in the King Years 1963–1965 (Simon and Schuster, 1999), p. 524–529 Adams, Cecil M. (May 2, 2003). "Was Martin Luther King, Jr. a plagiarist?". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on July 18, 2011. Retrieved June 6, 2006. Branch, Taylor (April 16, 2007). Taylor Branch, Pillar of Fire: America in the King Years 1963–1965 (Simon and Schuster, 1999) p. 527-529. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-5870-5. Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York, New York: Basic Books. p. 40. ISBN 0-465-04195-7. "Postwar America: 1945–1960s". Federal Bureau of Investigation. Archived from the original on January 6, 2015. Escobedo, Tricia (March 31, 2014). "5 things you might not know about JFK's assassination". CNN. Archived from the original on November 16, 2015. Retrieved November 11, 2015. "Publ

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Richard Anthony Moore (January 23, 1914 – January 27, 1995) was an American lawyer and communications executive, who served as special counsel to President Richard Nixon and was United States Ambassador to Ireland (1989–1992).[1][2] Moore became a special counsel to President Nixon in 1971, and in July 1973 was a witness to the Senate committee investigating the Watergate scandal.[2] After leaving the administration he later became founder and associate producer of The McLaughlin Group, and was later ambassador to Ireland under President George H. W. Bush.[2] His brother, John D. J. Moore, had served as ambassador to Ireland under Presidents Nixon and Ford.[3] Moore died of prostate cancer in Washington, D.C., in 1995.[2] References "Nomination of Richard Anthony Moore To Be United States Ambassador to Ireland" (Press release). March 30, 1989 – via The American Presidency Project. "Richard Moore, 81, Nixon Aide And Former Ambassador, Dies". The New York Times. January 29, 1995. "Richard A. Moore; Ex-Envoy to Ireland, Counsel to Nixon". Los Angeles Times. January 30, 1995. Retrieved April 25, 2017. External links Richard Anthony Moore profile at history.state.gov Diplomatic posts Preceded by Margaret Heckler United States Ambassador to Ireland 1989–1992 Succeeded by William H. G. FitzGerald vte United States Ambassadors to Ireland Republic of Ireland Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary (1927–50) Commissioned to the Irish Free State Sterling McDowell Owsley Cudahy Commissioned to the Republic of Ireland Gray Garrett Seal of the US Department of State Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary (1950–present) Garrett Matthews Taft McLoed Stockdale McCloskey Guest Sheridan J. Moore Curley Shannon Dailey Kane Heckler R. Moore FitzGerald Kennedy Smith Sullivan Egan Kenny Foley Rooney O'Malley Crawford Cronin Categories: 1914 births1995 deathsAmbassadors of the United States to IrelandYale Law School alumni20th-century American businesspeopleUnited States Army soldiersUnited States Army personnel of World War IIDeaths from prostate cancer Richard Milhous Nixon (January 9, 1913 – April 22, 1994) was the 37th president of the United States, serving from 1969 to 1974. A lawyer and member of the Republican Party, he previously served as a representative and senator from California and was the 36th vice president from 1953 to 1961 under President Dwight D. Eisenhower. His five years in the White House saw reduction of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, détente with the Soviet Union and China, the Apollo 11 Moon landing, and the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Nixon's second term ended early when he became the only U.S. president to resign from office, as a result of the Watergate scandal. Nixon was born into a poor family of Quakers in a small town in Southern California. He graduated from Duke Law School in 1937, practiced law in California, and then moved with his wife Pat to Washington, DC in 1942 to work for the federal government. After active duty in the Naval Reserve during World War II, he was elected to the House of Representatives in 1946. His work on the Alger Hiss case established his reputation as a leading anti-communist, which elevated him to national prominence, and in 1950, he was elected to the Senate. Nixon was the running mate of Eisenhower, the Republican Party's presidential nominee in the 1952 election, and served for eight years as the vice president. He ran for president in 1960, narrowly lost to John F. Kennedy, then failed again in a 1962 race for governor of California, after which it was widely believed that his political career was over. However, in 1968, he made another run for the presidency and was elected, defeating Hubert Humphrey by less than one percentage point in the popular vote, as well as defeating third-party candidate George Wallace. Nixon ended American involvement in Vietnam combat in 1973 and the military draft in the same year. His visit to China in 1972 eventually led to diplomatic relations between the two nations, and he also then concluded the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the Soviet Union. Domestically, Nixon pushed for the Controlled Substances Act and began the war on drugs. Nixon's first term took place at the height of the American environmental movement and enacted many progressive environmental policy shifts; his administration created the Environmental Protection Agency and passed legislation such as the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Air Acts, and the Clean Water Acts (although he vetoed the final version of the CWA). He implemented the ratified Twenty-sixth Amendment, which lowered the voting age from 21 to 18, and enforced the desegregation of Southern schools. Under Nixon, relations with Native Americans improved, seeing an increase in self-determination for Native Americans and his administration rescinded the termination policy. Nixon imposed wage and price controls for 90 days, began the war on cancer, and presided over the Apollo 11 Moon landing, which signaled the end of the Space Race. He was re-elected with a historic electoral landslide in 1972 when he defeated Democratic candidate George McGovern. In his second term, Nixon ordered an airlift to resupply Israeli losses in the Yom Kippur War, a conflict which led to the oil crisis at home. From 1973, ongoing revelations leading from the Nixon administration's involvement in Watergate eroded his support in Congress and the country. Nixon and senior members of his administration were found to have weaponized government agencies against his enemies, among much other wrongdoing. On August 9, 1974, facing almost certain impeachment and removal from office, Nixon resigned from the presidency. Afterwards, he was issued a pardon by his successor, Gerald Ford. During nearly 20 years of retirement, Nixon wrote his memoirs and nine other books. He undertook many foreign trips, attempting to rehabilitate his image into that of an elder statesman and leading expert on foreign affairs. He suffered a debilitating stroke on April 18, 1994 and died four days later. Evaluations of his presidency have proven complex, with its successes contrasted against the circumstances of his departure. Early life and education Nixon (second from right) makes his newspaper debut in 1916, contributing five cents to a fund for war orphans. His brother Donald is to his right. Richard Milhous Nixon was born on January 9, 1913, in what was then the township precinct of Yorba Linda, California,[2] in a house built by his father, located on his family's lemon ranch.[1][3][4] His parents were Hannah (Milhous) Nixon and Francis A. Nixon. His mother was a Quaker, and his father converted from Methodism to the Quaker faith. Through his mother, Nixon was a descendant of the early English settler Thomas Cornell, who was also an ancestor of Ezra Cornell, the founder of Cornell University, as well as of Jimmy Carter and Bill Gates.[5] Nixon's upbringing was influenced by Quaker observances of the time such as abstinence from alcohol, dancing, and swearing. He had four brothers: Harold (1909–1933), Donald (1914–1987), Arthur (1918–1925), and Edward (1930–2019).[6] Four of the five Nixon boys were named after kings who had ruled in medieval or historic Great Britain; Richard, for example, was named after Richard the Lionheart.[7] Nixon's early life was marked by hardship, and he later quoted a saying of Dwight Eisenhower in describing his boyhood: "We were poor, but the glory of it was we didn't know it".[8] The Nixon family ranch failed in 1922, and the family moved to Whittier, California. In an area with many Quakers, Frank Nixon opened a grocery store and gas station.[9] Richard's younger brother Arthur died in 1925 at the age of seven after a short illness.[10] Richard was twelve years old when a spot was found on his lung; with a family history of tuberculosis, he was forbidden to play sports. The spot turned out to be scar tissue from an early bout of pneumonia.[11][12] Primary and secondary education Nixon as a senior at Whittier High School in 1930 Nixon attended East Whittier Elementary School, where he was president of his eighth-grade class.[13] His older brother Harold had attended Whittier High School, which his parents thought resulted in Harold's dissolute lifestyle, before he contracted tuberculosis (that killed him in 1933). They decided to send Nixon to the larger Fullerton Union High School.[14][15] Though he had to ride a school bus an hour each way during his freshman year, he received excellent grades. Later, he lived with an aunt in Fullerton during the week.[16] He played junior varsity football, and seldom missed a practice, though he rarely was used in games.[17] He had greater success as a debater, winning a number of championships and taking his only formal tutelage in public speaking from Fullerton's Head of English, H. Lynn Sheller. Nixon later mused on Sheller's words, "Remember, speaking is conversation...don't shout at people. Talk to them. Converse with them."[18] Nixon said he tried to use a conversational tone as much as possible.[18] At the start of his junior year in September 1928, Nixon's parents permitted him to transfer to Whittier High School. At Whittier, Nixon lost a bid for student body president, representing his first electoral defeat. At this period of his life, he often rose at 4 a.m. to drive the family truck to Los Angeles to purchase vegetables at the market and then drove to the store to wash and display them before going to school. Harold was diagnosed with tuberculosis the previous year; when their mother took him to Arizona hoping to improve his health, the demands on Nixon increased, causing him to give up football. Nevertheless, Nixon graduated from Whittier High third in his class of 207.[19] College and law school Nixon was offered a tuition grant to attend Harvard University, but with Harold's continued illness requiring his mother's care, Richard was needed at the store. He remained in his hometown, and enrolled at Whittier College in September 1930. His expenses at Whittier College were met by his maternal grandfather.[1][20] Nixon played for the basketball team; he also tried out for football, and though he lacked the size to play, he remained on the team as a substitute and was noted for his enthusiasm.[21] Instead of fraternities and sororities, Whittier had literary societies. Nixon was snubbed by the only one for men, the Franklins, many of whom were from prominent families, unlike Nixon. He responded by helping to found a new society, the Orthogonian Society.[22] In addition to the society, his studies, and work at the store, Nixon engaged in several extracurricular activities; he was a champion debater and hard worker.[23] In 1933, he engaged to Ola Florence Welch, daughter of the Whittier police chief, but they broke up in 1935.[24] After graduating summa cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts degree in history from Whittier in 1934, Nixon was accepted at the new Duke University School of Law,[25] which offered scholarships to top students, including Nixon.[26] It paid high salaries to its professors, many of whom had national or international reputations.[27] The number of scholarships was greatly reduced for second- and third-year students, creating intense competition.[26] Nixon kept his scholarship, was elected president of the Duke Bar Association,[28] inducted into the Order of the Coif,[29] and graduated third in his class in June 1937.[25] Early career and marriage Nixon's family: Julie and David Eisenhower, President Nixon, First Lady Pat Nixon, Tricia, and Edward Cox on December 24, 1971 After graduating from Duke University law school, Nixon initially hoped to join the FBI. He received no response to his letter of application, and learned years later that he had been hired, but his appointment had been canceled at the last minute due to budget cuts.[30] He returned to California, was admitted to the California bar in 1937, and began practicing in Whittier with the law firm Wingert and Bewley.[25] His work concentrated on commercial litigation for local petroleum companies and other corporate matters, as well as on wills.[31] Nixon was reluctant to work on divorce cases, disliking frank sexual talk from women.[32] In 1938, he opened up his own branch of Wingert and Bewley in La Habra, California,[33] and became a full partner in the firm the following year.[34] In later years, Nixon proudly said he was the only modern president to have previously worked as a practicing attorney.[32] In January 1938, Nixon was cast in the Whittier Community Players production of The Dark Tower in which he played opposite his future wife, a high school teacher named Thelma "Pat" Ryan.[25] In his memoirs, Nixon described it as "a case of love at first sight",[35] but apparently for Nixon only, since Pat Ryan turned down the young lawyer several times before agreeing to date him.[36] Once they began their courtship, Ryan was reluctant to marry Nixon; they dated for two years before she assented to his proposal. They wed in a small ceremony on June 21, 1940. After a honeymoon in Mexico, the Nixons began their married life in Whittier.[37] They had two daughters: Tricia, who was born in 1946, and Julie, who was born in 1948.[38] Military service Nixon as a lieutenant commander in the United States Navy, c. 1945 In January 1942, the couple moved to Washington, D.C., where Nixon took a job at the Office of Price Administration.[25] In his political campaigns, Nixon suggested that this was his response to Pearl Harbor, but he had sought the position throughout the latter part of 1941. Both Nixon and his wife believed he was limiting his prospects by remaining in Whittier.[39] He was assigned to the tire rationing division, where he was tasked with replying to correspondence. He did not enjoy the role, and four months later applied to join the United States Navy.[40] Though he could have claimed an exemption from the draft as a birthright Quaker, or a deferral due to his government service, Nixon nevertheless sought a commission in the Navy. His application was approved, and he was appointed a lieutenant junior grade in the United States Naval Reserve on June 15, 1942.[41][42] In October 1942, after securing a home in Alexandria, Virginia, he was given his first assignment as aide to the commander of the Naval Air Station Ottumwa in Wapello County, Iowa until May 1943.[41][43] Seeking more excitement, he requested sea duty; on July 2, 1943, he was assigned to Marine Aircraft Group 25 and the South Pacific Combat Air Transport Command (SCAT), where he supported the logistics of operations in the South Pacific theater during World War II.[44][45][46] On October 1, 1943, Nixon was promoted to lieutenant.[41] Nixon commanded the SCAT forward detachments at Vella Lavella, Bougainville, and finally at Nissan Island.[41][46] His unit prepared manifests and flight plans for R4D/C-47 operations and supervised the loading and unloading of the transport aircraft. For this service, he received a Navy Letter of Commendation, awarded a Navy Commendation Ribbon, which was later updated to the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal, from his commanding officer for "meritorious and efficient performance of duty as Officer in Charge of the South Pacific Combat Air Transport Command". Upon his return to the U.S., Nixon was appointed the administrative officer of the Alameda Naval Air Station in Alameda, California. In January 1945, he was transferred to the Bureau of Aeronautics office in Philadelphia, where he helped negotiate the termination of World War II contracts, and received his second letter of commendation, from the Secretary of the Navy[47] for "meritorious service, tireless effort, and devotion to duty". Later, Nixon was transferred to other offices to work on contracts and finally to Baltimore.[48] On October 3, 1945, he was promoted to lieutenant commander.[41][47] On March 10, 1946, he was relieved of active duty.[41] On June 1, 1953, he was promoted to commander in the U.S. Naval Reserve, and he retired from the U.S. Naval Reserve on June 6, 1966.[41] While in the Navy, Nixon became a very good five-card stud poker player, helping finance his first congressional campaign with the winnings. In a 1983 interview, he described turning down an invitation to dine with Charles Lindbergh because he was hosting a game.[49][50] U.S. House of Representatives (1947–1950) See also: 1946 California's 12th congressional district election Nixon's 1946 congressional campaign flyer Nixon in Yorba Linda, California in April 1950 Nixon campaigning for the Senate in 1950 Republicans in California's 12th congressional district were frustrated by their inability to defeat Democratic representative Jerry Voorhis, and they sought a consensus candidate who would run a strong campaign against him. In 1945, they formed a "Committee of 100" to decide on a candidate, hoping to avoid internal dissensions which had led to previous Voorhis victories. After the committee failed to attract higher-profile candidates, Herman Perry, manager of Whittier's Bank of America branch, suggested Nixon, a family friend with whom he had served on Whittier College's board of trustees before the war. Perry wrote to Nixon in Baltimore, and after a night of excited conversation with his wife, Nixon gave Perry an enthused response. Nixon flew to California and was selected by the committee. When he left the Navy at the start of 1946, Nixon and his wife returned to Whittier, where he began a year of intensive campaigning.[51][52] He contended that Voorhis had been ineffective as a representative and suggested that Voorhis's endorsement by a group linked to Communists meant that Voorhis must have radical views.[53] Nixon won the election, receiving 65,586 votes to Voorhis's 49,994.[54] In June 1947, Nixon supported the Taft–Hartley Act, a federal law that monitors the activities and power of labor unions, and he served on the Education and Labor Committee. In August 1947, he became one of 19 House members to serve on the Herter Committee,[55] which went to Europe to report on the need for U.S. foreign aid. Nixon was the youngest member of the committee and the only Westerner.[56] Advocacy by Herter Committee members, including Nixon, led to congressional passage of the Marshall Plan.[57] In his memoirs, Nixon wrote that he joined the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) "at the end of 1947". However, he was already a HUAC member in early February 1947, when he heard "Enemy Number One" Gerhard Eisler and his sister Ruth Fischer testify. On February 18, 1947, Nixon referred to Eisler's belligerence toward HUAC in his maiden speech to the House. Also by early February 1947, fellow U.S. Representative Charles J. Kersten had introduced him to Father John Francis Cronin in Baltimore. Cronin shared with Nixon his 1945 privately circulated paper "The Problem of American Communism in 1945",[58] with much information from the FBI's William C. Sullivan who by 1961 headed domestic intelligence under J. Edgar Hoover.[59] By May 1948, Nixon had co-sponsored the Mundt–Nixon Bill to implement "a new approach to the complicated problem of internal communist subversion ... It provided for registration of all Communist Party members and required a statement of the source of all printed and broadcast material issued by organizations that were found to be Communist fronts." He served as floor manager for the Republican Party. On May 19, 1948, the bill passed the House by 319 to 58, but later it failed to pass the Senate.[60] The Nixon Library cites this bill's passage as Nixon's first significant victory in Congress.[61] Nixon first gained national attention in August 1948, when his persistence as a House Un-American Activities Committee member helped break the Alger Hiss spy case. While many doubted Whittaker Chambers's allegations that Hiss, a former State Department official, had been a Soviet spy, Nixon believed them to be true and pressed for the committee to continue its investigation. After Hiss filed suit, alleging defamation, Chambers produced documents corroborating his allegations, including paper and microfilm copies that Chambers turned over to House investigators after hiding them overnight in a field; they became known as the "Pumpkin Papers".[62] Hiss was convicted of perjury in 1950 for denying under oath he had passed documents to Chambers.[63] In 1948, Nixon successfully cross-filed as a candidate in his district, winning both major party primaries,[64] and was comfortably reelected.[65] U.S. Senate (1950–1953) See also: 1950 United States Senate election in California Nixon campaigning in Sausalito, California in 1950 In 1949, Nixon began to consider running for the United States Senate against the Democratic incumbent, Sheridan Downey,[66] and entered the race in November.[67] Downey, faced with a bitter primary battle with Representative Helen Gahagan Douglas, announced his retirement in March 1950.[68] Nixon and Douglas won the primary elections[69] and engaged in a contentious campaign in which the ongoing Korean War was a major issue.[70] Nixon tried to focus attention on Douglas's liberal voting record. As part of that effort, a "Pink Sheet" was distributed by the Nixon campaign suggesting that Douglas's voting record was similar to that of New York Congressman Vito Marcantonio, reputed to be a communist, and their political views must be nearly identical.[71] Nixon won the election by almost twenty percentage points.[72] During the campaign, Nixon was first called "Tricky Dick" by his opponents for his campaign tactics.[73] In the Senate, Nixon took a prominent position in opposing global communism, traveling frequently and speaking out against it.[74] He maintained friendly relations with his fellow anti-communist, controversial Wisconsin senator Joseph McCarthy, but was careful to keep some distance between himself and McCarthy's allegations.[75] Nixon also criticized President Harry S. Truman's handling of the Korean War.[74] He supported statehood for Alaska and Hawaii, voted in favor of civil rights for minorities, and supported federal disaster relief for India and Yugoslavia.[76] He voted against price controls and other monetary restrictions, benefits for illegal immigrants, and public power.[76] Vice presidency (1953–1961) See also: Presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower Further information: Checkers speech Front cover of campaign literature for the Eisenhower–Nixon campaign in the 1952 presidential election Nixon's official portrait as vice president Nikita Khrushchev and Nixon speak as the press looks on at the Kitchen Debate on July 24, 1959; What's My Line? host John Charles Daly is on the far left. General Dwight D. Eisenhower was nominated for president by the Republicans in 1952. He had no strong preference for a vice-presidential candidate, and Republican officeholders and party officials met in a "smoke-filled room" and recommended Nixon to the general, who agreed to the senator's selection. Nixon's youth (he was then 39), stance against communism, and political base in California—one of the largest states—were all seen as vote-winners by the leaders. Among the candidates considered along with Nixon were Ohio Senator Robert A. Taft, New Jersey Governor Alfred Driscoll, and Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen.[77][78] On the campaign trail, Eisenhower spoke of his plans for the country, and left the negative campaigning to his running mate.[79] In mid-September, the Republican ticket faced a major crisis when the media reported that Nixon had a political fund, maintained by his backers, which reimbursed him for political expenses.[80][81] Such a fund was not illegal, but it exposed Nixon to allegations of a potential conflict of interest. With pressure building for Eisenhower to demand Nixon's resignation from the ticket, Nixon went on television to address the nation on September 23, 1952.[82] The address, later named the Checkers speech, was heard by about 60 million Americans, which represented the largest audience ever for a television broadcast at that point.[83] In the speech, Nixon emotionally defended himself, stating that the fund was not secret and that his donors had not received special favors. He painted himself as a patriot and man of modest means, mentioning that his wife had no mink coat; instead, he said, she wore a "respectable Republican cloth coat".[82] The speech was remembered for the gift which Nixon had received, but which he would not give back, which he described as "a little cocker spaniel dog ...sent all the way from Texas. And our little girl—Tricia, the 6-year-old—named it Checkers."[82] The speech prompted a huge public outpouring of support for Nixon.[84] Eisenhower decided to retain him on the ticket,[85] and the ticket was victorious in the November election.[79] Eisenhower granted Nixon more responsibilities during his term than any previous vice president.[86] Nixon attended Cabinet and National Security Council meetings and chaired them in Eisenhower's absence. A 1953 tour of the Far East succeeded in increasing local goodwill toward the United States, and gave Nixon an appreciation of the region as a potential industrial center. He visited Saigon and Hanoi in French Indochina.[87] On his return to the United States at the end of 1953, Nixon increased the time he devoted to foreign relations.[88] Biographer Irwin Gellman, who chronicled Nixon's congressional years, said of his vice presidency: Eisenhower radically altered the role of his running mate by presenting him with critical assignments in both foreign and domestic affairs once he assumed his office. The vice president welcomed the president's initiatives and worked energetically to accomplish White House objectives. Because of the collaboration between these two leaders, Nixon deserves the title, "the first modern vice president".[89] Los Angeles Times San Francisco Chronicle American newspaper covers on May 9, 1958, covering student protests against Nixon at the National University of San Marcos in Lima, Peru Despite intense campaigning by Nixon, who reprised his strong attacks on the Democrats, the Republicans lost control of both houses of Congress in the 1954 elections. These losses caused Nixon to contemplate leaving politics once he had served out his term.[90] On September 24, 1955, President Eisenhower suffered a heart attack and his condition was initially believed to be life-threatening. Eisenhower was unable to perform his duties for six weeks. The 25th Amendment to the United States Constitution had not yet been proposed, and the vice president had no formal power to act. Nonetheless, Nixon acted in Eisenhower's stead during this period, presiding over Cabinet meetings and ensuring that aides and Cabinet officers did not seek power.[91] According to Nixon biographer Stephen Ambrose, Nixon had "earned the high praise he received for his conduct during the crisis ... he made no attempt to seize power".[92] His spirits buoyed, Nixon sought a second term, but some of Eisenhower's aides aimed to displace him. In a December 1955 meeting, Eisenhower proposed that Nixon not run for reelection and instead become a Cabinet officer in a second Eisenhower administration, in order to give him administrative experience before a 1960 presidential run. Nixon believed this would destroy his political career. When Eisenhower announced his reelection bid in February 1956, he hedged on the choice of his running mate, saying it was improper to address that question until he had been renominated. Although no Republican was opposing Eisenhower, Nixon received a substantial number of write-in votes against the president in the 1956 New Hampshire primary election. In late April, the President announced that Nixon would again be his running mate.[93] Eisenhower and Nixon were reelected by a comfortable margin in the November 1956 election.[94] In early 1957, Nixon undertook another foreign trip, this time to Africa. On his return, he helped shepherd the Civil Rights Act of 1957 through Congress. The bill was weakened in the Senate, and civil rights leaders were divided over whether Eisenhower should sign it. Nixon advised the President to sign the bill, which he did.[95] Eisenhower suffered a mild stroke in November 1957, and Nixon gave a press conference, assuring the nation that the Cabinet was functioning well as a team during Eisenhower's brief illness.[96] On April 27, 1958, Richard and Pat Nixon reluctantly embarked on a goodwill tour of South America. In Montevideo, Uruguay, Nixon made an impromptu visit to a college campus, where he fielded questions from students on U.S. foreign policy. The trip was uneventful until the Nixon party reached Lima, Peru, where he was met with student demonstrations. Nixon went to the historical campus of National University of San Marcos, the oldest university in the Americas, got out of his car to confront the students, and stayed until forced back into the car by a volley of thrown objects. At his hotel, Nixon faced another mob, and one demonstrator spat on him.[97] In Caracas, Venezuela, Nixon and his wife were spat on by anti-American demonstrators and their limousine was attacked by a pipe-wielding mob.[98] According to Ambrose, Nixon's courageous conduct "caused even some of his bitterest enemies to give him some grudging respect".[99] Reporting to the cabinet after the trip, Nixon claimed there was "absolute proof that [the protestors] were directed and controlled by a central Communist conspiracy." Secretary of State John Foster Dulles and his brother, Director of Central Intelligence Allen Dulles, both concurred with Nixon.[100] In July 1959, President Eisenhower sent Nixon to the Soviet Union for the opening of the American National Exhibition in Moscow. On July 24, Nixon was touring the exhibits with Soviet First Secretary and Premier Nikita Khrushchev when the two stopped at a model of an American kitchen and engaged in an impromptu exchange about the merits of capitalism versus communism that became known as the "Kitchen Debate".[101][102] 1960 presidential campaign Main article: 1960 United States presidential election John F. Kennedy and Nixon before their first televised 1960 debate 1960 electoral vote results Nixon and successor Lyndon B. Johnson at Kennedy's 1961 inauguration In 1960, Nixon launched his first campaign for President of the United States, officially announcing on January 9, 1960.[103] He faced little opposition in the Republican primaries[104] and chose former Massachusetts Senator Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. as his running mate.[105] His Democratic opponent was John F. Kennedy and the race remained close for the duration.[106] Nixon campaigned on his experience, but Kennedy called for new blood and claimed the Eisenhower–Nixon administration had allowed the Soviet Union to overtake the U.S. in quantity and quality of ballistic missiles.[107] While Kennedy faced issues about his Catholicism, Nixon remained a divisive figure to some.[108] Televised presidential debates made their debut as a political medium during the campaign. In the first of four such debates, Nixon appeared pale, with a five o'clock shadow, in contrast to the photogenic Kennedy.[105] Nixon's performance in the debate was perceived to be mediocre in the visual medium of television, though many people listening on the radio thought Nixon had won.[109] Nixon narrowly lost the election, with Kennedy winning the popular vote by only 112,827 votes (0.2 percent).[105] There were charges of voter fraud in Texas and Illinois, both states won by Kennedy. Nixon refused to consider contesting the election, feeling a lengthy controversy would diminish the United States in the eyes of the world and that the uncertainty would hurt U.S. interests.[110] At the end of his term of office as vice president in January 1961, Nixon and his family returned to California, where he practiced law and wrote a bestselling book, Six Crises, which included coverage of the Hiss case, Eisenhower's heart attack, and the Fund Crisis, which had been resolved by the Checkers speech.[105][111] 1962 California gubernatorial campaign Main article: 1962 California gubernatorial election Local and national Republican leaders encouraged Nixon to challenge incumbent Pat Brown for Governor of California in the 1962 California gubernatorial election.[105] Despite initial reluctance, Nixon entered the race.[105] The campaign was clouded by public suspicion that Nixon viewed the office as a stepping stone for another presidential run, some opposition from the far-right of the party, and his own lack of interest in being California's governor.[105] Nixon hoped a successful run would confirm his status as the nation's leading active Republican politician, and ensure he remained a major player in national politics.[112] Instead, he lost to Brown by more than five percentage points, and the defeat was widely believed to be the end of his political career.[105] In an impromptu concession speech the morning after the election, Nixon blamed the media for favoring his opponent, saying, "You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference."[113] The California defeat was highlighted in the November 11, 1962, episode of Howard K. Smith's ABC News show, Howard K. Smith: News and Comment, titled "The Political Obituary of Richard M. Nixon".[114] Alger Hiss appeared on the program, and many members of the public complained that it was unseemly to give a convicted felon air time to attack a former vice president. The furor drove Smith and his program from the air,[115] and public sympathy for Nixon grew.[114] Wilderness years Nixon shows his papers to an East German officer as he crosses between the sectors of divided Berlin in July 1963 Nixon and Pat meeting Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, Cairo in September 1963 In 1963 the Nixon family traveled to Europe, where Nixon gave press conferences and met with leaders of the countries he visited.[116] The family moved to New York City, where Nixon became a senior partner in the leading law firm Nixon, Mudge, Rose, Guthrie & Alexander.[105] When announcing his California campaign, Nixon had pledged not to run for president in 1964; even if he had not, he believed it would be difficult to defeat Kennedy, or after his assassination, Kennedy's successor, Lyndon Johnson.[117] In 1964, Nixon won write-in votes in the primaries, and was considered a serious contender by both Gallup polls[118][119] and members of the press.[120] He was even placed on a primary ballot as an active candidate by Oregon's secretary of state.[121] As late as two months before the 1964 Republican National Convention, however, Nixon fulfilled his promise to remain out of the presidential nomination process and instead endorsed Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater, the Republican nominee. When Goldwater won the nomination, Nixon was selected to introduce him at the convention. Nixon felt that Goldwater was unlikely to win, but campaigned for him loyally. In the 1964 general election, Goldwater lost in a landslide to Johnson and Republicans experienced heavy losses in Congress and among state governors.[122] Nixon was one of the few leading Republicans not blamed for the disastrous results, and he sought to build on that in the 1966 Congressional elections in which he campaigned for many Republicans and sought to regain seats lost in the Johnson landslide. Nixon was credited with helping Republicans win major electoral gains that year.[123] 1968 presidential campaign Main articles: Richard Nixon 1968 presidential campaign and 1968 United States presidential election Nixon and U.S. president Lyndon B. Johnson meet at the White House prior to Nixon's nomination in July 1968 Nixon campaigning for president in Paoli, Pennsylvania, outside Philadelphia, in July 1968 1968 electoral vote results; the popular vote split between Nixon and Democrat Hubert Humphrey was less than one percentage point. At the end of 1967, Nixon told his family he planned to run for president a second time. Pat Nixon did not always enjoy public life,[124] being embarrassed, for example, by the need to reveal how little the family owned in the Checkers speech.[125] She still managed to be supportive of her husband's ambitions. Nixon believed that with the Democrats torn over the issue of the Vietnam War, a Republican had a good chance of winning, although he expected the election to be as close as in 1960.[124] An exceptionally tumultuous primary election season began as the Tet Offensive was launched in January 1968. President Johnson withdrew as a candidate in March, after an unexpectedly poor showing in the New Hampshire primary. In June, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, a Democratic candidate, was assassinated just moments after his victory in the California primary. On the Republican side, Nixon's main opposition was Michigan Governor George Romney, though New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller and California Governor Ronald Reagan each hoped to be nominated in a brokered convention. Nixon secured the nomination on the first ballot.[126] He was able to secure the nomination to the support of many Southern delegates, after he and his subordinates made concessions to Strom Thurmond and Harry Dent.[127] He selected Maryland Governor Spiro Agnew as his running mate, a choice which Nixon believed would unite the party, appealing both to Northern moderates and to Southerners disaffected with the Democrats.[128] Nixon's Democratic opponent in the general election was Vice President Hubert Humphrey, who was nominated at a convention marked by violent protests.[129] Throughout the campaign, Nixon portrayed himself as a figure of stability during this period of national unrest and upheaval.[129] He appealed to what he later called the "silent majority" of socially conservative Americans who disliked the hippie counterculture and the anti-war demonstrators. Agnew became an increasingly vocal critic of these groups, solidifying Nixon's position with the right.[130] Nixon waged a prominent television advertising campaign, meeting with supporters in front of cameras.[131] He stressed that the crime rate was too high, and attacked what he perceived as a surrender of the United States' nuclear superiority by the Democrats.[132] Nixon promised "peace with honor" in the Vietnam War and proclaimed that "new leadership will end the war and win the peace in the Pacific".[133] He did not give specifics of how he hoped to end the war, resulting in media intimations that he must have a "secret plan".[133] His slogan of "Nixon's the One" proved to be effective.[131] Johnson's negotiators hoped to reach a truce in Vietnam, or at least a cessation of bombings. On October 22, 1968, candidate Nixon received information that Johnson was preparing a so-called "October surprise", abandoning three non-negotiable conditions for a bombing halt, to help elect Humphrey in the last days of the campaign.[134] Whether the Nixon campaign interfered with negotiations between the Johnson administration and the South Vietnamese by engaging Anna Chennault, a fundraiser for the Republican party, remains a controversy.[134] It is not clear whether the government of South Vietnam needed encouragement to opt out of a peace process they considered disadvantageous.[135] In a three-way race between Nixon, Humphrey, and American Independent Party candidate George Wallace, Nixon defeated Humphrey by only 500,000 votes, a margin almost as close as in 1960, with both elections seeing a gap of less than one percentage point of the popular vote. However, Nixon earned 301 electoral votes to 191 for Humphrey and 46 for Wallace, a majority.[129][136] He became the first non-incumbent vice president to be elected president.[137] In his victory speech, Nixon pledged that his administration would try to bring the divided nation together.[138] Nixon said: "I have received a very gracious message from the Vice President, congratulating me for winning the election. I congratulated him for his gallant and courageous fight against great odds. I also told him that I know exactly how he felt. I know how it feels to lose a close one."[139] Presidency (1969–1974) Main article: Presidency of Richard Nixon For a chronological guide, see Timeline of the Richard Nixon presidency. Nixon is sworn in as the 37th President by Chief Justice Earl Warren. The new First Lady, Pat, holds the family Bible. Nixon was inaugurated as president on January 20, 1969, sworn in by his onetime political rival, Chief Justice Earl Warren. Pat Nixon held the family Bibles open at Isaiah 2:4, which reads, "They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks." In his inaugural address, which received almost uniformly positive reviews, Nixon remarked that "the greatest honor history can bestow is the title of peacemaker"[140]—a phrase that found a place on his gravestone.[141] He spoke about turning partisan politics into a new age of unity: In these difficult years, America has suffered from a fever of words; from inflated rhetoric that promises more than it can deliver; from angry rhetoric that fans discontents into hatreds; from bombastic rhetoric that postures instead of persuading. We cannot learn from one another until we stop shouting at one another, until we speak quietly enough so that our words can be heard as well as our voices.[142] Foreign policy Main article: Foreign policy of the Richard Nixon administration China Main article: 1972 visit by Richard Nixon to China President Nixon shakes hands with Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai upon arriving in Beijing, 1972. Nixon and Zhou Enlai toast during Nixon's 1972 visit to China. Nixon laid the groundwork for his overture to China before he became president, writing in Foreign Affairs a year before his election: "There is no place on this small planet for a billion of its potentially most able people to live in angry isolation."[143] Assisting him in this venture was Henry Kissinger, Nixon's National Security Advisor and future Secretary of State. They collaborated closely, bypassing Cabinet officials. With relations between the Soviet Union and China at a nadir—border clashes between the two took place during Nixon's first year in office—Nixon sent private word to the Chinese that he desired closer relations. A breakthrough came in early 1971, when Chinese Communist Party (CCP) chairman Mao Zedong invited a team of American table tennis players to visit China and play against top Chinese players. Nixon followed up by sending Kissinger to China for clandestine meetings with Chinese officials.[143] On July 15, 1971, with announcements from Washington and Beijing, it was learned that the President would visit China the following February.[144] The secrecy had allowed both sets of leaders time to prepare the political climate in their countries for the visit.[145] In February 1972, Nixon and his wife traveled to China after Kissinger briefed Nixon for over 40 hours in preparation.[146] Upon touching down, the President and First Lady emerged from Air Force One and were greeted by Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai. Nixon made a point of shaking Zhou's hand, something which then-Secretary of State John Foster Dulles had refused to do in 1954 when the two met in Geneva.[147] More than a hundred television journalists accompanied the president. On Nixon's orders, television was strongly favored over printed publications, as Nixon felt that the medium would capture the visit much better than print. It also gave him the opportunity to snub the print journalists he despised.[147] Mao Zedong and Nixon Nixon and Kissinger immediately met for an hour with CCP Chairman Mao Zedong and Premier Zhou at Mao's official private residence, where they discussed a range of issues.[148] Mao later told his doctor that he had been impressed by Nixon's forthrightness, unlike the leftists and the Soviets.[148] He said he was suspicious of Kissinger,[148] though the National Security Advisor referred to their meeting as his "encounter with history".[147] A formal banquet welcoming the presidential party was given that evening in the Great Hall of the People. The following day, Nixon met with Zhou; the joint communique following this meeting recognized Taiwan as a part of China and looked forward to a peaceful solution to the problem of reunification.[149] When not in meetings, Nixon toured architectural wonders, including the Forbidden City, the Ming tombs, and the Great Wall.[147] Americans took their first glance into everyday Chinese life through the cameras that accompanied Pat Nixon, who toured the city of Beijing and visited communes, schools, factories, and hospitals.[147] The visit ushered in a new era of US–China relations.[129] Fearing the possibility of a US–China alliance, the Soviet Union yielded to pressure for détente with the United States.[150] This was one component of triangular diplomacy.[151] Vietnam War Main articles: Vietnam War, Vietnamization, and Role of the United States in the Vietnam War Nixon delivers an address to the nation about the incursion in Cambodia. When Nixon took office, about 300 American soldiers were dying each week in Vietnam,[152] and the war was widely unpopular in the United States, the subject of ongoing violent protests. The Johnson administration had offered to suspend bombing unconditionally in exchange for negotiations, but to no avail. According to Walter Isaacson, Nixon concluded soon after taking office that the Vietnam War could not be won, and he was determined to end it quickly.[153] He sought an arrangement that would permit American forces to withdraw while leaving South Vietnam secure against attack.[154] Nixon approved a secret B-52 carpet bombing campaign of North Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge positions in Cambodia beginning in March 1969 and code-named Operation Menu, without the consent of Cambodian leader Norodom Sihanouk.[155][156][157] In mid-1969, Nixon began efforts to negotiate peace with the North Vietnamese, sending a personal letter to their leaders, and peace talks began in Paris. Initial talks did not result in an agreement,[158] and in May 1969 he publicly proposed to withdraw all American troops from South Vietnam provided North Vietnam did so, and suggesting South Vietnam hold internationally supervised elections with Viet Cong participation.[159] Nixon visits American troops in South Vietnam, July 30, 1969. In July 1969, Nixon visited South Vietnam, where he met with his U.S. military commanders and President Nguyễn Văn Thiệu. Amid protests at home demanding an immediate pullout, he implemented a strategy of replacing American troops with Vietnamese troops, known as "Vietnamization".[129] He soon instituted phased U.S. troop withdrawals,[160] but also authorized incursions into Laos, in part to interrupt the Ho Chi Minh trail passing through Laos and Cambodia and used to supply North Vietnamese forces. In March 1970, at the explicit request of the Khmer Rouge and negotiated by Pol Pot's then-second-in-command, Nuon Chea, North Vietnamese troops launched an offensive and overran much of Cambodia.[161] Nixon announced the ground invasion of Cambodia on April 30, 1970, against North Vietnamese bases in the east of the country,[162] and further protests erupted against perceived expansion of the conflict, which resulted in Ohio National Guardsmen killing four unarmed students at Kent State University.[163] Nixon's responses to protesters included an impromptu, early morning meeting with them at the Lincoln Memorial on May 9, 1970.[164][165][166] Nixon's campaign promise to curb the war, contrasted with the escalated bombing, led to claims that Nixon had a "credibility gap" on the issue.[160] It is estimated that between 50,000 and 150,000 people were killed during the bombing of Cambodia between 1970 and 1973.[156] In 1971, excerpts from the "Pentagon Papers", which had been leaked by Daniel Ellsberg, were published by The New York Times and The Washington Post. When news of the leak first appeared, Nixon was inclined to do nothing; the Papers, a history of United States' involvement in Vietnam, mostly concerned the lies of prior administrations and contained few real revelations. He was persuaded by Kissinger that the Papers were more harmful than they appeared, and the President tried to prevent publication, but the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the newspapers.[167] As U.S. troop withdrawals continued, conscription was phased out by 1973, and the armed forces became all-volunteer.[168] After years of fighting, the Paris Peace Accords were signed at the beginning of 1973. The agreement implemented a cease fire and allowed for the withdrawal of remaining American troops without requiring withdrawal of the 160,000 North Vietnam Army regulars located in the South.[169] Once American combat support ended, there was a brief truce, before fighting resumed, and North Vietnam conquered South Vietnam in 1975.[170] Latin American policy See also: U.S. intervention in Chile § 1973 coup, and Operation Condor Nixon with Mexican president Gustavo Díaz Ordaz (to his right); motorcade in San Diego, California, September 1970 Nixon had been a firm supporter of Kennedy during the 1961 Bay of Pigs Invasion and 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. On taking office in 1969, he stepped up covert operations against Cuba and its president, Fidel Castro. He maintained close relations with the Cuban-American exile community through his friend, Bebe Rebozo, who often suggested ways of irritating Castro. The Soviets and Cubans became concerned, fearing Nixon might attack Cuba and break the understanding between Kennedy and Khrushchev that ended the missile crisis. In August 1970, the Soviets asked Nixon to reaffirm the understanding, which he did, despite his hard line against Castro. The process was not completed before the Soviets began expanding their base at the Cuban port of Cienfuegos in October 1970. A minor confrontation ensued, the Soviets stipulated they would not use Cienfuegos for submarines bearing ballistic missiles, and the final round of diplomatic notes were exchanged in November.[171] The election of Marxist candidate Salvador Allende as President of Chile in September 1970 spurred a vigorous campaign of covert opposition to him by Nixon and Kissinger.[172]: 25  This began by trying to convince the Chilean congress to confirm Jorge Alessandri as the winner of the election, and then messages to military officers in support of a coup.[172] Other support included strikes organized against Allende and funding for Allende opponents. It was even alleged that "Nixon personally authorized" $700,000 in covert funds to print anti-Allende messages in a prominent Chilean newspaper.[172]: 93  Following an extended period of social, political, and economic unrest, General Augusto Pinochet assumed power in a violent coup d'état on September 11, 1973; among the dead was Allende.[173] Soviet Union Nixon with Brezhnev during the Soviet leader's trip to the U.S., 1973 Nixon used the improving international environment to address the topic of nuclear peace. Following the announcement of his visit to China, the Nixon administration concluded negotiations for him to visit the Soviet Union. The President and First Lady arrived in Moscow on May 22, 1972, and met with Leonid Brezhnev, the General Secretary of the Communist Party; Alexei Kosygin, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers; and Nikolai Podgorny, the Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet, among other leading Soviet officials.[174] Nixon engaged in intense negotiations with Brezhnev.[174] Out of the summit came agreements for increased trade and two landmark arms control treaties: SALT I, the first comprehensive limitation pact signed by the two superpowers,[129] and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which banned the development of systems designed to intercept incoming missiles. Nixon and Brezhnev proclaimed a new era of "peaceful coexistence". A banquet was held that evening at the Kremlin.[174] Nixon and Kissinger planned to link arms control to détente and to the resolution of other urgent problems through what Nixon called "linkage." David Tal argues: The linkage between strategic arms limitations and outstanding issues such as the Middle East, Berlin and, foremost, Vietnam thus became central to Nixon's and Kissinger's policy of détente. Through the employment of linkage, they hoped to change the nature and course of U.S. foreign policy, including U.S. nuclear disarmament and arms control policy, and to separate them from those practiced by Nixon's predecessors. They also intended, through linkage, to make U.S. arms control policy part of détente ... His policy of linkage had in fact failed. It failed mainly because it was based on flawed assumptions and false premises, the foremost of which was that the Soviet Union wanted strategic arms limitation agreement much more than the United States did.[175] Seeking to foster better relations with the United States, China and the Soviet Union both cut back on their diplomatic support for North Vietnam and advised Hanoi to come to terms militarily.[176] Nixon later described his strategy: I had long believed that an indispensable element of any successful peace initiative in Vietnam was to enlist, if possible, the help of the Soviets and the Chinese. Though rapprochement with China and détente with the Soviet Union were ends in themselves, I also considered them possible means to hasten the end of the war. At worst, Hanoi was bound to feel less confident if Washington was dealing with Moscow and Beijing. At best, if the two major Communist powers decided that they had bigger fish to fry, Hanoi would be pressured into negotiating a settlement we could accept.[177] In 1973, Nixon encouraged the Export-Import Bank to finance in part a trade deal with the Soviet Union in which Armand Hammer's Occidental Petroleum would export phosphate from Florida to the Soviet Union, and import Soviet ammonia. The deal, valued at $20 billion over 20 years, involved the construction of two major Soviet port facilities at Odessa and Ventspils,[178][179][180] and a pipeline connecting four ammonia plants in the greater Volga region to the port at Odessa.[180] In 1973, Nixon announced his administration was committed to seeking most favored nation trade status with the USSR,[181] which was challenged by Congress in the Jackson-Vanik Amendment.[182] During the previous two years, Nixon had made considerable progress in U.S.–Soviet relations, and he embarked on a second trip to the Soviet Union in 1974.[183] He arrived in Moscow on June 27 to a welcome ceremony, cheering crowds, and a state dinner at the Grand Kremlin Palace that evening.[183] Nixon and Brezhnev met in Yalta, where they discussed a proposed mutual defense pact, détente, and MIRVs. Nixon considered proposing a comprehensive test-ban treaty, but he felt he would not have time to complete it during his presidency.[183] There were no significant breakthroughs in these negotiations.[183] Middle Eastern policy Nixon with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, June 1974. Nixon with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, June 1974 Nixon with President Anwar Sadat of Egypt, June 1974 As part of the Nixon Doctrine, the U.S. avoided giving direct combat assistance to its allies and instead gave them assistance to defend themselves. During the Nixon administration, the U.S. greatly increased arms sales to the Middle East, particularly Israel, Iran and Saudi Arabia.[184] The Nixon administration strongly supported Israel, an American ally in the Middle East, but the support was not unconditional. Nixon believed Israel should make peace with its Arab neighbors and that the U.S. should encourage it. The president believed that—except during the Suez Crisis—the U.S. had failed to intervene with Israel, and should use the leverage of the large U.S. military aid to Israel to urge the parties to the negotiating table. The Arab-Israeli conflict was not a major focus of Nixon's attention during his first term—for one thing, he felt that no matter what he did, American Jews would oppose his reelection.[a] On October 6, 1973, an Arab coalition led by Egypt and Syria, supported with arms and materiel by the Soviet Union, attacked Israel in the Yom Kippur War. Israel suffered heavy losses and Nixon ordered an airlift to resupply Israeli losses, cutting through inter-departmental squabbles and bureaucracy and taking personal responsibility for any response by Arab nations. More than a week later, by the time the U.S. and Soviet Union began negotiating a truce, Israel had penetrated deep into enemy territory. The truce negotiations rapidly escalated into a superpower crisis; when Israel gained the upper hand, Egyptian President Sadat requested a joint U.S.–USSR peacekeeping mission, which the U.S. refused. When Soviet Premier Brezhnev threatened to unilaterally enforce any peacekeeping mission militarily, Nixon ordered the U.S. military to DEFCON3,[185] placing all U.S. military personnel and bases on alert for nuclear war. This was the closest the world had come to nuclear war since the Cuban Missile Crisis. Brezhnev backed down as a result of Nixon's actions.[186] Because Israel's victory was largely due to U.S. support, the Arab OPEC nations retaliated by refusing to sell crude oil to the U.S., resulting in the 1973 oil crisis.[187] The embargo caused gasoline shortages and rationing in the United States in late 1973, and was eventually ended by the oil-producing nations as peace in the Middle East took hold.[188] After the war, and under Nixon's presidency, the U.S. reestablished relations with Egypt for the first time since 1967. Nixon used the Middle East crisis to restart the stalled Middle East Peace Negotiations; he wrote in a confidential memo to Kissinger on October 20: I believe that, beyond a doubt, we are now facing the best opportunity we have had in 15 years to build a lasting peace in the Middle East. I am convinced history will hold us responsible if we let this opportunity slip by ... I now consider a permanent Middle East settlement to be the most important final goal to which we must devote ourselves.[189] Nixon made one of his final international visits as president to the Middle East in June 1974, and became the first President to visit Israel.[190] Domestic policy Economy Further information: Nixon shock and 1970s energy crisis Nixon at the Washington Senators' 1969 Opening Day with team owner Bob Short (arms folded) and Baseball Commissioner Bowie Kuhn (hand on mouth). Nixon's aide, Major Jack Brennan, sits behind them in uniform. At the time Nixon took office in 1969, inflation was at 4.7 percent—its highest rate since the Korean War. The Great Society had been enacted under Johnson, which, together with the Vietnam War costs, was causing large budget deficits. Unemployment was low, but interest rates were at their highest in a century.[191] Nixon's major economic goal was to reduce inflation; the most obvious means of doing so was to end the war.[191] This could not be accomplished overnight, and the U.S. economy continued to struggle through 1970, contributing to a lackluster Republican performance in the midterm congressional elections (Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress throughout Nixon's presidency).[192] According to political economist Nigel Bowles in his 2011 study of Nixon's economic record, the new president did little to alter Johnson's policies through the first year of his presidency.[193] Nixon was far more interested in foreign affairs than domestic policies, but he believed that voters tend to focus on their own financial condition and that economic conditions were a threat to his reelection. As part of his "New Federalism" views, he proposed grants to the states, but these proposals were for the most part lost in the congressional budget process. However, Nixon gained political credit for advocating them.[192] In 1970, Congress had granted the president the power to impose wage and price freezes, though the Democratic majorities, knowing Nixon had opposed such controls throughout his career, did not expect Nixon to actually use the authority.[193] With inflation unresolved by August 1971, and an election year looming, Nixon convened a summit of his economic advisers at Camp David. Nixon's options were to limit fiscal and monetary expansionist policies that reduced unemployment or end the dollar's fixed exchange rate; Nixon's dilemma has been cited as an example of the Impossible trinity in international economics.[194][195] He then announced temporary wage and price controls, allowed the dollar to float against other currencies, and ended the convertibility of the dollar into gold.[196] Bowles points out, by identifying himself with a policy whose purpose was inflation's defeat, Nixon made it difficult for Democratic opponents ... to criticize him. His opponents could offer no alternative policy that was either plausible or believable since the one they favored was one they had designed but which the president had appropriated for himself.[193] Nixon's policies dampened inflation through 1972, although their aftereffects contributed to inflation during his second term and into the Ford administration.[196] Nixon's decision to end the gold standard in the United States led to the collapse of the Bretton Woods system. According to Thomas Oatley, "the Bretton Woods system collapsed so that Nixon might win the 1972 presidential election."[194] After Nixon won re-election, inflation was returning.[197] He reimposed price controls in June 1973. The price controls became unpopular with the public and businesspeople, who saw powerful labor unions as preferable to the price board bureaucracy.[197] The controls produced food shortages, as meat disappeared from grocery stores and farmers drowned chickens rather than sell them at a loss.[197] Despite the failure to control inflation, controls were slowly ended, and on April 30, 1974, their statutory authorization lapsed.[197] Governmental initiatives and organization Nixon gives the 1971 State of the Union Address. Official Nixon portrait by James Anthony Wills, c. 1984 Graph of increases in U.S. incarceration rate Nixon advocated a "New Federalism", which would devolve power to state and local elected officials, though Congress was hostile to these ideas and enacted few of them.[198] He eliminated the Cabinet-level United States Post Office Department, which in 1971 became the government-run United States Postal Service.[199] Nixon was a late supporter of the conservation movement. Environmental policy had not been a significant issue in the 1968 election, and the candidates were rarely asked for their views on the subject. Nixon broke new ground by discussing environmental policy in his State of the Union speech in 1970. He saw that the first Earth Day in April 1970 presaged a wave of voter interest on the subject, and sought to use that to his benefit; in June he announced the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).[200] He relied on his domestic advisor John Ehrlichman, who favored protection of natural resources, to keep him "out of trouble on environmental issues."[201] Other initiatives supported by Nixon included the Clean Air Act of 1970 and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the National Environmental Policy Act required environmental impact statements for many Federal projects.[201][200] Nixon vetoed the Clean Water Act of 1972—objecting not to the policy goals of the legislation but to the amount of money to be spent on them, which he deemed excessive. After Congress overrode his veto, Nixon impounded the funds he deemed unjustifiable.[202] In 1971, Nixon proposed health insurance refo

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The video "Africa: Continent in Crisis" featuring an interview with Maceo Dixon offers a firsthand account of the challenges facing many communities in sub-Saharan Africa. Dixon's two-month trip to the region provided him with a deep understanding of the complex issues at play. Sub-Saharan Africa, Subsahara, or Non-Mediterranean Africa[3] is the area and regions of the continent of Africa that lie south of the Sahara. These include Central Africa, East Africa, Southern Africa, and West Africa. Geopolitically, in addition to the African countries and territories that are situated fully in that specified region, the term may also include polities that only have part of their territory located in that region, per the definition of the United Nations (UN).[4] This is considered a non-standardized geographical region with the number of countries included varying from 46 to 48 depending on the organization describing the region (e.g. UN, WHO, World Bank, etc.). The African Union (AU) uses a different regional breakdown, recognizing all 55 member states on the continent—grouping them into five distinct and standard regions. The term serves as a grouping counterpart to North Africa, which is instead grouped with the definition of MENA (i.e. Middle East and North Africa) as it is part of the Arab world, and most North African states are likewise members of the Arab League. However, while they are also member states of the Arab League, the Comoros, Djibouti, Mauritania, and Somalia (and sometimes Sudan) are all geographically considered to be part of sub-Saharan Africa.[5] Overall, the UN Development Programme applies the "sub-Saharan" classification to 46 of Africa's 55 countries, excluding Djibouti, SADR, Somalia, and Sudan.[6] Since around 3900 BCE,[7][8] the Saharan and sub-Saharan regions of Africa have been separated by the extremely harsh climate of the sparsely populated Sahara, forming an effective barrier that is interrupted only by the Nile in Sudan, though navigation on the Nile was blocked by the Sudd and the river's cataracts. There is also an evident genetic divide between North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa that dates back to the Neolithic. The Sahara pump theory explains how flora and fauna (including Homo sapiens) left Africa to penetrate Eurasia and beyond. African pluvial periods are associated with a "Wet Sahara" phase, during which larger lakes and more rivers existed.[9] Nomenclature Ethnographic map of Africa, from Meyers Blitz-Lexikon (1932) Geographers historically divided the region into several distinct ethnographic sections based on each area's respective inhabitants.[10] Commentators in Arabic in the medieval period used the general term bilâd as-sûdân ("Land of the Blacks") for the vast Sudan region (an expression denoting Central and West Africa),[11] or sometimes extending from the coast of West Africa to Western Sudan.[12] Its equivalent in Southeast Africa was Zanj ("Country of the Blacks"), which was situated in the vicinity of the Great Lakes region.[10][12] The geographers drew an explicit ethnographic distinction between the Sudan region and its analogue Zanj, from the area to their extreme east on the Red Sea coast in the Horn of Africa.[10] In modern-day Ethiopia and Eritrea was Al-Habash or Abyssinia,[13] which was inhabited by the Habash or Abyssinians, who were the forebears of the Habesha.[14] In northern Somalia was Barbara or the Bilad al-Barbar ("Land of the Berbers"), which was inhabited by the Eastern Baribah or Barbaroi, as the ancestors of the Somalis were referred to by medieval Arab and ancient Greek geographers, respectively.[10][15][16][17] In the 19th and 20th centuries, the populations south of the Sahara were divided into three broad ancestral groups: Hamites and Semites in the Horn of Africa and Sahel related to those in North Africa, who spoke languages belonging to the Afroasiatic family; Negroes in most of the rest of the subcontinent (hence, the toponym Black Africa for Africa south of the Sahara[18]), who spoke languages belonging to the Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan families; and Khoisan in Southern Africa, who spoke languages belonging to the Khoisan family. Climate zones and ecoregions Further information: Afrotropical realm; Tropical and subtropical grasslands, savannas, and shrublands; and List of tropical and subtropical moist broadleaf forests ecoregions Climate zones of Africa, showing the ecological break between the hot desert climate of North Africa and the Horn of Africa (red), the hot semi-arid climate of the Sahel and areas surrounding semi-deserts (orange) and the tropical climate of Central and West Africa (blue). Southern Africa has a transition to subtropical or temperate climates (green and yellow), and more desert or semi-desert regions, centered on Namibia and Botswana. Sub-Saharan Africa has a wide variety of climate zones or biomes. South Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo in particular are considered megadiverse countries. It has a dry winter season and a wet summer season. The Sahel extends across all of Africa at a latitude of about 10° to 15° N. Countries that include parts of the Sahara Desert proper in their northern territories and parts of the Sahel in their southern region include Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, and Sudan. The Sahel has a hot semi-arid climate. South of the Sahel, a belt of savanna (the West and East Sudanian savannas) stretch from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ethiopian Highlands. The more humid Guinean and Northern Congolian forest–savanna mosaic lie between the savannas and the equatorial forests. The Horn of Africa includes hot desert climate along the coast but a hot semi-arid climate can be found much more in the interior, contrasting with savanna and moist broadleaf forests in the Ethiopian Highlands. Tropical Africa encompasses tropical rainforest stretching along the southern coast of West Africa and across most of Central Africa (the Congo) west of the African Great Lakes. In East Africa, woodlands, savannas, and grasslands are found in the equatorial zone, including the Serengeti ecosystem in Tanzania and Kenya. Distinctive Afromontane forests, grasslands, and shrublands are found in the high mountains and mountain ranges of eastern Africa, from the Ethiopian Highlands to South Africa. South of the equatorial forests, the Western and Southern Congolian forest–savanna mosaic are transition zones between the tropical forests and the miombo woodland belt that spans the continent from Angola to Mozambique and Tanzania. The Namib and Kalahari Deserts lie in Southern Africa, and are surrounded by semi-deserts including the Karoo region of South Africa. The Bushveld grasslands lie to the east of the deserts. The Cape Floristic Region is at Africa's southern tip, and is home to diverse subtropical and temperate forests, woodlands, grasslands, and shrublands. History Main articles: History of Africa, History of West Africa, History of Central Africa, History of East Africa, and History of Southern Africa Further information: African empires, List of kingdoms in pre-colonial Africa § List of African kingdoms, and African archaeology Prehistory Further information: History of Africa § Prehistory, Prehistoric West Africa, Prehistoric Central Africa, Prehistoric East Africa, Horn of Africa § Prehistory, Prehistoric Southern Africa, and African archaeology Stone chopping tool from Olduvai Gorge According to paleontology, early hominid skull anatomy was similar to that of their close cousins, the great African forest apes, gorilla and chimpanzee. However, they had adopted a bipedal locomotion and freed hands, giving them a crucial advantage enabling them to live in both forested areas and on the open savanna at a time when Africa was drying up, with savanna encroaching on forested areas. This occurred 10 million to 5 million years ago.[19] By 3 million years ago several australopithecine hominid species had developed throughout Southern, East, and Central Africa. They were tool users rather than tool manufacturers. The next major evolutionary step occurred around 2.3 million BCE, when primitive stone tools were used to scavenge the carcasses of animals killed by other predators, both for their meat and their marrow. In hunting, H. habilis was most likely not capable of competing with large predators and was more prey than hunter, although H. habilis likely did steal eggs from nests and may have been able to catch small game and weakened larger prey such as cubs and older animals. The tools were classed as Oldowan.[20] Roughly 1.8 million years ago, Homo ergaster first appeared in the fossil record in Africa. From Homo ergaster, Homo erectus (upright man) evolved 1.5 million years ago. Some of the earlier representatives of this species were small-brained and used primitive stone tools, much like H. habilis. The brain later grew in size, and H. erectus eventually developed a more complex stone tool technology called the Acheulean. Potentially the first hominid to engage in hunting, H. erectus mastered the art of making fire. They were the first hominids to leave Africa, going on to colonize the entire Old World, and perhaps later on giving rise to Homo floresiensis. Although some recent writers suggest that H. georgicus, a H. habilis descendant, was the first and most primitive hominid to ever live outside Africa, many scientists consider H. georgicus to be an early and primitive member of the H. erectus species.[21] The fossil and genetic evidence shows Homo sapiens developed in Southern and East Africa by around 350,000 to 260,000 years ago[22][23][24] and gradually migrated across the continent in waves. Between 50,000 and 60,000 years ago, their expansion out of Africa launched the colonization of the planet by modern humans. By 10,000 BCE, Homo sapiens had spread to all corners of the world. This dispersal of the human species is suggested by linguistic, cultural and genetic evidence.[20][25] During the 11th millennium BP, pottery was independently invented in West Africa, with the earliest pottery there dating to about 9,400 BC from central Mali.[26] It spread throughout the Sahel and southern Sahara.[27] After the Sahara became a desert, it did not present a totally impenetrable barrier for travelers between north and south because of the application of animal husbandry towards carrying water, food, and supplies across the desert. Prior to the introduction of the camel,[28] the use of oxen, mule, and horses for desert crossing was common, and trade routes followed chains of oases that were strung across the desert. The trans-saharan trade was in full motion by 500 BCE with Carthage being a major economic force for its establishment.[29][30][31] It is thought that the camel was first brought to Egypt after the Persian Empire conquered Egypt in 525 BCE, although large herds did not become common enough in North Africa for camels to be the pack animal of choice for the trans-saharan trade.[32] West Africa Main article: History of West Africa Further information: Ghana Empire, Mali Empire, Songhay Empire, Kingdom of Benin, and Kingdom of Nri Nok sculpture, terracotta, Louvre The Bantu expansion is a major migration movement that originated in West Central Africa (possibly around Cameroon) around 2500 BCE, reaching East and Central Africa by 1000 BCE and Southern Africa by the early centuries CE. The Djenné-Djenno city-state flourished from 250 BCE to 900 CE and was influential to the development of the Ghana Empire. The Nok culture of Nigeria (lasting from 1,500 BCE to 200 CE) is known from a type of terracotta figure.[33] There were a number of medieval empires of the southern Sahara and the Sahel, based on trans-Saharan trade, including the Ghana Empire and the Mali Empire, Songhai Empire, the Kanem Empire and the subsequent Bornu Empire.[34] They built stone structures like in Tichit, but mainly constructed in adobe. The Great Mosque of Djenne is most reflective of Sahelian architecture and is the largest adobe building in the world. In the forest zone, several states and empires such as Bono State, Akwamu and others emerged. The Ashanti Empire arose in the 18th century in modern-day Ghana.[35] The Kingdom of Nri, was established by the Igbo in the 11th century. Nri was famous for having a priest-king who wielded no military power. Nri was a rare African state which was a haven for freed slaves and outcasts who sought refuge in their territory. Other major states included the kingdoms of Ifẹ and Oyo in the western block of Nigeria which became prominent about 700–900 and 1400 respectively, and center of Yoruba culture. The Yoruba's built massive mud walls around their cities, the most famous being Sungbo's Eredo. Another prominent kingdom in southwestern Nigeria was the Kingdom of Benin 9th–11th century whose power lasted between the 15th and 19th century and was one of the greatest Empires of African history documented all over the world. Their dominance reached as far as the well-known city of Eko which was named Lagos by the Portuguese traders and other early European settlers. The Edo-speaking people of Benin are known for their famous bronze casting and rich coral, wealth, ancient science and technology and the Walls of Benin, which is the largest man-made structure in the world. In the 18th century, the Oyo and the Aro confederacy were responsible for most of the slaves exported from modern-day Nigeria, selling them to European slave traders.[36] Following the Napoleonic Wars, the British expanded their influence into the Nigerian interior. In 1885, British claims to a West African sphere of influence received international recognition, and in the following year the Royal Niger Company was chartered under the leadership of Sir George Goldie. In 1900, the company's territory came under the control of the British government, which moved to consolidate its hold over the area of modern Nigeria. On 1 January 1901, Nigeria became a British protectorate as part of the British Empire, the foremost world power at the time. Nigeria was granted its independence in 1960 during the period of decolonization. Central Africa Main article: History of Central Africa Fictionalised portrait of Nzinga, queen of the Ndongo and Matamba kingdoms Archeological finds in Central Africa provide evidence of human settlement that may date back over 10,000 years.[37] According to Zangato and Holl, there is evidence of iron-smelting in the Central African Republic and Cameroon that may date back to 3,000 to 2,500 BCE.[38] Extensive walled sites and settlements have recently been found in Zilum, Chad. The area is located approximately 60 km (37 mi) southwest of Lake Chad, and has been radiocarbon dated to the first millennium BCE.[39][40] Trade and improved agricultural techniques supported more sophisticated societies, leading to the early civilizations of Sao, Kanem, Bornu, Shilluk, Baguirmi, and Wadai.[41] Following the Bantu Migration into Central Africa, during the 14th century, the Luba Kingdom in southeast Congo came about under a king whose political authority derived from religious, spiritual legitimacy. The kingdom controlled agriculture and regional trade of salt and iron from the north and copper from the Zambian/Congo copper belt.[42] Rival kingship factions which split from the Luba Kingdom later moved among the Lunda people, marrying into its elite and laying the foundation of the Lunda Empire in the 16th century. The ruling dynasty centralised authority among the Lunda under the Mwata Yamyo or Mwaant Yaav. The Mwata Yamyo's legitimacy, like that of the Luba king, came from being viewed as a spiritual religious guardian. This imperial cult or system of divine kings was spread to most of central Africa by rivals in kingship migrating and forming new states. Many new states received legitimacy by claiming descent from the Lunda dynasties.[42] The Kingdom of Kongo existed from the Atlantic west to the Kwango river to the east. During the 15th century, the Bakongo farming community was united with its capital at M'banza-Kongo, under the king title, Manikongo.[42] Other significant states and peoples included the Kuba Kingdom, producers of the famous raffia cloth, the Eastern Lunda, Bemba, Burundi, Rwanda, and the Kingdom of Ndongo. East Africa Main article: History of East Africa Sudan Further information: History of Sudan Sphinx of the Nubian Emperor Taharqa Nubia, covered by present-day northern Sudan and southern Egypt, was referred to as "Aethiopia" ("land of the burnt face") by the Greeks.[43] Nubia in her greatest phase is considered sub-Saharan Africa's oldest urban civilisation. Nubia was a major source of gold for the ancient world. Nubians built famous structures and numerous pyramids. Sudan, the site of ancient Nubia, has more pyramids than anywhere else in the world.[44][better source needed] Horn of Africa Main article: Horn of Africa § History Further information: History of Ethiopia, History of Somalia, History of Eritrea, History of Djibouti, and Ethiopian historiography Stone city of Gondershe, Somalia The Axumite Empire spanned the southern Sahara, south Arabia and the Sahel along the western shore of the Red Sea. Located in northern Ethiopia and Eritrea, Aksum was deeply involved in the trade network between India and the Mediterranean. Growing from the proto-Aksumite Iron Age period (c. 4th century BCE), it rose to prominence by the 1st century CE. The Aksumites constructed monolithic stelae to cover the graves of their kings, such as King Ezana's Stele. The later Zagwe dynasty, established in the 12th century, built churches out of solid rock. These rock-hewn structures include the Church of St. George at Lalibela. Fasilides Castle, Ethiopia In ancient Somalia, city-states flourished such as Opone, Mosyllon and Malao that competed with the Sabaeans, Parthians and Axumites for the wealthy Indo–Greco–Roman trade.[45] In the Middle Ages several powerful Somali empires dominated the region's trade, including the Ajuran Sultanate, which excelled in hydraulic engineering and fortress building,[46] the Sultanate of Adal, whose General Ahmed Gurey was the first African commander in history to use cannon warfare on the continent during Adal's conquest of the Ethiopian Empire,[47] and the Geledi Sultanate, whose military dominance forced governors of the Omani empire north of the city of Lamu to pay tribute to the Somali Sultan Ahmed Yusuf.[48][49][50] Southeast Africa Further information: Southeast Africa § History, and History of Africa § Southeast Africa According to the theory of recent African origin of modern humans, the mainstream position held within the scientific community, all humans originate from either Southeast Africa or the Horn of Africa.[51] During the first millennium CE, Nilotic and Bantu-speaking peoples moved into the region, and the latter now account for three-quarters of Kenya's population. The Tongoni Ruins south of Tanga in Tanzania On the coastal section of Southeast Africa, a mixed Bantu community developed through contact with Muslim Arab and Persian traders, leading to the development of the mixed Arab, Persian and African Swahili City States.[52] The Swahili culture that emerged from these exchanges evinces many Arab and Islamic influences not seen in traditional Bantu culture, as do the many Afro-Arab members of the Bantu Swahili people. With its original speech community centered on the coastal parts of Tanzania (particularly Zanzibar) and Kenya – a seaboard referred to as the Swahili Coast – the Bantu Swahili language contains many Arabic loan-words as a consequence of these interactions.[53] The earliest Bantu inhabitants of the Southeast coast of Kenya and Tanzania encountered by these later Arab and Persian settlers have been variously identified with the trading settlements of Rhapta, Azania and Menouthias[54] referenced in early Greek and Chinese writings from 50 CE to 500 CE.[55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62] These early writings perhaps document the first wave of Bantu settlers to reach Southeast Africa during their migration.[63] Between the 14th and 15th centuries, large medieval Southeast African kingdoms and states emerged, such as the Buganda,[64] Bunyoro and Karagwe[64] kingdoms of Uganda and Tanzania. During the early 1960s, the Southeast African nations achieved independence from colonial rule. Southern Africa Main article: History of Southern Africa Further information: Kingdom of Mutapa Great Zimbabwe: Tower in the Great Enclosure Settlements of Bantu-speaking peoples, who were iron-using agriculturists and herdsmen, were already present south of the Limpopo River by the 4th or 5th century displacing and absorbing the original Khoisan speakers. They slowly moved south, and the earliest ironworks in modern-day KwaZulu-Natal Province are believed to date from around 1050. The southernmost group was the Xhosa people, whose language incorporates certain linguistic traits from the earlier Khoisan inhabitants. They reached the Fish River in today's Eastern Cape Province. Monomotapa was a medieval kingdom (c. 1250–1629), which existed between the Zambezi and Limpopo rivers of Southern Africa in the territory of modern-day Zimbabwe and Mozambique. Its old capital was located at Great Zimbabwe. In 1487, Bartolomeu Dias became the first European to reach the southernmost tip of Africa. In 1652, a victualling station was established at the Cape of Good Hope by Jan van Riebeeck on behalf of the Dutch East India Company. For most of the 17th and 18th centuries, the slowly expanding settlement was a Dutch possession. In 1795, the Dutch colony was captured by the British during the French Revolutionary Wars. The British intended to use Cape Town as a major port on the route to Australia and India. It was later returned to the Dutch in 1803, but soon afterward the Dutch East India Company declared bankruptcy, and the Dutch (now under French control) and the British found themselves at war again. The British captured the Dutch possession yet again at the Battle of Blaauwberg, commanded by Sir David Blair. The Zulu Kingdom was a Southern African tribal state in what is now KwaZulu-Natal in southeastern South Africa. The small kingdom gained world fame during and after their defeat in the Anglo-Zulu War. During the 1950s and early 1960s, most sub-Saharan African nations achieved independence from colonial rule.[65] Demographics Main article: Demographics of Africa Population Further information: List of African countries by population Population density in Africa, 2006 Fertility rates and life expectancy in sub-Saharan Africa According to the 2022 revision of the World Population Prospects[66][67], the population of sub-Saharan Africa was 1.1 billion in 2019. The current growth rate is 2.3%. The UN predicts for the region a population between 2 and 2.5 billion by 2050[68] with a population density of 80 per km2 compared to 170 for Western Europe, 140 for Asia and 30 for the Americas. Sub-Saharan African countries top the list of countries and territories by fertility rate with 40 of the highest 50, all with TFR greater than 4 in 2008. All are above the world average except South Africa and Seychelles.[69] More than 40% of the population in sub-Saharan countries is younger than 15 years old, as well as in Sudan, with the exception of South Africa.[70] Country Population Area (km2) Literacy (M/F)[71] GDP per Capita (PPP)[72] Trans (Rank/Score)[73] Life (Exp.)[71] HDI EODBR/SAB[74] PFI (RANK/MARK) Angola 18,498,000 1,246,700 82.9%/54.2% 6,800 168/2 42.4 0.486 172/171 132/58,43 Burundi 8,988,091 27,830 67.3%/52.2% 700 168/1.8 49 0.316 176/130 103/29,00 Democratic Republic of the Congo 68,692,542 2,345,410 80.9%/54.1% 800 162/11.9 46.1 0.286 182/152 146/53,50 Cameroon 18,879,301 475,440 77%/59.8% 3,700 146/2.2 50.3 0.482 171/174 109/30,50 Central African Republic 4,511,488 622,984 64.8%/33.5% 700 158/2.8 44.4 0.343 183/159 80/17,75 Chad 10,329,208 1,284,000 40.8%/12.8% 2,300 175/1.6 50.6 0.328 178/182 132/44,50 Republic of the Congo 3,700,000 342,000 90.5%/79.0% 800 162/1.9 54.8 0.533 N/A 116/34,25 Equatorial Guinea 1,110,000 28,051 93.4%/80.3% 37,400 168/1.8 51.1 0.537 170/178 158/65,50 Gabon 1,514,993 267,667 88.5%/79.7% 18,100 106/2.9 56.7 0.674 158/152 129/43,50 Kenya 39,002,772 582,650 77.7%/70.2% 3,500 146/2.2 57.8 0.519 95/124 96/25,00 Nigeria 174,507,539 923,768 84.4%/72.7%[75] 5,900 136/2.7 57 0.504 131/120 112/34,24 Rwanda 10,473,282 26,338 71.4%/59.8% 2,100 89/3.3 46.8 0.429 67/11 157/64,67 São Tomé and Príncipe 212,679 1,001 92.2%/77.9% 3,200 111/2.8 65.2 0.509 180/140 NA Tanzania 44,928,923 945,087 77.5%/62.2% 3,200 126/2.6 51.9 0.466 131/120 NA/15,50 Uganda 32,369,558 236,040 76.8%/57.7% 2,400 130/2.5 50.7 0.446 112/129 86/21,50 Sudan 31,894,000 1,886,068 79.6%/60.8% 4,300 176/1.5 62.57[76] 0.408 154/118 148/54,00 South Sudan 8,260,490 619,745 1,600 Djibouti 516,055 23,000 N/A 3,600 111/2.8 54.5 0.430 163/177 110/31,00 Eritrea 5,647,168 121,320 N/A 1,600 126/2.6 57.3 0.349 175/181 175/115,50 Ethiopia 85,237,338 1,127,127 50%/28.8% 2,200 120/2.7 52.5 0.363 107/93 140/49,00 Somalia 9,832,017 637,657 N/A N/A 180/1.1 47.7 N/A N/A 164/77,50 Botswana 1,990,876 600,370 80.4%/81.8% 17,000 37/5.6 49.8 0.633 45/83 62/15,50 Comoros 752,438 2,170 N/A 1,600 143/2.3 63.2 0.433 162/168 82/19,00 Lesotho 2,130,819 30,355 73.7%/90.3% 3,300 89/3.3 42.9 0.450 130/131 99/27,50 Madagascar 19,625,000 587,041 76.5%/65.3% 1,600 99/3.0 59 0.480 134/12 134/45,83 Malawi 14,268,711 118,480 N/A 1,200 89/3.3 47.6 0.400 132/128 62/15,50 Mauritius 1,284,264 2,040 88.2%/80.5% 22,300 42/5.4 73.2 0.728 17/10 51/14,00 Mozambique 21,669,278 801,590 N/A 1,300 130/2.5 42.5 0.322 135/96 82/19,00 Namibia 2,108,665 825,418 86.8%/83.6% 11,200 56/4.5 52.5 0.625 66/123 35/9,00 Seychelles 87,476 455 91.4%/92.3% 29,300 54/4.8 72.2 0.773 111/81 72/16,00 South Africa 59,899,991 1,219,912 N/A 13,600 55/4.7 50.7 0.619 34/67 33/8,50 Eswatini 1,123,913 17,363 80.9%/78.3% 11,089 79/3.6 40.8 0.608 115/158 144/52,50 Zambia 11,862,740 752,614 N/A 4,000 99/3.0 41.7 0.430 90/94 97/26,75 Zimbabwe 11,392,629 390,580 92.7%/86.2% 2,300 146/2.2 42.7 0.376 159/155 136/46,50 Benin 8,791,832 112,620 47.9%/42.3% 2,300 106/2.9 56.2 0.427 172/155 97/26,75 Mali 12,666,987 1,240,000 32.7%/15.9% 2,200 111/2.8 53.8 0.359 156/139 38/8,00 Burkina Faso 15,730,977 274,200 25.3% 1,900 79/3.6 51 0.331 150/116 N/A Cape Verde 499,000 322,462 7,000 Ivory Coast 20,617,068 322,463 3,900 Gambia 1,782,893 11,295 2,600 Ghana 24,200,000 238,535 4,700 Guinea 10,057,975 245,857 2,200 Guinea-Bissau 1,647,000 36,125 1,900 Liberia 4,128,572 111,369 1,300 Mauritania 3,359,185 1,030,700 4,500 Niger 17,129,076 1,267,000 1,200 Senegal 12,855,153 196,712 3,500 Sierra Leone 6,190,280 71,740 1,600 Togo 7,154,237 56,785 1,700 GDP per Capita (PPP) (2016, 2017 (PPP, US$)), Life (Exp.) (Life Expectancy 2006), Literacy (Male/Female 2006), Trans (Transparency 2009), HDI (Human Development Index), EODBR (Ease of Doing Business Rank June 2008 through May 2009), SAB (Starting a Business June 2008 through May 2009), PFI (Press Freedom Index 2009) Languages and ethnic groups Further information: Languages of Africa, Writing systems of Africa § Indigenous writing systems, List of African ethnic groups, African diaspora, and Black people Map showing the traditional language families spoken in Africa Yoruba drummers (Niger-Congo) A San man (Khoisan) Maasai women and children (Nilo-Saharan) Saho women (Afroasiatic) A Boer European African family (Indo-European) Sub-Saharan Africa contains over 1,500 languages. Afroasiatic With the exception of the extinct Sumerian (a language isolate) of Mesopotamia, Afroasiatic has the oldest documented history of any language family in the world. Egyptian was recorded as early as 3200 BCE. The Semitic branch was recorded as early as 2900 BCE in the form of the Akkadian language of Mesopotamia (Assyria and Babylonia) and circa 2500 BCE in the form of the Eblaite language of northeastern Syria.[77] The distribution of the Afroasiatic languages within Africa is principally concentrated in North Africa and the Horn of Africa. Languages belonging to the family's Berber branch are mainly spoken in the north, with its speech area extending into the Sahel (northern Mauritania, northern Mali, northern Niger).[78][79] The Cushitic branch of Afroasiatic is centered in the Horn, and is also spoken in the Nile Valley and parts of the African Great Lakes region. Additionally, the Semitic branch of the family, in the form of Arabic, is widely spoken in the parts of Africa that are within the Arab world. South Semitic languages are also spoken in parts of the Horn of Africa (Ethiopia, Eritrea). The Chadic branch is distributed in Central and West Africa.[80] Hausa, its most widely spoken language, serves as a lingua franca in West Africa (Niger, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Cameroon, and Chad).[81] Khoisan The several families lumped under the term Khoi-San include languages indigenous to Southern Africa and Tanzania, though some, such as the Khoi languages, appear to have moved to their current locations not long before the Bantu expansion.[82] In Southern Africa, their speakers are the Khoikhoi and San (Bushmen), in Southeast Africa, the Sandawe and Hadza. Niger–Congo The Niger–Congo family is the largest in the world in terms of the number of languages (1,436) it contains.[83] The vast majority of languages of this family are tonal, such as Yoruba and Igbo. However, others such as Fulani, Wolof and Kiswahili are not. A major branch of the Niger–Congo languages is Bantu, which covers a greater geographic area than the rest of the family. Bantu speakers represent the majority of inhabitants in southern, central and southeastern Africa, though San, Pygmy, and Nilotic groups, respectively, can also be found in those regions. Bantu-speakers can also be found in parts of Central Africa such as the Gabon, Equatorial Guinea and southern Cameroon. Swahili, a Bantu language with many Arabic, Persian and other Middle Eastern and South Asian loan words, developed as a lingua franca for trade between the different peoples in southeastern Africa. In the Kalahari Desert of Southern Africa, the distinct people known as Bushmen (also "San", closely related to, but distinct from "Hottentots") have long been present. The San evince unique physical traits, and are the indigenous people of southern Africa. Pygmies are the pre-Bantu indigenous peoples of Central Africa. Nilo-Saharan The Nilo-Saharan languages are concentrated in the upper parts of the Chari and Nile rivers of Central Africa and Southeast Africa. They are principally spoken by Nilotic peoples and are also spoken in Sudan among the Fur, Masalit, Nubian and Zaghawa peoples and in West and Central Africa among the Songhai, Zarma and Kanuri. The Old Nubian language is also a member of this family. Major languages of Africa by region, family and number of primary language speakers in millions: Central Africa Niger–Congo, Bantu Lingala[84] Kinyarwanda: 12[85] Kongo: 5+[84][86][87] Tshiluba[84] Kirundi[88] Nilo-Saharan Nubian: 5+[89] Fur: 5+[90] Zaghawa[91] Masalit Niger–Congo Kordofanian languages Nuba[92] Horn of Africa Afro-Asiatic Semitic Amharic: 20+ Tigrinya: 5 Cushitic Somali: 10–15 Oromo: 30–35 Nilo-Saharan: <1[93][94] Gumuz Anuak Kunama Nara Niger–Congo: <1[95][96] Zigula Swahili (Bravanese and Bajuni dialects) Southeast Africa Niger–Congo, Bantu: Swahili: 5–10 Gikuyu: 9[97] Ganda: 20[98] Luhya: 6[97] Austronesian Malagasy: 20+[99] Niger-Congo, Ubangian Gbaya: 2[100][failed verification] Banda: 1–2[100] Zande[101][failed verification] Nilo-Saharan Kanuri: 10[102][103][104] Luo: 5[97][105] Sara: 3–4[100][104] Kalenjin: 5[97] Dinka[101] Nuer[101] Shilluk[101] Maasai: 1–2[106][107] Southern Africa Niger–Congo, Bantu Zulu: 10[108] Xhosa: 8[108] Shona: 7 Sotho: 5 Tswana: 4[108][109] Umbundu: 4[86] Northern Sotho: 4[108] Chichewa: 8[110][111] Makua: 8[112] Indo-European Germanic Afrikaans: 7–10 Romance Portuguese: 14[113] West Africa Niger–Congo Benue–Congo Ibibio (Nigeria): 7[102] Volta–Niger Igbo (Nigeria): 30–35[102] Yoruba: 40[102] Kwa: Akan (Ghana, Ivory Coast): 20–25 Gur More: 5 Senegambian Fula (West Africa): 40[102][103][114][115][116] Wolof: 8[114][115] Afro-Asiatic Chadic Hausa: 50[102][103] Nilo-Saharan Saharan Kanuri: 10[103][104][117] Songhai: 5[103][117] Zarma: 5[103][117] Genetic history Main articles: Genetic history of Africa and Genetic history of the African diaspora Major cities Lagos Kinshasa Further information: Urbanization in Africa Sub-Saharan Africa has several large cities. Lagos is a city in the Nigerian state of Lagos. The city, with its adjoining conurbation, is the most populous in Nigeria, and the second-most populous in Africa after Cairo, Egypt. It is one of the fastest-growing cities in the world,[118][119][120][121][122][123][124] and also one of the most populous urban agglomerations.[125][126] Lagos is a major financial centre in Africa; this megacity has the highest GDP,[127] and also houses Apapa, one of the largest and busiest ports on the continent.[128][129][130] Dar es Salaam is the former capital of, as well as the most populous city in, Tanzania; it is a regionally important economic centre.[131] It is located on the Swahili coast. Johannesburg is the largest city in South Africa. It is the provincial capital and largest city in Gauteng, which is the wealthiest province in South Africa.[132] While Johannesburg is not one of South Africa's three capital cities, it is the seat of the Constitutional Court. The city is located in the mineral-rich Witwatersrand range of hills, and is the centre of a large-scale gold and diamond trade. Nairobi is the capital and the largest city of Kenya. The name comes from the Maasai phrase Enkare Nyrobi, which translates to "cool water", a reference to the Nairobi River which flows through the city. The city is popularly referred to as the Green City in the Sun.[133] Other major cities in sub-Saharan Africa include Abidjan, Cape Town, Kinshasa, Luanda, Mogadishu and Addis Ababa. Largest cities or towns in Sub Saharan Africa worldpopulationreview.com 2022 City Population estimates. Rank Pop. Rank Pop. 1 Lagos 21,320,000 11 Yaounde 4,336,670 2 Kinshasa 17,071,000 12 Kano 4,219,209 3 Johannesburg 11,061,878 13 Douala 3,926,645 4 Luanda 8,952,496 14 Ibadan 3,756,445 5 Dar Es Salaam 7,404,689 15 Antananarivo 3,669,900 6 Khartoum 6,160,327 16 Abuja 3,652,029 7 Abidjan 5,515,794 17 Kampala 3,651,919 8 Addis Ababa 5,227,794 18 Kumasi 3,630,326 9 Nairobi 5,118,844 19 Dakar 3,326,001 10 Cape Town 4,800,954 20 Port Harcourt 3,324,694 Economy This section needs to be updated. The reason given is: The most recent data in this section seems to be from 2015. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (April 2021) Main article: Economy of Africa In the mid-2010s, private capital flows to sub-Saharan Africa – primarily from the BRICs, private-sector investment portfolios, and remittances – began to exceed official development assistance.[134] Johannesburg As of 2011, Africa is one of the fastest developing regions in the world. Six of the world's ten fastest-growing economies over the previous decade were situated below the Sahara, with the remaining four in East and Central Asia. According to the World Bank, the economic growth rate in the region had risen to 4.7% in 2013. This continued rise was attributed to increasing investment in infrastructure and resources as well as steady expenditure per household.[135] 424 million people in sub-Saharan Africa were reportedly living in severe poverty in 2019. In 2022, 460 million people—an increase of 36 million in only three years—were anticipated to be living in extreme poverty as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.[136][137][138] Sub-Saharan Africa's government debt rose from 28% of gross domestic product in 2012 to 50% of gross domestic product in 2019. The COVID-19 pandemic caused it to rise to 57% of gross domestic product in 2021.[139][140][141] Sub-Saharan Africa was severely harmed when government revenue declined from 22% of GDP in 2011 to 17% in 2021. 15 African nations are at significant risk of debt, and 7 are currently in financial crisis according to the IMF.[142][143][144] The region went on to receive IMF Special Drawing Rights of $23 billion in 2021 to assist critical public spending.[145] Energy and power Main article: Mineral industry of Africa Oil production by country (with other key actors of African or oil economy) Rank Area bb/day Year Like... _ W: World 85,540,000 2007 est. 01 E: Russia 9,980,000 2007 est. 02 Ar: Saudi Arb 9,200,000 2008 est. 04 As: Libya 4,725,000 2008 est. Iran 10 Af: Nigeria 2,352,000 2011 est. Norway 15 Af: Algeria 2,173,000 2007 est. 16 Af: Angola 1,910,000 2008 est. 17 Af: Egypt 1,845,000 2007 est. 27 Af: Tunisia 664,000 2007 est. Australia 31 Af: Sudan 466,100 2007 est. Ecuador 33 Af: Eq.Guinea 368,500 2007 est. Vietnam 38 Af: DR Congo 261,000 2008 est. 39 Af: Gabon 243,900 2007 est. 40 Af: Sth Africa 199,100 2007 est. 45 Af: Chad 156,000 2008 est. Germany 53 Af: Cameroon 87,400 2008 est. France 56 E: France 71,400 2007 60 Af: Ivory Coast 54,400 2008 est. _ Af: Africa 10,780,400 2011 Russia Source: CIA.gov Archived 12 May 2012 at the Wayback Machine, World Facts Book > Oil exporters. Energy sources in sub-Saharan Africa. Fossil fuels and hydroelectric power make up the largest share of sub-Saharan African electricity. As of 2009, 50% of Africa was rural with no access to electricity. In 2021, Africa generated 889 TWh of electricity, amounting to 3.13% of the global market share.[146] Many countries are affected by power shortages.[147] The percentage of residences with access to electricity in sub-Saharan Africa is the lowest in the world. In some remote regions, fewer than one in every 20 households has electricity.[148][149][150] The Athlone Power Station in Cape Town, South Africa Because of rising prices in commodities such as coal and oil, thermal sources of energy are proving to be too expensive for power generation. Sub-Saharan Africa has the potential to generate 1,750 TWh of energy, of which only 7% has been explored. The failure to exploit its full energy potential is largely due to significant underinvestment, as at least four times as much (approximately $23 billion a year) and what is currently spent is invested in operating high cost power systems and not on expanding the infrastructure.[151] African governments are taking advantage of the readily available water resources to broaden their energy mix. Hydro Turbine Markets in sub-Saharan Africa generated revenues of $120.0 million in 2007 and is estimated to reach $425.0 million.[when?] Asian countries, notably China, India, and Japan, are playing an active role in power projects across the African continent. The majority of these power projects are hydro-based because of China's vast experience in the construction of hydro-power projects and part of the Energy & Power Growth Partnership Services programme.[152] With electrification numbers, sub-Saharan Africa with access to the Sahara and being in the tropical zones has massive potential for solar photovoltaic electrical potential.[153] Six hundred million people could be served with electricity based on its photovoltaic potential.[154][failed verification] China is promising to train 10,000 technicians from Africa and other developing countries in the use of solar energy technologies over the next five years. Training African technicians to use solar power is part of the China-Africa science and technology cooperation agreement signed by Chinese science minister Xu Guanhua and African counterparts during premier Wen Jiabao's visit to Ethiopia in December 2003.[155] The New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) is developing an integrated, continent-wide energy strategy. This has been funded by, amongst others, the African Development Bank (AfDB) and the EU-Africa Infrastructure Trust Fund. These projects must be sustainable, involve a cross-border dimension and/or have a regional impact, involve public and private capital, contribute to poverty alleviation and economic development, and involve at least one country in sub-Saharan Africa.[151] Renewable Energy Performance Platform was established by the European Investment Bank and the United Nations Environment Programme with a five-year goal of improving energy access for at least two million people in sub-Saharan Africa. It has so far invested around $45 million to renewable energy projects in 13 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Solar power and hydropower are among the energy methods used in the projects.[148][156] Media Radio is the major source of information in sub-Saharan Africa.[157] Average coverage stands at more than a third of the population. Countries such as Gabon, Seychelles, and South Africa boast almost 100% penetration. Only five countries—Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Somalia—still have a penetration of less than 10%. Broadband penetration outside of South Africa has been limited where it is exorbitantly expensive.[158][159] Access to the internet via cell phones is on the rise.[160] Television is the second major source of information.[157] Because of power shortages, the spread of television viewing has been limited. Eight per cent have television, a total of 62 million. Those in the television industry view the region as an untapped green market. Digital television and pay for service are on the rise.[161] Oil and minerals Phenakite from the Jos Plateau, Plateau State, Nigeria The region is a major exporter to the world of gold, uranium, chromium, vanadium, antimony, coltan, bauxite, iron ore, copper, and manganese. South Africa is a major exporter of manganese[162] as well as chromium. A 2001 estimate is that 42% of the world's reserves of chromium may be found in South Africa.[163] South Africa is the largest producer of platinum, with 80% of the total world's annual mine production and 88% of the world's platinum reserve.[164] Sub-Saharan Africa produces 33% of the world's bauxite, with Guinea as the major supplier.[165] Zambia is a major producer of copper.[166] The Democratic Republic of Congo is a major source of coltan. Production from DR Congo is very small, but the country has 80% of the proven reserves in Africa, which are 80% of those worldwide.[167] Sub-Saharan Africa is a major producer of gold, producing up to 30% of global production. Major suppliers are South Africa, Ghana, Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Guinea, and Mali. South Africa had been first in the world in terms of gold production since 1905, but in 2007 it moved to second place, according to GFMS, the precious metals consultancy.[168] Uranium is major commodity from the region. Significant suppliers are Niger, Namibia, and South Africa. Namibia was the number one supplier from sub-Saharan Africa in 2008.[169] The region produces 49% of the world's diamonds. Sub-Saharan Africa has been the focus of an intense race for oil by the West, China, India, and other emerging economies, even though it holds only 10% of proven oil reserves, less than the Middle East. This race has been referred to as the second Scramble for Africa. All reasons for this global scramble come from the reserves' economic benefits. Transportation cost is low and no pipelines have to be laid as in Central Asia. Almost all reserves are offshore, so political turmoil within the host country will not directly interfere with operations. Sub-Saharan oil is viscous, with a very low sulfur content. This quickens the refining process and effectively reduces costs. New sources of oil are being located in sub-Saharan Africa more frequently than anywhere else. Of all new sources of oil, 1⁄3 are in sub-Saharan Africa.[170] Agriculture Agricultural fields in Rwanda's Eastern Province Sub-Saharan Africa has more variety of grains than anywhere in the world. Between 13,000 and 11,000 BCE wild grains began to be collected as a source of food in the cataract region of the Nile, south of Egypt. The collecting of wild grains as source of food spread to Syria, parts of Turkey, and Iran by the eleventh millennium BCE. By the tenth and ninth millennia southwest Asians domesticated their wild grains, wheat, and barley after the notion of collecting wild grains spread from the Nile.[171] Numerous crops have been domesticated in the region and spread to other parts of the world. These crops included sorghum, castor beans, coffee, cotton,[172] okra, black-eyed peas, watermelon, gourd, and pearl millet. Other domesticated crops included teff, enset, African rice, yams, kola nuts, oil palm, and raffia palm.[171][173] Domesticated animals include the guinea fowl and the donkey. The Naute Fruit Farm at the Naute Dam outside of Keetmanshoop, Namibia Agriculture represents 20% to 30% of GDP and 50% of exports. In some cases, 60% to 90% of the labor force are employed in agriculture.[174] Most agricultural activity is subsistence farming. This has made agricultural activity vulnerable to climate change and global warming. As of right now Sub-Saharan Africa has degraded land covering one million square kilometres.[175] Biotechnology has been advocated to create high yield, pest and environmentally resistant crops in the hands of small farmers. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a strong advocate and donor to this cause. Biotechnology and GM crops have met resistance both by natives and environmental groups. Cash crops include cotton, coffee, tea, cocoa, sugar, and tobacco.[176] The OECD says Africa has the potential to become an agricultural superbloc if it can unlock the wealth of the savannahs by allowing farmers to use their land as collateral for credit.[177] There is such international interest in sub-Saharan agriculture, that the World Bank increased its financing of African agricultural programs to $1.3 billion in the 2011 fiscal year.[178] Recently, there has been a trend to purchase large tracts of land in sub-Sahara for agricultural use by developing countries.[179][180] Early in 2009, George Soros highlighted a new farmland buying frenzy caused by growing population, scarce water supplies and climate change. Chinese interests bought up large swathes of Senegal to supply it with sesame. Aggressive moves by China, South Korea, and Gulf states to buy vast tracts of agricultural land in sub-Saharan Africa could soon be limited by a new global international protocol.[181] Infrastructure See also: Water supply and sanitation in sub-Saharan Africa Skyline of Libreville, Gabon According to researchers at the Overseas Development Institute, the lack of infrastructure in many developing countries represents one of the most significant limitations to economic growth and achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).[151][179][180] Infrastructure investments and maintenance can be very expensive, especially in such as areas as landlocked, rural and sparsely populated countries in Africa.[151] Infrastructure investments contributed to Africa's growth, and increased investment is necessary to maintain growth and tackle poverty.[151][179][180] The returns to investment in infrastructure are very significant, with on average 30–40% returns for telecommunications (ICT) investments, over 40% for electricity generation and 80% for roads.[151] In Africa, it is argued that in order to meet the MDGs, infrastructure investments would need to reach about 15% of GDP (around $93 billion a year).[151] Currently, the source of financing varies significantly across sectors.[151] Some sectors are dominated by state spending, others by overseas development aid (ODA) and yet others by private investors.[151] In sub-Saharan Africa, the state spends around $9.4 billion out of a total of $24.9 billion.[151] In irrigation, SSA states represent almost all spending; in transport and energy a majority of investment is state spending; in ICT and water supply and sanitation, the private sector represents the majority of capital expenditure.[151] Overall, aid, the private sector and non-OECD financiers between them exceed state spending.[151] The private sector spending alone equals state capital expenditure, though the majority is focused on ICT infrastructure investments.[151] External financing increased from $7 billion (2002) to $27 billion (2009). China, in particular, has emerged as an important investor.[151] Transport See also: Category:Transport in Africa Road in Rwanda Less than 40% of rural Africans live within two kilometers of an all-season road, the lowest level of rural accessibility in the developing world. Spending on roads averages just below 2% of GDP with varying degree among countries. This compares with 1% of GDP that is typical in industrialised countries, and 2–3% of GDP found in fast-growing emerging economies. Although the level of expenditure is high relative to the size of Africa's economies, it remains small in absolute terms, with low-income countries spending an average of about US$7 per capita per year.[182] Education Main article: Education in Africa Further information: History of education § Africa The University of Botswana's Earth Science building in Gaborone, Botswana Forty per cent of African scientists live in OECD countries, predominantly in Europe, the United States and Canada.[183] This has been described as an African brain drain.[184][185] According to Naledi Pandor, the South African Minister of Science and Technology, even with the drain enrollments in sub-Saharan African universities tripled between 1991 and 2005, expanding at an annual rate of 8.7%, which is one of the highest regional growth rates in the world.[citation needed] In the last 10 to 15 years interest in pursuing university-level degrees abroad has increased.[183] According to the CIA, low global literacy rates are concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa, West Asia and South Asia. However, literacy rates in sub-Saharan Africa vary significantly between countries. The highest registered literacy rate in the region is in Zimbabwe (90.7%; 2003 est.), while the lowest literacy rate is in South Sudan (27%).[186] Research on human capital formation was able to determine, that the numeracy levels of sub-Saharan Africa and Africa, in general, were higher than numeracy levels in South Asia. In the 1940s more than 75% of the population of sub-Saharan Africa was numerate. The numeracy of the West African countries, Benin and Ghana, was even higher with more than 80% of the population being numerate. In contrast, numeracy in South Asia was only around 50%.[187] Higher diversity in Sub-Saharan African countries has been found to lead to a poorer economy. Researchers have argued that this is because of ethnic favoritism in their politics. Sub-Saharan leaders are more likely to provide better resources to their coethnic groups when in power. A study found that, on average, children of the favored ethnic group are 2.25% more likely to attend primary school and 1.80% more likely to complete primary school. A 1% increase in GDP is associated with a 1.5% increase in the ethnic favoritism effect on primary school attendance.[188] Sub-Saharan African countries spent an average of 0.3% of their GDP on science and technology in 2007. This represents an increase from US$1.8 billion in 2002 to US$2.8 billion in 2007, a 50% increase in spending.[189][190] Major progress in access to education The University of Antananarivo in Antananarivo, Madagascar At the World Conference held in Jomtien, Thailand in 1990, delegates from 155 countries and representatives of some 150 organizations gathered with the goal to promote universal primary education and the radical reduction of illiteracy before the end of the decade. The World Education Forum, held ten years later in Dakar, Senegal, provided the opportunity to reiterate and reinforce these goals. This initiative contributed to having education made a priority of the Millennium Development Goals in 2000, with the aim of achieving universal schooling (MDG2) and eliminating gender disparities, especially in primary and secondary education (MDG3).[191] Since the World Education Forum in Dakar, considerable efforts have been made to respond to these demographic challenges in terms of education. The amount of funds raised has been decisive. Between 1999 and 2010, public spending on education as a percentage of gross national product (GNP) increased by 5% per year in sub-Saharan Africa, with major variations between countries, with percentages varying from 1.8% in Cameroon to over 6% in Burundi.[192] As of 2015, governments in sub-Saharan Africa spend on average 18% of their total budget on education, against 15% in the rest of the world.[191] In the years immediately after the Dakar Forum, the efforts made by the African States towards achieving EFA produced multiple results in sub-Saharan Africa. The greatest advance was in access to primary education, which governments had made their absolute priority. The number of children in a primary school in sub-Saharan Africa thus rose from 82 million in 1999 to 136.4 million in 2011. In Niger, for example, the number of children entering school increased by more than three-and-a-half times between 1999 and 2011.[192] In Ethiopia, over the same period, over 8.5 million more children were admitted to primary school. The net rate of first-year access in sub-Saharan Africa has thus risen by 19 points in 12 years, from 58% in 1999 to 77% in 2011. Despite the considerable efforts, the latest available data from the UNESCO Institute for Statistics estimates that, for 2012, there were still 57.8 million children who were not in school. Of these, 29.6 million were in sub-Saharan Africa alone, a figure which has not changed for several years.[191] Many sub-Saharan countries have notably included the first year of secondary school in basic education. In Rwanda, the first year of secondary school was attached to primary education in 2009, which significantly increased the number of pupils enrolled at this level of education.[192][191] In 2012, the primary completion rate (PCR) – which measures the proportion of children reaching the final year of primary school – was 70%, meaning that more than three out of ten children entering primary school do not reach the final primary year.[191] Literacy rates have gone up in sub-Saharan Africa, and internet access has improved considerably. At least 39 countries in sub-Saharan Africa have some large-scale school feeding programs, which can improve access to education. In aggregate, 16% of school-age children (and 25% of primary school-age children) in the region benefit from school meal programs, and about 82% of the funding for these programs is provided by governments.[193] Nonetheless, a lot must yet happen for this region to catch up. The statistics show that the literacy rate for sub-Saharan Africa was 65% in 2017. In other words, one-third of the people aged 15 and above were unable to read and write. The comparative figure for 1984 was an illiteracy rate of 49%. In 2017, only about 22% of Africans were internet users at all, according to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).[194] Science and technology Further information: History of science and technology in Africa, Internet in Africa, Mobile technology in Africa, and Educational technology in sub-Saharan Africa Health Further information: HIV/AIDS in Africa and Demographics of Africa The Komfo Anokye Hospital in Kumasi, Ghana Health challenges in Sub-Saharan Africa include HIV/AIDS in Africa, malaria, neglected tropical diseases, tuberculosis, onchocerciasis, maternal mortality and infant mortality.[195][196][197][198][199] In 1987, the Bamako Initiative conference organized by the World Health Organization was held in Bamako, the capital of Mali, and helped reshape the health policy of sub-Saharan Africa.[200] The new strategy dramatically increased accessibility through community-based healthcare reform, resulting in more efficient and equitable provision of services.[201][self-published source?] A comprehensive approach strategy was extended to all areas of health care, with subsequent improvement in the health care indicators and improvement in health care efficiency and cost.[202][203] A world map illustrating the proportion of population aged 15-49 infected with HIV in 2019. HIV is endemic especially in Southern Africa. In 2011, sub-Saharan Africa was home to 69% of all people living with HIV/AIDS worldwide.[204] In response, a number of initiatives have been launched to educate the public on HIV/AIDS. Among these are combination prevention programmes, considered to be the most effective initiative, the abstinence, be faithful, use a condom campaign, and the Desmond Tutu HIV Foundation's outreach programs.[205] According to a 2013 special report issued by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), the number of HIV positive people in Africa receiving anti-retro viral treatment in 2012 was over seven times the number receiving treatment in 2005, with an almost 1 million added in the last year alone.[206][207]: 15  The number of AIDS-related deaths in sub-Saharan Africa in 2011 was 33 per cent less than the number in 2005.[208] The number of new HIV infections in sub-Saharan Africa in 2011 was 25 per cent less than the number in 2001.[208] Life expectancy at birth in sub-Saharan Africa increased from 40 years in 1960 to 61 years in 2017.[209] Malaria is an endemic illness in sub-Saharan Africa, where the majority of malaria cases and deaths worldwide occur.[210] Routine immunization has been introduced in order to prevent measles.[211] Onchocerciasis ("river blindness"), a common cause of blindness, is also endemic to parts of the region. More than 99% of people affected by the illness worldwide live in 31 countries therein.[212] In response, the African Programme for Onchocerciasis Control (APOC) was launched in 1995 with the aim of controlling the disease.[212] Maternal mortality is another challenge, with more than half of maternal deaths in the world occurring in sub-Saharan Africa.[213] However, there has generally been progress here as well, as a number of countries in the region have halved their levels of maternal mortality since 1990.[213] Additionally, the African Union in July 2003 ratified the Maputo Protocol, which pledges to prohibit female genital mutilation (FGM).[214][215] Somalia, Guinea, Djibouti, Sierra Leone and Mali have the highest prevalence of FGM in the world.[216] Infibulation, the most extreme form of FGM, is concentrated primarily in Northeast Africa.[217] National health systems vary between countries. In Ghana, most health care is provided by the government and largely administered by the Ministry of Health and Ghana Health Services. The healthcare system has five levels of providers: health posts which are first-level primary care for rural areas, health centers and clinics, district hospitals, regional hospitals, and tertiary hospitals. These programs are funded by the government of Ghana, financial credits, Internally Generated Fund (IGF), and Donors-pooled Health Fund.[218] Ebola virus disease, which was first identified in 1976, occasionally occurs in outbreaks in tropical regions of Sub-Saharan Africa.[219] The 2013–2016 Western African Ebola virus epidemic originated in Guinea, later speading to neighboring Liberia and Sierra Leone.[220] Religion Further information: Religion in Africa, Christianity in Africa, Islam in Africa, Hinduism in Africa, and African traditional religion Religion in Sub Saharan Africa Christianity (62%) Islam (31%) Traditional faiths (3%) Others (4%) African countries below the Sahara are largely Christian, while those above the Sahara, in North Africa, are predominantly Islamic. There are also Muslim majorities in parts of the Horn of Africa (Djibouti and Somalia) and in the Sahel and Sudan regions (the Gambia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Burkina Faso), as well as significant Muslim communities in Ethiopia and Eritrea, and on the Swahili Coast (Tanzania, Mozambique and Kenya).[221] [222] West Africa is the only subregion of sub-Saharan Africa which has a Muslim majority population, and Nigeria has the largest Muslim population in sub-Saharan Africa.[223] Mauritius is the only country in Africa to have a Hindu majority. In 2012, sub-Saharan Africa constituted in absolute terms the world's third largest Christian population, after Europe and Latin America respectively.[224] In 2012, sub-Saharan Africa also constituted in absolute terms the world's third largest Muslim population, after Asia and the Middle East and North Africa respectively.[225] Traditional African religions are also commonly practiced across sub-Saharan Africa, with these religions being especially common in South Sudan,[226] Guinea Bissau,[227] Mozambique,[228] and Cameroon.[229] Traditional African religions can be broken down into linguistic cultural groups, with common themes. Among Niger–Congo-speakers is a belief in a creator god or higher deity, along with ancestor spirits, territorial spirits, evil caused by human ill will and neglecting ancestor spirits, and priests of territorial spirits.[230][231][232][233] New world religions such as Santería, Vodun, and Candomblé, would be derived from this world. Among Nilo-Saharan speakers is the belief in Divinity; evil is caused by divine judgement and retribution; prophets as middlemen between Divinity and man. Among Afro-Asiatic-speakers is henotheism, the belief in one's own gods but accepting the existence of other gods; evil here is caused by malevolent spirits. The Semitic Abrahamic religion of Judaism is comparable to the latter world view.[234][230][235] San religion is non-theistic but a belief in a Spirit or Power of existence which can be tapped in a trance-dance; trance-healers.[236] Generally, traditional African religions are united by an ancient complex animism and ancestor worship.[237] Traditional religions in sub-Saharan Africa often display complex ontology, cosmology and metaphysics. Mythologies, for example, demonstrated the difficulty fathers of creation had in bringing about order from chaos. Order is what is right and natural and any deviation is chaos. Cosmology and ontology is also neither simple or linear. It defines duality, the material and immaterial, male and female, heaven and earth. Common principles of being and becoming are widespread: Among the Dogon, the principle of Amma (being) and Nummo (becoming), and among the Bambara, Pemba (being) and Faro (becoming).[238] Ifá divination and its four digit binary code West Africa Akan mythology Ashanti mythology (Ghana) Dahomey (Fon) mythology Efik mythology (Nigeria, Cameroon) Igbo mythology (Nigeria) Serer religion and Serer creation myth (Senegal, Gambia and Mauritania) Yoruba mythology (Nigeria, Benin) Central Africa Dinka mythology (South Sudan) Lotuko mythology (South Sudan) Bushongo mythology (Congo) Bambuti (Pygmy) mythology (Congo) Lugbara mythology (Congo) Southeast Africa Akamba mythology (eastern Kenya) Masai mythology (Kenya, Tanzania) Southern Africa

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Buddhism (/ˈbʊdɪzəm/ BUUD-ih-zəm, US also /ˈbuːd-/ BOOD-),[1][2][3] also known as Buddha Dharma, and Dharmavinaya (transl. "doctrines and disciplines"), is an Indian religion or philosophical tradition based on teachings attributed to the Buddha.[4] It originated in the eastern Gangetic plain as a śramaṇa–movement in the 5th century BCE, and gradually spread throughout much of Asia via the Silk Road. It is the world's fourth-largest religion,[5][6] with over 520 million followers (Buddhists) who comprise seven percent of the global population.[7][8][9] The Buddha's central teachings emphasize the aim of attaining liberation from dukkha (often translated as "suffering" or "unease"[note 1]), the source of which is said to be attachment or clinging.[14] He endorsed the Middle Way, a path of development that avoids both extreme asceticism and hedonism. A summary of this path is expressed in the Noble Eightfold Path, a cultivation of the mind which is said to lead to awakening and full liberation through observance of Buddhist ethics and meditation. Other widely observed practices include: monasticism; "taking refuge" in the Three Jewels: the Buddha, the dharma, and the saṅgha; and the cultivation of perfections (pāramitā).[15] Buddhist schools vary in their interpretation of the paths to liberation (mārga) as well as the relative importance and 'canonicity' assigned to various Buddhist texts, and their specific teachings and practices.[16][17] Two major extant branches of Buddhism are generally recognized by scholars: Theravāda (lit. 'School of the Elders') and Mahāyāna (lit. 'Great Vehicle'). The Theravada tradition emphasizes the attainment of nirvāṇa (lit. 'extinguishing') as a means of transcending the individual self and ending the cycle of death and rebirth (saṃsāra),[18][19][20] while the Mahayana tradition emphasizes the Bodhisattva-ideal, in which one works for the liberation of all beings. The Buddhist canon is vast, with many different textual collections in different languages (such as Sanskrit, Pali, Tibetan, and Chinese).[21] The Theravāda branch has a widespread following in Sri Lanka as well as in Southeast Asia, namely Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia. The Mahāyāna branch—which includes the traditions of Zen, Pure Land, Nichiren, Tiantai, Tendai, and Shingon—is predominantly practised in Nepal, Bhutan, China, Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan. Additionally, Vajrayāna (lit. 'Indestructible Vehicle'), a body of teachings attributed to Indian adepts, may be viewed as a separate branch or tradition within Mahāyāna.[22] Tibetan Buddhism, which preserves the Vajrayāna teachings of eighth-century India, is practised in the Himalayan states as well as in Mongolia[23] and Russian Kalmykia.[24] Historically, until the early 2nd millennium, Buddhism was widely practiced in the Indian subcontinent;[25][26][27] it also had a foothold to some extent elsewhere in Asia, namely Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan.[28] Etymology Buddhism is an Indian religion[29] or philosophy. The Buddha ("the Awakened One") was a Śramaṇa who lived in South Asia c. 6th or 5th century BCE.[30][31] Followers of Buddhism, called Buddhists in English, referred to themselves as Sakyan-s or Sakyabhiksu in ancient India.[32][33] Buddhist scholar Donald S. Lopez asserts they also used the term Bauddha,[34] although scholar Richard Cohen asserts that that term was used only by outsiders to describe Buddhists.[35] The Buddha Mayadevi Temple marking the Buddha's birthplace in Lumbini Ancient kingdoms and cities of India during the time of the Buddha (c. 500 BCE) – modern-day India, Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan The gilded "Emaciated Buddha statue" in an Ubosoth in Bangkok representing the stage of his asceticism Enlightenment of Buddha, Kushan dynasty, late 2nd to early 3rd century CE, Gandhara Main article: The Buddha Details of the Buddha's life are mentioned in many Early Buddhist Texts but are inconsistent. His social background and life details are difficult to prove, and the precise dates are uncertain, although the 5th century BCE seems to be the best estimate.[36][note 2] Early texts have the Buddha's family name as "Gautama" (Pali: Gotama), while some texts give Siddhartha as his surname. He was born in Lumbini, present-day Nepal and grew up in Kapilavastu,[note 3] a town in the Ganges Plain, near the modern Nepal–India border, and he spent his life in what is now modern Bihar[note 4] and Uttar Pradesh.[44][36] Some hagiographic legends state that his father was a king named Suddhodana, his mother was Queen Maya.[45] Scholars such as Richard Gombrich consider this a dubious claim because a combination of evidence suggests he was born in the Shakya community, which was governed by a small oligarchy or republic-like council where there were no ranks but where seniority mattered instead.[46][note 5] Some of the stories about the Buddha, his life, his teachings, and claims about the society he grew up in may have been invented and interpolated at a later time into the Buddhist texts.[49][50] According to early texts such as the Pali Ariyapariyesanā-sutta ("The discourse on the noble quest", MN 26) and its Chinese parallel at MĀ 204, Gautama was moved by the suffering (dukkha) of life and death, and its endless repetition due to rebirth.[51] He thus set out on a quest to find liberation from suffering (also known as "nirvana").[52] Early texts and biographies state that Gautama first studied under two teachers of meditation, namely Āḷāra Kālāma (Sanskrit: Arada Kalama) and Uddaka Ramaputta (Sanskrit: Udraka Ramaputra), learning meditation and philosophy, particularly the meditative attainment of "the sphere of nothingness" from the former, and "the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception" from the latter.[53][54][note 6] Finding these teachings to be insufficient to attain his goal, he turned to the practice of severe asceticism, which included a strict fasting regime and various forms of breath control.[57] This too fell short of attaining his goal, and then he turned to the meditative practice of dhyana. He famously sat in meditation under a Ficus religiosa tree — now called the Bodhi Tree — in the town of Bodh Gaya and attained "Awakening" (Bodhi).[58] According to various early texts like the Mahāsaccaka-sutta, and the Samaññaphala Sutta, on awakening, the Buddha gained insight into the workings of karma and his former lives, as well as achieving the ending of the mental defilements (asavas), the ending of suffering, and the end of rebirth in saṃsāra.[57] This event also brought certainty about the Middle Way as the right path of spiritual practice to end suffering.[59][60] As a fully enlightened Buddha, he attracted followers and founded a Sangha (monastic order).[61] He spent the rest of his life teaching the Dharma he had discovered, and then died, achieving "final nirvana", at the age of 80 in Kushinagar, India.[62][39] The Buddha's teachings were propagated by his followers, which in the last centuries of the 1st millennium BCE became various Buddhist schools of thought, each with its own basket of texts containing different interpretations and authentic teachings of the Buddha;[63][64][65] these over time evolved into many traditions of which the more well known and widespread in the modern era are Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism.[66][67][note 7] Worldview Main article: Glossary of Buddhism The term "Buddhism" is an occidental neologism, commonly (and "rather roughly" according to Donald S. Lopez Jr.) used as a translation for the Dharma of the Buddha, fójiào in Chinese, bukkyō in Japanese, nang pa sangs rgyas pa'i chos in Tibetan, buddhadharma in Sanskrit, buddhaśāsana in Pali.[70] Four Noble Truths – dukkha and its ending Main articles: Dukkha and Four Noble Truths color manuscript illustration of Buddha teaching the Four Noble Truths, Nalanda, Bihar, India The Buddha teaching the Four Noble Truths. Sanskrit manuscript. Nalanda, Bihar, India The Four Truths express the basic orientation of Buddhism: we crave and cling to impermanent states and things, which is dukkha, "incapable of satisfying" and painful.[71][72] This keeps us caught in saṃsāra, the endless cycle of repeated rebirth, dukkha and dying again.[note 8] But there is a way to liberation from this endless cycle[78] to the state of nirvana, namely following the Noble Eightfold Path.[note 9] The truth of dukkha is the basic insight that life in this mundane world, with its clinging and craving to impermanent states and things[71] is dukkha, and unsatisfactory.[73][84][web 1] Dukkha can be translated as "incapable of satisfying",[web 5] "the unsatisfactory nature and the general insecurity of all conditioned phenomena"; or "painful".[71][72] Dukkha is most commonly translated as "suffering", but this is inaccurate, since it refers not to episodic suffering, but to the intrinsically unsatisfactory nature of temporary states and things, including pleasant but temporary experiences.[note 10] We expect happiness from states and things which are impermanent, and therefore cannot attain real happiness. In Buddhism, dukkha is one of the three marks of existence, along with impermanence and anattā (non-self).[90] Buddhism, like other major Indian religions, asserts that everything is impermanent (anicca), but, unlike them, also asserts that there is no permanent self or soul in living beings (anattā).[91][92][93] The ignorance or misperception (avijjā) that anything is permanent or that there is self in any being is considered a wrong understanding, and the primary source of clinging and dukkha.[94][95][96] The cycle of rebirth Traditional Tibetan Buddhist Thangka depicting the Wheel of Life with its six realms Saṃsāra Main article: Saṃsāra (Buddhism) Saṃsāra means "wandering" or "world", with the connotation of cyclic, circuitous change.[97][98] It refers to the theory of rebirth and "cyclicality of all life, matter, existence", a fundamental assumption of Buddhism, as with all major Indian religions.[98][99] Samsara in Buddhism is considered to be dukkha, unsatisfactory and painful,[100] perpetuated by desire and avidya (ignorance), and the resulting karma.[98][101][102] Liberation from this cycle of existence, nirvana, has been the foundation and the most important historical justification of Buddhism.[103][104] Buddhist texts assert that rebirth can occur in six realms of existence, namely three good realms (heavenly, demi-god, human) and three evil realms (animal, hungry ghosts, hellish).[note 11] Samsara ends if a person attains nirvana, the "blowing out" of the afflictions through insight into impermanence and "non-self".[106][107][108] Rebirth Main article: Rebirth (Buddhism) A very large hill behind two palm trees and a boulevard, where the Buddha is believed to have been cremated Ramabhar Stupa in Kushinagar, Uttar Pradesh, India, is regionally believed to be Buddha's cremation site. Rebirth refers to a process whereby beings go through a succession of lifetimes as one of many possible forms of sentient life, each running from conception to death.[109] In Buddhist thought, this rebirth does not involve a soul or any fixed substance. This is because the Buddhist doctrine of anattā (Sanskrit: anātman, no-self doctrine) rejects the concepts of a permanent self or an unchanging, eternal soul found in other religions.[110][111] The Buddhist traditions have traditionally disagreed on what it is in a person that is reborn, as well as how quickly the rebirth occurs after death.[112][113] Some Buddhist traditions assert that "no self" doctrine means that there is no enduring self, but there is avacya (inexpressible) personality (pudgala) which migrates from one life to another.[112] The majority of Buddhist traditions, in contrast, assert that vijñāna (a person's consciousness) though evolving, exists as a continuum and is the mechanistic basis of what undergoes the rebirth process.[73][112] The quality of one's rebirth depends on the merit or demerit gained by one's karma (i.e., actions), as well as that accrued on one's behalf by a family member.[note 12] Buddhism also developed a complex cosmology to explain the various realms or planes of rebirth.[100] Karma Main article: Karma in Buddhism In Buddhism, karma (from Sanskrit: "action, work") drives saṃsāra – the endless cycle of suffering and rebirth for each being. Good, skilful deeds (Pāli: kusala) and bad, unskilful deeds (Pāli: akusala) produce "seeds" in the unconscious receptacle (ālaya) that mature later either in this life or in a subsequent rebirth.[115][116] The existence of karma is a core belief in Buddhism, as with all major Indian religions, and it implies neither fatalism nor that everything that happens to a person is caused by karma.[117][note 13] A central aspect of Buddhist theory of karma is that intent (cetanā) matters and is essential to bring about a consequence or phala "fruit" or vipāka "result".[118][note 14] However, good or bad karma accumulates even if there is no physical action, and just having ill or good thoughts creates karmic seeds; thus, actions of body, speech or mind all lead to karmic seeds.[117] In the Buddhist traditions, life aspects affected by the law of karma in past and current births of a being include the form of rebirth, realm of rebirth, social class, character and major circumstances of a lifetime.[117][122][123] It operates like the laws of physics, without external intervention, on every being in all six realms of existence including human beings and gods.[117][124] A notable aspect of the karma theory in Buddhism is merit transfer.[125][126] A person accumulates merit not only through intentions and ethical living, but also is able to gain merit from others by exchanging goods and services, such as through dāna (charity to monks or nuns).[127] Further, a person can transfer one's own good karma to living family members and ancestors.[126][note 15] Liberation Main articles: Moksha and Nirvana (Buddhism) An aniconic depiction of the Buddha's spiritual liberation (moksha) or awakening (bodhi), at Sanchi. The Buddha is not depicted, only symbolized by the Bodhi tree and the empty seat The cessation of the kleshas and the attainment of nirvana (nibbāna), with which the cycle of rebirth ends, has been the primary and the soteriological goal of the Buddhist path for monastic life since the time of the Buddha.[80][130][131] The term "path" is usually taken to mean the Noble Eightfold Path, but other versions of "the path" can also be found in the Nikayas.[note 16] In some passages in the Pali Canon, a distinction is being made between right knowledge or insight (sammā-ñāṇa), and right liberation or release (sammā-vimutti), as the means to attain cessation and liberation.[133][134] Nirvana literally means "blowing out, quenching, becoming extinguished".[135][136] In early Buddhist texts, it is the state of restraint and self-control that leads to the "blowing out" and the ending of the cycles of sufferings associated with rebirths and redeaths.[137][138][139] Many later Buddhist texts describe nirvana as identical with anatta with complete "emptiness, nothingness".[140][141][142][note 17] In some texts, the state is described with greater detail, such as passing through the gate of emptiness (sunyata) – realising that there is no soul or self in any living being, then passing through the gate of signlessness (animitta) – realising that nirvana cannot be perceived, and finally passing through the gate of wishlessness (apranihita) – realising that nirvana is the state of not even wishing for nirvana.[130][144][note 18] The nirvana state has been described in Buddhist texts partly in a manner similar to other Indian religions, as the state of complete liberation, enlightenment, highest happiness, bliss, fearlessness, freedom, permanence, non-dependent origination, unfathomable, and indescribable.[146][147] It has also been described in part differently, as a state of spiritual release marked by "emptiness" and realisation of non-self.[148][149][150][note 19] While Buddhism considers the liberation from saṃsāra as the ultimate spiritual goal, in traditional practice, the primary focus of a vast majority of lay Buddhists has been to seek and accumulate merit through good deeds, donations to monks and various Buddhist rituals in order to gain better rebirths rather than nirvana.[153][154][note 20] Dependent arising Main articles: Pratītyasamutpāda and Twelve Nidānas Pratityasamutpada, also called "dependent arising, or dependent origination", is the Buddhist theory to explain the nature and relations of being, becoming, existence and ultimate reality. Buddhism asserts that there is nothing independent, except the state of nirvana.[157] All physical and mental states depend on and arise from other pre-existing states, and in turn from them arise other dependent states while they cease.[158] The 'dependent arisings' have a causal conditioning, and thus Pratityasamutpada is the Buddhist belief that causality is the basis of ontology, not a creator God nor the ontological Vedic concept called universal Self (Brahman) nor any other 'transcendent creative principle'.[159][160] However, Buddhist thought does not understand causality in terms of Newtonian mechanics; rather it understands it as conditioned arising.[161][162] In Buddhism, dependent arising refers to conditions created by a plurality of causes that necessarily co-originate a phenomenon within and across lifetimes, such as karma in one life creating conditions that lead to rebirth in one of the realms of existence for another lifetime.[163][164][165] Buddhism applies the theory of dependent arising to explain origination of endless cycles of dukkha and rebirth, through Twelve Nidānas or "twelve links". It states that because Avidyā (ignorance) exists, Saṃskāras (karmic formations) exist; because Saṃskāras exist therefore Vijñāna (consciousness) exists; and in a similar manner it links Nāmarūpa (the sentient body), Ṣaḍāyatana (our six senses), Sparśa (sensory stimulation), Vedanā (feeling), Taṇhā (craving), Upādāna (grasping), Bhava (becoming), Jāti (birth), and Jarāmaraṇa (old age, death, sorrow, and pain).[166][167] By breaking the circuitous links of the Twelve Nidanas, Buddhism asserts that liberation from these endless cycles of rebirth and dukkha can be attained.[168] Not-Self and Emptiness Main articles: Anātman and Śūnyatā The Five Aggregates (pañca khandha) according to the Pali Canon. form (rūpa) 4 elements (mahābhūta) ↓ contact (phassa) ↓ ↑ consciousness (viññāna) → ← ← mental factors (cetasika) feeling (vedanā) perception (sañña) formation (saṅkhāra) Form is derived from the Four Great Elements. Consciousness arises from other aggregates. Mental Factors arise from the Contact of Consciousness and other aggregates. Source: MN 109 (Thanissaro, 2001) | diagram details A related doctrine in Buddhism is that of anattā (Pali) or anātman (Sanskrit). It is the view that there is no unchanging, permanent self, soul or essence in phenomena.[169] The Buddha and Buddhist philosophers who follow him such as Vasubandhu and Buddhaghosa, generally argue for this view by analyzing the person through the schema of the five aggregates, and then attempting to show that none of these five components of personality can be permanent or absolute.[170] This can be seen in Buddhist discourses such as the Anattalakkhana Sutta. "Emptiness" or "voidness" (Skt: Śūnyatā, Pali: Suññatā), is a related concept with many different interpretations throughout the various Buddhisms. In early Buddhism, it was commonly stated that all five aggregates are void (rittaka), hollow (tucchaka), coreless (asāraka), for example as in the Pheṇapiṇḍūpama Sutta (SN 22:95).[171] Similarly, in Theravada Buddhism, it often means that the five aggregates are empty of a Self.[172] Emptiness is a central concept in Mahāyāna Buddhism, especially in Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka school, and in the Prajñāpāramitā sutras. In Madhyamaka philosophy, emptiness is the view which holds that all phenomena (dharmas) are without any svabhava (literally "own-nature" or "self-nature"), and are thus without any underlying essence, and so are "empty" of being independent. This doctrine sought to refute the heterodox theories of svabhava circulating at the time.[173] The Three Jewels Main article: Three Jewels Dharma Wheel and triratna symbols from Sanchi Stupa number 2 All forms of Buddhism revere and take spiritual refuge in the "three jewels" (triratna): Buddha, Dharma and Sangha.[174] Buddha Main article: Buddhahood While all varieties of Buddhism revere "Buddha" and "buddhahood", they have different views on what these are. Regardless of their interpretation, the concept of Buddha is central to all forms of Buddhism. In Theravada Buddhism, a Buddha is someone who has become awake through their own efforts and insight. They have put an end to their cycle of rebirths and have ended all unwholesome mental states which lead to bad action and thus are morally perfected.[175] While subject to the limitations of the human body in certain ways (for example, in the early texts, the Buddha suffers from backaches), a Buddha is said to be "deep, immeasurable, hard-to-fathom as is the great ocean," and also has immense psychic powers (abhijñā).[176] Theravada generally sees Gautama Buddha (the historical Buddha Sakyamuni) as the only Buddha of the current era. Mahāyāna Buddhism meanwhile, has a vastly expanded cosmology, with various Buddhas and other holy beings (aryas) residing in different realms. Mahāyāna texts not only revere numerous Buddhas besides Shakyamuni, such as Amitabha and Vairocana, but also see them as transcendental or supramundane (lokuttara) beings.[177] Mahāyāna Buddhism holds that these other Buddhas in other realms can be contacted and are able to benefit beings in this world.[178] In Mahāyāna, a Buddha is a kind of "spiritual king", a "protector of all creatures" with a lifetime that is countless of eons long, rather than just a human teacher who has transcended the world after death.[179] Shakyamuni's life and death on earth is then usually understood as a "mere appearance" or "a manifestation skilfully projected into earthly life by a long-enlightened transcendent being, who is still available to teach the faithful through visionary experiences."[179][180] Dharma Main article: Dharma The second of the three jewels is "Dharma" (Pali: Dhamma), which in Buddhism refers to the Buddha's teaching, which includes all of the main ideas outlined above. While this teaching reflects the true nature of reality, it is not a belief to be clung to, but a pragmatic teaching to be put into practice. It is likened to a raft which is "for crossing over" (to nirvana) not for holding on to.[181] It also refers to the universal law and cosmic order which that teaching both reveals and relies upon.[182] It is an everlasting principle which applies to all beings and worlds. In that sense it is also the ultimate truth and reality about the universe, it is thus "the way that things really are." Sangha Main articles: Sangha, Bodhisattva, and Arhat Buddhist monks and nuns praying in the Buddha Tooth Relic Temple of Singapore The third "jewel" which Buddhists take refuge in is the "Sangha", which refers to the monastic community of monks and nuns who follow Gautama Buddha's monastic discipline which was "designed to shape the Sangha as an ideal community, with the optimum conditions for spiritual growth."[183] The Sangha consists of those who have chosen to follow the Buddha's ideal way of life, which is one of celibate monastic renunciation with minimal material possessions (such as an alms bowl and robes).[184] The Sangha is seen as important because they preserve and pass down Buddha Dharma. As Gethin states "the Sangha lives the teaching, preserves the teaching as Scriptures and teaches the wider community. Without the Sangha there is no Buddhism."[185] The Sangha also acts as a "field of merit" for laypersons, allowing them to make spiritual merit or goodness by donating to the Sangha and supporting them. In return, they keep their duty to preserve and spread the Dharma everywhere for the good of the world.[186] There is also a separate definition of Sangha, referring to those who have attained any stage of awakening, whether or not they are monastics. This sangha is called the āryasaṅgha "noble Sangha".[187] All forms of Buddhism generally reveres these āryas (Pali: ariya, "noble ones" or "holy ones") who are spiritually attained beings. Aryas have attained the fruits of the Buddhist path.[188] Becoming an arya is a goal in most forms of Buddhism. The āryasaṅgha includes holy beings such as bodhisattvas, arhats and stream-enterers. Other key Mahāyāna views Main articles: Yogachara and Buddha-nature Mahāyāna Buddhism also differs from Theravada and the other schools of early Buddhism in promoting several unique doctrines which are contained in Mahāyāna sutras and philosophical treatises. One of these is the unique interpretation of emptiness and dependent origination found in the Madhyamaka school. Another very influential doctrine for Mahāyāna is the main philosophical view of the Yogācāra school variously, termed Vijñaptimātratā-vāda ("the doctrine that there are only ideas" or "mental impressions") or Vijñānavāda ("the doctrine of consciousness"). According to Mark Siderits, what classical Yogācāra thinkers like Vasubandhu had in mind is that we are only ever aware of mental images or impressions, which may appear as external objects, but "there is actually no such thing outside the mind."[189] There are several interpretations of this main theory, many scholars see it as a type of Idealism, others as a kind of phenomenology.[190] Another very influential concept unique to Mahāyāna is that of "Buddha-nature" (buddhadhātu) or "Tathagata-womb" (tathāgatagarbha). Buddha-nature is a concept found in some 1st-millennium CE Buddhist texts, such as the Tathāgatagarbha sūtras. According to Paul Williams these Sutras suggest that 'all sentient beings contain a Tathagata' as their 'essence, core inner nature, Self'.[191][note 21] According to Karl Brunnholzl "the earliest mahayana sutras that are based on and discuss the notion of tathāgatagarbha as the buddha potential that is innate in all sentient beings began to appear in written form in the late second and early third century."[193] For some, the doctrine seems to conflict with the Buddhist anatta doctrine (non-Self), leading scholars to posit that the Tathāgatagarbha Sutras were written to promote Buddhism to non-Buddhists.[194][195] This can be seen in texts like the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, which state that Buddha-nature is taught to help those who have fear when they listen to the teaching of anatta.[196] Buddhist texts like the Ratnagotravibhāga clarify that the "Self" implied in Tathagatagarbha doctrine is actually "not-self".[197][198] Various interpretations of the concept have been advanced by Buddhist thinkers throughout the history of Buddhist thought and most attempt to avoid anything like the Hindu Atman doctrine. These Indian Buddhist ideas, in various synthetic ways, form the basis of subsequent Mahāyāna philosophy in Tibetan Buddhism and East Asian Buddhism. Paths to liberation Main article: Buddhist paths to liberation The Bodhipakkhiyādhammā are seven lists of qualities or factors that promote spiritual awakening (bodhi). Each list is a short summary of the Buddhist path, and the seven lists substantially overlap. The best-known list in the West is the Noble Eightfold Path, but a wide variety of paths and models of progress have been used and described in the different Buddhist traditions. However, they generally share basic practices such as sila (ethics), samadhi (meditation, dhyana) and prajña (wisdom), which are known as the three trainings. An important additional practice is a kind and compassionate attitude toward every living being and the world. Devotion is also important in some Buddhist traditions, and in the Tibetan traditions visualisations of deities and mandalas are important. The value of textual study is regarded differently in the various Buddhist traditions. It is central to Theravada and highly important to Tibetan Buddhism, while the Zen tradition takes an ambiguous stance. An important guiding principle of Buddhist practice is the Middle Way (madhyamapratipad). It was a part of Buddha's first sermon, where he presented the Noble Eightfold Path that was a 'middle way' between the extremes of asceticism and hedonistic sense pleasures.[199][200] In Buddhism, states Harvey, the doctrine of "dependent arising" (conditioned arising, pratītyasamutpāda) to explain rebirth is viewed as the 'middle way' between the doctrines that a being has a "permanent soul" involved in rebirth (eternalism) and "death is final and there is no rebirth" (annihilationism).[201][202] Paths to liberation in the early texts A common presentation style of the path (mārga) to liberation in the Early Buddhist Texts is the "graduated talk", in which the Buddha lays out a step-by-step training.[203] In the early texts, numerous different sequences of the gradual path can be found.[204] One of the most important and widely used presentations among the various Buddhist schools is The Noble Eightfold Path, or "Eightfold Path of the Noble Ones" (Skt. 'āryāṣṭāṅgamārga'). This can be found in various discourses, most famously in the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta (The discourse on the turning of the Dharma wheel). Other suttas such as the Tevijja Sutta, and the Cula-Hatthipadopama-sutta give a different outline of the path, though with many similar elements such as ethics and meditation.[204] According to Rupert Gethin, the path to awakening is also frequently summarized by another a short formula: "abandoning the hindrances, practice of the four establishings of mindfulness, and development of the awakening factors."[205] Noble Eightfold Path Main article: Noble Eightfold Path The Eightfold Path consists of a set of eight interconnected factors or conditions, that when developed together, lead to the cessation of dukkha.[206] These eight factors are: Right View (or Right Understanding), Right Intention (or Right Thought), Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration. This Eightfold Path is the fourth of the Four Noble Truths and asserts the path to the cessation of dukkha (suffering, pain, unsatisfactoriness).[207][208] The path teaches that the way of the enlightened ones stopped their craving, clinging and karmic accumulations, and thus ended their endless cycles of rebirth and suffering.[209][210][211] The Noble Eightfold Path is grouped into three basic divisions, as follows:[212][213][214] Division Eightfold factor Sanskrit, Pali Description Wisdom (Sanskrit: prajñā, Pāli: paññā) 1. Right view samyag dṛṣṭi, sammā ditthi The belief that there is an afterlife and not everything ends with death, that Buddha taught and followed a successful path to nirvana;[212] according to Peter Harvey, the right view is held in Buddhism as a belief in the Buddhist principles of karma and rebirth, and the importance of the Four Noble Truths and the True Realities.[215] 2. Right intention samyag saṃkalpa, sammā saṅkappa Giving up home and adopting the life of a religious mendicant in order to follow the path;[212] this concept, states Harvey, aims at peaceful renunciation, into an environment of non-sensuality, non-ill-will (to lovingkindness), away from cruelty (to compassion).[215] Moral virtues[213] (Sanskrit: śīla, Pāli: sīla) 3. Right speech samyag vāc, sammā vāca No lying, no rude speech, no telling one person what another says about him, speaking that which leads to salvation.[212] 4. Right action samyag karman, sammā kammanta No killing or injuring, no taking what is not given; no sexual acts in monastic pursuit,[212] for lay Buddhists no sensual misconduct such as sexual involvement with someone married, or with an unmarried woman protected by her parents or relatives.[216][217][218] 5. Right livelihood samyag ājīvana, sammā ājīva For monks, beg to feed, only possessing what is essential to sustain life.[219] For lay Buddhists, the canonical texts state right livelihood as abstaining from wrong livelihood, explained as not becoming a source or means of suffering to sentient beings by cheating them, or harming or killing them in any way.[220][221] Meditation[213] (Sanskrit and Pāli: samādhi) 6. Right effort samyag vyāyāma, sammā vāyāma Guard against sensual thoughts; this concept, states Harvey, aims at preventing unwholesome states that disrupt meditation.[222] 7. Right mindfulness samyag smṛti, sammā sati Never be absent-minded, conscious of what one is doing; this, states Harvey, encourages mindfulness about impermanence of the body, feelings and mind, as well as to experience the five skandhas, the five hindrances, the four True Realities and seven factors of awakening.[222] 8. Right concentration samyag samādhi, sammā samādhi Correct meditation or concentration (dhyana), explained as the four jhānas.[212][223] Common Buddhist practices Sermon in the Deer Park depicted at Wat Chedi Liam, near Chiang Mai, Northern Thailand Hearing and learning the Dharma In various suttas which present the graduated path taught by the Buddha, such as the Samaññaphala Sutta and the Cula-Hatthipadopama Sutta, the first step on the path is hearing the Buddha teach the Dharma. This then said to lead to the acquiring of confidence or faith in the Buddha's teachings.[204] Mahayana Buddhist teachers such as Yin Shun also state that hearing the Dharma and study of the Buddhist discourses is necessary "if one wants to learn and practice the Buddha Dharma."[224] Likewise, in Indo-Tibetan Buddhism, the "Stages of the Path" (Lamrim) texts generally place the activity of listening to the Buddhist teachings as an important early practice.[225] Refuge Main article: Refuge (Buddhism) Traditionally, the first step in most Buddhist schools requires taking of the "Three Refuges", also called the Three Jewels (Sanskrit: triratna, Pali: tiratana) as the foundation of one's religious practice.[226] This practice may have been influenced by the Brahmanical motif of the triple refuge, found in the Rigveda 9.97.47, Rigveda 6.46.9 and Chandogya Upanishad 2.22.3–4.[227] Tibetan Buddhism sometimes adds a fourth refuge, in the lama. The three refuges are believed by Buddhists to be protective and a form of reverence.[226] The ancient formula which is repeated for taking refuge affirms that "I go to the Buddha as refuge, I go to the Dhamma as refuge, I go to the Sangha as refuge."[228] Reciting the three refuges, according to Harvey, is considered not as a place to hide, rather a thought that "purifies, uplifts and strengthens the heart".[174] Śīla – Buddhist ethics Main article: Buddhist ethics Buddhist monks collect alms in Si Phan Don, Laos. Giving is a key virtue in Buddhism. Śīla (Sanskrit) or sīla (Pāli) is the concept of "moral virtues", that is the second group and an integral part of the Noble Eightfold Path.[215] It generally consists of right speech, right action and right livelihood.[215] One of the most basic forms of ethics in Buddhism is the taking of "precepts". This includes the Five Precepts for laypeople, Eight or Ten Precepts for monastic life, as well as rules of Dhamma (Vinaya or Patimokkha) adopted by a monastery.[229][230] Other important elements of Buddhist ethics include giving or charity (dāna), Mettā (Good-Will), Heedfulness (Appamada), 'self-respect' (Hri) and 'regard for consequences' (Apatrapya). Precepts Main article: Five precepts Buddhist scriptures explain the five precepts (Pali: pañcasīla; Sanskrit: pañcaśīla) as the minimal standard of Buddhist morality.[216] It is the most important system of morality in Buddhism, together with the monastic rules.[231] The five precepts are seen as a basic training applicable to all Buddhists. They are:[229][232][233] "I undertake the training-precept (sikkha-padam) to abstain from onslaught on breathing beings." This includes ordering or causing someone else to kill. The Pali suttas also say one should not "approve of others killing" and that one should be "scrupulous, compassionate, trembling for the welfare of all living beings."[234] "I undertake the training-precept to abstain from taking what is not given." According to Harvey, this also covers fraud, cheating, forgery as well as "falsely denying that one is in debt to someone."[235] "I undertake the training-precept to abstain from misconduct concerning sense-pleasures." This generally refers to adultery, as well as rape and incest. It also applies to sex with those who are legally under the protection of a guardian. It is also interpreted in different ways in the varying Buddhist cultures.[236] "I undertake the training-precept to abstain from false speech." According to Harvey this includes "any form of lying, deception or exaggeration...even non-verbal deception by gesture or other indication...or misleading statements."[237] The precept is often also seen as including other forms of wrong speech such as "divisive speech, harsh, abusive, angry words, and even idle chatter."[238] "I undertake the training-precept to abstain from alcoholic drink or drugs that are an opportunity for heedlessness." According to Harvey, intoxication is seen as a way to mask rather than face the sufferings of life. It is seen as damaging to one's mental clarity, mindfulness and ability to keep the other four precepts.[239] Undertaking and upholding the five precepts is based on the principle of non-harming (Pāli and Sanskrit: ahiṃsa).[240] The Pali Canon recommends one to compare oneself with others, and on the basis of that, not to hurt others.[241] Compassion and a belief in karmic retribution form the foundation of the precepts.[242][243] Undertaking the five precepts is part of regular lay devotional practice, both at home and at the local temple.[244][245] However, the extent to which people keep them differs per region and time.[246][245] They are sometimes referred to as the śrāvakayāna precepts in the Mahāyāna tradition, contrasting them with the bodhisattva precepts.[247] Vinaya Main article: Vinaya An ordination ceremony at Wat Yannawa in Bangkok. The Vinaya codes regulate the various sangha acts, including ordination. Vinaya is the specific code of conduct for a sangha of monks or nuns. It includes the Patimokkha, a set of 227 offences including 75 rules of decorum for monks, along with penalties for transgression, in the Theravadin tradition.[248] The precise content of the Vinaya Pitaka (scriptures on the Vinaya) differs in different schools and tradition, and different monasteries set their own standards on its implementation. The list of pattimokkha is recited every fortnight in a ritual gathering of all monks.[248] Buddhist text with vinaya rules for monasteries have been traced in all Buddhist traditions, with the oldest surviving being the ancient Chinese translations.[249] Monastic communities in the Buddhist tradition cut normal social ties to family and community and live as "islands unto themselves".[250] Within a monastic fraternity, a sangha has its own rules.[250] A monk abides by these institutionalised rules, and living life as the vinaya prescribes it is not merely a means, but very nearly the end in itself.[250] Transgressions by a monk on Sangha vinaya rules invites enforcement, which can include temporary or permanent expulsion.[251] Restraint and renunciation Living at the root of a tree (trukkhamulik'anga) is one of the dhutaṅgas, a series of optional ascetic practices for Buddhist monastics. Another important practice taught by the Buddha is the restraint of the senses (indriyasamvara). In the various graduated paths, this is usually presented as a practice which is taught prior to formal sitting meditation, and which supports meditation by weakening sense desires that are a hindrance to meditation.[252] According to Anālayo, sense restraint is when one "guards the sense doors in order to prevent sense impressions from leading to desires and discontent."[252] This is not an avoidance of sense impression, but a kind of mindful attention towards the sense impressions which does not dwell on their main features or signs (nimitta). This is said to prevent harmful influences from entering the mind.[253] This practice is said to give rise to an inner peace and happiness which forms a basis for concentration and insight.[253] A related Buddhist virtue and practice is renunciation, or the intent for desirelessness (nekkhamma).[254] Generally, renunciation is the giving up of actions and desires that are seen as unwholesome on the path, such as lust for sensuality and worldly things.[255] Renunciation can be cultivated in different ways. The practice of giving for example, is one form of cultivating renunciation. Another one is the giving up of lay life and becoming a monastic (bhiksu o bhiksuni).[256] Practicing celibacy (whether for life as a monk, or temporarily) is also a form of renunciation.[257] Many Jataka stories such as the focus on how the Buddha practiced renunciation in past lives.[258] One way of cultivating renunciation taught by the Buddha is the contemplation (anupassana) of the "dangers" (or "negative consequences") of sensual pleasure (kāmānaṃ ādīnava). As part of the graduated discourse, this contemplation is taught after the practice of giving and morality.[259] Another related practice to renunciation and sense restraint taught by the Buddha is "restraint in eating" or moderation with food, which for monks generally means not eating after noon. Devout laypersons also follow this rule during special days of religious observance (uposatha).[260] Observing the Uposatha also includes other practices dealing with renunciation, mainly the eight precepts. For Buddhist monastics, renunciation can also be trained through several optional ascetic practices called dhutaṅga. In different Buddhist traditions, other related practices which focus on fasting are followed. Mindfulness and clear comprehension The training of the faculty called "mindfulness" (Pali: sati, Sanskrit: smṛti, literally meaning "recollection, remembering") is central in Buddhism. According to Analayo, mindfulness is a full awareness of the present moment which enhances and strengthens memory.[261] The Indian Buddhist philosopher Asanga defined mindfulness thus: "It is non-forgetting by the mind with regard to the object experienced. Its function is non-distraction."[262] According to Rupert Gethin, sati is also "an awareness of things in relation to things, and hence an awareness of their relative value."[263] There are different practices and exercises for training mindfulness in the early discourses, such as the four Satipaṭṭhānas (Sanskrit: smṛtyupasthāna, "establishments of mindfulness") and Ānāpānasati (Sanskrit: ānāpānasmṛti, "mindfulness of breathing"). A closely related mental faculty, which is often mentioned side by side with mindfulness, is sampajañña ("clear comprehension"). This faculty is the ability to comprehend what one is doing and is happening in the mind, and whether it is being influenced by unwholesome states or wholesome ones.[264] Meditation – Sama-amādhi and dhyāna Main articles: Buddhist meditation, Samadhi, Samatha, and Rupajhana Kōdō Sawaki practicing Zazen ("sitting dhyana") A wide range of meditation practices has developed in the Buddhist traditions, but "meditation" primarily refers to the attainment of samādhi and the practice of dhyāna (Pali: jhāna). Samādhi is a calm, undistracted, unified and concentrated state of awareness. It is defined by Asanga as "one-pointedness of mind on the object to be investigated. Its function consists of giving a basis to knowledge (jñāna)."[262] Dhyāna is "state of perfect equanimity and awareness (upekkhā-sati-parisuddhi)," reached through focused mental training.[265] The practice of dhyāna aids in maintaining a calm mind and avoiding disturbance of this calm mind by mindfulness of disturbing thoughts and feelings.[266][note 22] Origins The earliest evidence of yogis and their meditative tradition, states Karel Werner, is found in the Keśin hymn 10.136 of the Rigveda.[267] While evidence suggests meditation was practised in the centuries preceding the Buddha,[268] the meditative methodologies described in the Buddhist texts are some of the earliest among texts that have survived into the modern era.[269][270] These methodologies likely incorporate what existed before the Buddha as well as those first developed within Buddhism.[271][note 23] There is no scholarly agreement on the origin and source of the practice of dhyāna. Some scholars, like Bronkhorst, see the four dhyānas as a Buddhist invention.[275] Alexander Wynne argues that the Buddha learned dhyāna from Brahmanical teachers.[276] Whatever the case, the Buddha taught meditation with a new focus and interpretation, particularly through the four dhyānas methodology,[277] in which mindfulness is maintained.[278][279] Further, the focus of meditation and the underlying theory of liberation guiding the meditation has been different in Buddhism.[268][280][281] For example, states Bronkhorst, the verse 4.4.23 of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad with its "become calm, subdued, quiet, patiently enduring, concentrated, one sees soul in oneself" is most probably a meditative state.[282] The Buddhist discussion of meditation is without the concept of soul and the discussion criticises both the ascetic meditation of Jainism and the "real self, soul" meditation of Hinduism.[283] The formless attainments Often grouped into the jhāna-scheme are four other meditative states, referred to in the early texts as arupa samāpattis (formless attainments). These are also referred to in commentarial literature as immaterial/formless jhānas (arūpajhānas). The first formless attainment is a place or realm of infinite space (ākāsānañcāyatana) without form or colour or shape. The second is termed the realm of infinite consciousness (viññāṇañcāyatana); the third is the realm of nothingness (ākiñcaññāyatana), while the fourth is the realm of "neither perception nor non-perception".[284] The four rupa-jhānas in Buddhist practice leads to rebirth in successfully better rupa Brahma heavenly realms, while arupa-jhānas leads into arupa heavens.[285][286] Meditation and insight See also: Meditation and insight and Yoga Kamakura Daibutsu, Kōtoku-in, Kamakura, Japan In the Pali canon, the Buddha outlines two meditative qualities which are mutually supportive: samatha (Pāli; Sanskrit: śamatha; "calm") and vipassanā (Sanskrit: vipaśyanā, insight).[287] The Buddha compares these mental qualities to a "swift pair of messengers" who together help deliver the message of nibbana (SN 35.245).[288] The various Buddhist traditions generally see Buddhist meditation as being divided into those two main types.[289][290] Samatha is also called "calming meditation", and focuses on stilling and concentrating the mind i.e. developing samadhi and the four dhyānas. According to Damien Keown, vipassanā meanwhile, focuses on "the generation of penetrating and critical insight (paññā)".[291] There are numerous doctrinal positions and disagreements within the different Buddhist traditions regarding these qualities or forms of meditation. For example, in the Pali Four Ways to Arahantship Sutta (AN 4.170), it is said that one can develop calm and then insight, or insight and then calm, or both at the same time.[292] Meanwhile, in Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośakārikā, vipaśyanā is said to be practiced once one has reached samadhi by cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness (smṛtyupasthānas).[293] Beginning with comments by La Vallee Poussin, a series of scholars have argued that these two meditation types reflect a tension between two different ancient Buddhist traditions regarding the use of dhyāna, one which focused on insight based practice and the other which focused purely on dhyāna.[294][295] However, other scholars such as Analayo and Rupert Gethin have disagreed with this "two paths" thesis, instead seeing both of these practices as complementary.[295][296] The Brahma-vihara Main article: Brahmavihara gilded statue of Buddha in Wat Phra Si Rattana Mahathat, Thailand Statue of Buddha in Wat Phra Si Rattana Mahathat, Phitsanulok, Thailand The four immeasurables or four abodes, also called Brahma-viharas, are virtues or directions for meditation in Buddhist traditions, which helps a person be reborn in the heavenly (Brahma) realm.[297][298][299] These are traditionally believed to be a characteristic of the deity Brahma and the heavenly abode he resides in.[300] The four Brahma-vihara are: Loving-kindness (Pāli: mettā, Sanskrit: maitrī) is active good will towards all;[298][301] Compassion (Pāli and Sanskrit: karuṇā) results from metta; it is identifying the suffering of others as one's own;[298][301] Empathetic joy (Pāli and Sanskrit: muditā): is the feeling of joy because others are happy, even if one did not contribute to it; it is a form of sympathetic joy;[301] Equanimity (Pāli: upekkhā, Sanskrit: upekṣā): is even-mindedness and serenity, treating everyone impartially.[298][301] Tantra, visualization and the subtle body See also: Tibetan Tantric Practice and Vajrayana § Tantra_techniques An 18th century Mongolian miniature which depicts the generation of the Vairocana Mandala A section of the Northern wall mural at the Lukhang Temple depicting tummo, the three channels (nadis) and phowa Some Buddhist traditions, especially those associated with Tantric Buddhism (also known as Vajrayana and Secret Mantra) use images and symbols of deities and Buddhas in meditation. This is generally done by mentally visualizing a Buddha image (or some other mental image, like a symbol, a mandala, a syllable, etc.), and using that image to cultivate calm and insight. One may also visualize and identify oneself with the imagined deity.[302][303] While visualization practices have been particularly popular in Vajrayana, they may also found in Mahayana and Theravada traditions.[304] In Tibetan Buddhism, unique tantric techniques which include visualization (but also mantra recitation, mandalas, and other elements) are considered to be much more effective than non-tantric meditations and they are one of the most popular meditation methods.[305] The methods of Unsurpassable Yoga Tantra, (anuttarayogatantra) are in turn seen as the highest and most advanced. Anuttarayoga practice is divided into two stages, the Generation Stage and the Completion Stage. In the Generation Stage, one meditates on emptiness and visualizes oneself as a deity as well as visualizing its mandala. The focus is on developing clear appearance and divine pride (the understanding that oneself and the deity are one).[306] This method is also known as deity yoga (devata yoga). There are numerous meditation deities (yidam) used, each with a mandala, a circular symbolic map used in meditation.[307] Insight and knowledge Main articles: Prajñā, Bodhi, Kenshō, Satori, Subitism, and Vipassana Prajñā (Sanskrit) or paññā (Pāli) is wisdom, or knowledge of the true nature of existence. Another term which is associated with prajñā and sometimes is equivalent to it is vipassanā (Pāli) or vipaśyanā (Sanskrit), which is often translated as "insight". In Buddhist texts, the faculty of insight is often said to be cultivated through the four establishments of mindfulness.[308] In the early texts, Paññā is included as one of the "five faculties" (indriya) which are commonly listed as important spiritual elements to be cultivated (see for example: AN I 16). Paññā along with samadhi, is also listed as one of the "trainings in the higher states of mind" (adhicittasikkha).[308] The Buddhist tradition regards ignorance (avidyā), a fundamental ignorance, misunderstanding or mis-perception of the nature of reality, as one of the basic causes of dukkha and samsara. Overcoming this ignorance is part of the path to awakening. This overcoming includes the contemplation of impermanence and the non-self nature of reality,[309][310] and this develops dispassion for the objects of clinging, and liberates a being from dukkha and saṃsāra.[311][312][313] Prajñā is important in all Buddhist traditions. It is variously described as wisdom regarding the impermanent and not-self nature of dharmas (phenomena), the functioning of karma and rebirth, and knowledge of dependent origination.[314] Likewise, vipaśyanā is described in a similar way, such as in the Paṭisambhidāmagga, where it is said to be the contemplation of things as impermanent, unsatisfactory and not-self.[315] Devotion Main article: Buddhist devotion Tibetan Buddhist prostration practice at Jokhang, Tibet Most forms of Buddhism "consider saddhā (Skt śraddhā), 'trustful confidence' or 'faith', as a quality which must be balanced by wisdom, and as a preparation for, or accompaniment of, meditation."[316] Because of this devotion (Skt. bhakti; Pali: bhatti) is an important part of the practice of most Buddhists.[317] Devotional practices include ritual prayer, prostration, offerings, pilgrimage, and chanting.[318] Buddhist devotion is usually focused on some object, image or location that is seen as holy or spiritually influential. Examples of objects of devotion include paintings or statues of Buddhas and bodhisattvas, stupas, and bodhi trees.[319] Public group chanting for devotional and ceremonial is common to all Buddhist traditions and goes back to ancient India where chanting aided in the memorization of the orally transmitted teachings.[320] Rosaries called malas are used in all Buddhist traditions to count repeated chanting of common formulas or mantras. Chanting is thus a type of devotional group meditation which leads to tranquility and communicates the Buddhist teachings.[321] Vegetarianism and animal ethics Main article: Buddhist vegetarianism Vegetarian meal at Buddhist temple. East Asian Buddhism tends to promote vegetarianism. Based on the Indian principle of ahimsa (non-harming), the Buddha's ethics strongly condemn the harming of all sentient beings, including all animals. He thus condemned the animal sacrifice of the Brahmins as well hunting, and killing animals for food.[322] However, early Buddhist texts depict the Buddha as allowing monastics to eat meat. This seems to be because monastics begged for their food and thus were supposed to accept whatever food was offered to them.[323] This was tempered by the rule that meat had to be "three times clean": "they had not seen, had not heard, and had no reason to suspect that the animal had been killed so that the meat could be given to them".[324] Also, while the Buddha did not explicitly promote vegetarianism in his discourses, he did state that gaining one's livelihood from the meat trade was unethical.[325] In contrast to this, various Mahayana sutras and texts like the Mahaparinirvana sutra, Surangama sutra and the Lankavatara sutra state that the Buddha promoted vegetarianism out of compassion.[326] Indian Mahayana thinkers like Shantideva promoted the avoidance of meat.[327] Throughout history, the issue of whether Buddhists should be vegetarian has remained a much debated topic and there is a variety of opinions on this issue among modern Buddhists. Buddhist texts Main article: Buddhist texts A depiction of the supposed First Buddhist council at Rajgir. Communal recitation was one of the original ways of transmitting and preserving Early Buddhist texts. Buddhism, like all Indian religions, was initially an oral tradition in ancient times.[328] The Buddha's words, the early doctrines, concepts, and their traditional interpretations were orally transmitted from one generation to the next. The earliest oral texts were transmitted in Middle Indo-Aryan languages called Prakrits, such as Pali, through the use of communal recitation and other mnemonic techniques.[329] The first Buddhist canonical texts were likely written down in Sri Lanka, about 400 years after the Buddha died.[328] The texts were part of the Tripitakas, and many versions appeared thereafter claiming to be the words of the Buddha. Scholarly Buddhist commentary texts, with named authors, appeared in India, around the 2nd century CE.[328] These texts were written in Pali or Sanskrit, sometimes regional languages, as palm-leaf manuscripts, birch bark, painted scrolls, carved into temple walls, and later on paper.[328] Unlike what the Bible is to Christianity and the Quran is to Islam, but like all major ancient Indian religions, there is no consensus among the different Buddhist traditions as to what constitutes the scriptures or a common canon in Buddhism.[328] The general belief among Buddhists is that the canonical corpus is vast.[330][331][332] This corpus includes the ancient Sutras organised into Nikayas or Agamas, itself the part of three basket of texts called the Tripitakas.[333] Each Buddhist tradition has its own collection of texts, much of which is translation of ancient Pali and Sanskrit Buddhist texts of India. The Chinese Buddhist canon, for example, includes 2184 texts in 55 volumes, while the Tibetan canon comprises 1108 texts – all claimed to have been spoken by the Buddha – and another 3461 texts composed by Indian scholars revered in the Tibetan tradition.[334] The Buddhist textual history is vast; over 40,000 manuscripts – mostly Buddhist, some non-Buddhist – were discovered in 1900 in the Dunhuang Chinese cave alone.[334] Early Buddhist texts Main article: Early Buddhist Texts Gandhara birchbark scroll fragments (c. 1st century) from British Library Collection The Early Buddhist Texts refers to the literature which is considered by modern scholars to be the earliest Buddhist material. The first four Pali Nikayas, and the corresponding Chinese Āgamas are generally considered to be among the earliest material.[335][336][337] Apart from these, there are also fragmentary collections of EBT materials in other languages such as Sanskrit, Khotanese, Tibetan and Gāndhārī. The modern study of early Buddhism often relies on comparative scholarship using these various early Buddhist sources to identify parallel texts and common doctrinal content.[338] One feature of these early texts are literary structures which reflect oral transmission, such as widespread repetition.[339] The Tripitakas Main articles: Tripiṭaka and Pali Canon After the development of the different early Buddhist schools, these schools began to develop their own textual collections, which were termed Tripiṭakas (Triple Baskets).[340] Many early Tripiṭakas, like the Pāli Tipitaka, were divided into three sections: Vinaya Pitaka (focuses on monastic rule), Sutta Pitaka (Buddhist discourses) and Abhidhamma Pitaka, which contain expositions and commentaries on the doctrine. The Pāli Tipitaka (also known as the Pali Canon) of the Theravada School constitutes the only complete collection of Buddhist texts in an Indic language which has survived until today.[341] However, many Sutras, Vinayas and Abhidharma works from other schools survive in Chinese translation, as part of the Chinese Buddhist Canon. According to some sources, some early schools of Buddhism had five or seven pitakas.[342] Mahāyāna texts Main article: Mahayana sutras Tripiṭaka Koreana in South Korea, over 81,000 wood printing blocks stored in racks The Tripiṭaka Koreana in South Korea, an edition of the Chinese Buddhist canon carved and preserved in over 81,000 wood printing blocks The Mahāyāna sūtras are a very broad genre of Buddhist scriptures that the Mahāyāna Buddhist tradition holds are original teachings of the Buddha. Modern historians generally hold that the first of these texts were composed probably around the 1st century BCE or 1st century CE.[343][344][345] In Mahāyāna, these texts are generally given greater authority than the early Āgamas and Abhidharma literature, which are called "Śrāvakayāna" or "Hinayana" to distinguish them from Mahāyāna sūtras.[346] Mahāyāna traditions mainly see these different classes of texts as being designed for different types of persons, with different levels of spiritual understanding. The Mahāyāna sūtras are mainly seen as being for those of "greater" capacity.[347][better source needed] Mahāyāna also has a very large literature of philosophical and exegetical texts. These are often called śāstra (treatises) or vrittis (commentaries). Some of this literature was also written in verse form (karikās), the most famous of which is the Mūlamadhyamika-karikā (Root Verses on the Middle Way) by Nagarjuna, the foundational text of the Madhyamika school. Tantric texts Main article: Tantras (Buddhism) During the Gupta Empire, a new class of Buddhist sacred literature began to develop, which are called the Tantras.[348] By the 8th century, the tantric tradition was very influential in India and beyond. Besides drawing on a Mahāyāna Buddhist framework, these texts also borrowed deities and material from other Indian religious traditions, such as the Śaiva and Pancharatra traditions, local god/goddess cults, and local spirit worship (such as yaksha or nāga spirits).[349][350] Some features of these texts include the widespread use of mantras, meditation on the subtle body, worship of fierce deities, and antinomian and transgressive practices such as ingesting alcohol and performing sexual rituals.[351][352][353] History Main article: History of Buddhism For a chronological guide, see Timeline of Buddhism. Mahākāśyapa meets an Ājīvika ascetic, one of the common Śramaṇa groups in ancient India Historical roots Historically, the roots of Buddhism lie in the religious thought of Iron Age India around the middle of the first millennium BCE.[354] This was a period of great intellectual ferment and socio-cultural change known as the "Second urbanisation", marked by the growth of towns and trade, the composition of the Upanishads and the historical emergence of the Śramaṇa traditions.[355][356][note 24] New ideas developed both in the Vedic tradition in the form of the Upanishads, and outside of the Vedic tradition through the Śramaṇa movements.[359][360][361] The term Śramaṇa refers to several Indian religious movements parallel to but separate from the historical Vedic religion, including Buddhism, Jainism and others such as Ājīvika.[362] Several Śramaṇa movements are known to have existed in India before the 6th century BCE (pre-Buddha, pre-Mahavira), and these influenced both the āstika and nāstika traditions of Indian philosophy.[363] According to Martin Wilshire, the Śramaṇa tradition evolved in India over two phases, namely P

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ A 2003 Gallup poll indicated that nearly 20% of Americans suspected Lyndon B. Johnson of being involved in the assassination of Kennedy. Critics of the Warren Commission have accused Johnson of plotting the assassination because he "disliked" the Kennedys and feared that he would be dropped from the Democratic ticket for the 1964 election. According to journalist Max Holland, the first published allegation that Johnson perpetrated the assassination of Kennedy appeared in Penn Jones, Jr.'s book Forgive My Grief, self-published in May 1966.[421] In the book, Jones provided excerpts of a letter purported to have been authored by Jack Ruby charging LBJ with the murder of the President.[421] With his 1968 book, The Dark Side of Lyndon Baines Johnson, Joachim Joesten is credited by Bugliosi as being the first conspiracy author to accuse Johnson of having a role in the assassination.[422] According to Joesten, Johnson "played the leading part" in a conspiracy that involved "the Dallas oligarchy and ... local branches of the CIA, the FBI, and the Secret Service".[422] Others who have indicated there was complicity on the part of Johnson include Jim Marrs,[422] Ralph D. Thomas,[422] J. Gary Shaw,[422] Larry Harris,[422] Walt Brown,[422] Noel Twyman,[422] Barr McClellan,[422] Craig Zirbel,[423] Phillip F. Nelson,[424] and Madeleine Brown.[425] The fact that JFK was seriously considering dropping Johnson from the ticket in favor of North Carolina Governor Terry Sanford should Kennedy run in 1964 has been cited as a possible motive for Johnson's complicity in the assassination. In 1968, Kennedy's personal secretary Evelyn Lincoln wrote in her book, Kennedy and Johnson, that President Kennedy had told her that Lyndon B. Johnson would be replaced as Vice President of the United States. That conversation took place on November 19, 1963, just three days before the assassination of President Kennedy and was recorded that evening in her diary and reads as follows: As Mr. Kennedy sat in the rocker in my office, his head resting on its back he placed his left leg across his right knee. He rocked slightly as he talked. In a slow pensive voice he said to me, 'You know if I am re-elected in sixty-four, I am going to spend more and more time toward making government service an honorable career. I would like to tailor the executive and legislative branches of government so that they can keep up with the tremendous strides and progress being made in other fields.' 'I am going to advocate changing some of the outmoded rules and regulations in the Congress, such as the seniority rule. To do this I will need as a running mate in sixty-four a man who believes as I do.' Mrs. Lincoln went on to write "I was fascinated by this conversation and wrote it down verbatim in my diary. Now I asked, 'Who is your choice as a running-mate?' 'He looked straight ahead, and without hesitating he replied, 'at this time I am thinking about Governor Terry Sanford of North Carolina. But it will not be Lyndon.'[426] In 2003, researcher Barr McClellan published the book Blood, Money & Power.[427] McClellan claims that Johnson, motivated by the fear of being dropped from the Kennedy ticket in 1964 and the need to cover up various scandals, masterminded Kennedy's assassination with the help of his friend, attorney Edward A. Clark. The book suggests that a smudged partial fingerprint from the sniper's nest likely belonged to Johnson's associate Malcolm "Mac" Wallace, and that Mac Wallace was, therefore, on the sixth floor of the Depository at the time of the shooting. The book further claims that the killing of Kennedy was paid for by oil magnates, including Clint Murchison and H. L. Hunt. McClellan states that the assassination of Kennedy allowed the oil depletion allowance to be kept at 27.5 percent. It remained unchanged during the Johnson presidency. According to McClellan, this resulted in a saving of over $100 million to the American oil industry. McClellan's book subsequently became the subject of an episode of Nigel Turner's ongoing documentary television series, The Men Who Killed Kennedy. The episode, "The Guilty Men", drew angry condemnation from the Johnson family, Johnson's former aides, and former Presidents Gerald Ford (who was a member of the Warren Commission[428]) and Jimmy Carter following its airing on The History Channel. The History Channel assembled a committee of historians who concluded the accusations in the documentary were without merit, and The History Channel apologized to the Johnson family and agreed not to air the series in the future.[429] Madeleine Brown, who alleged she was the mistress of Johnson, also implicated him in a conspiracy to kill Kennedy. In 1997, Brown said that Johnson, along with H. L. Hunt, had begun planning Kennedy's demise as early as 1960. Brown claimed that by its fruition in 1963, the conspiracy involved dozens of persons, including the leadership of the FBI and the Mafia, as well as prominent politicians and journalists.[430] In the documentary The Men Who Killed Kennedy, Madeleine Brown and May Newman, an employee of Texas oilman Clint Murchison, both placed FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover at a social gathering at Murchison's mansion the night before the assassination.[431] Also in attendance, according to Brown, were John McCloy, Richard Nixon, George Brown, R. L. Thornton, and H. L. Hunt.[432] Madeleine Brown claimed that Johnson arrived at the gathering late in the evening and, in a "grating whisper", told her that the "... Kennedys will never embarrass me again – that's no threat – that's a promise."[432][433] Brown said that on New Year's Eve 1963, she met Johnson at the Driskill Hotel in Austin, Texas, and that he confirmed the conspiracy to kill Kennedy, insisting that "the fat cats of Texas and [U.S.] intelligence" had been responsible.[431] Brown reiterated her allegations against Johnson in the 2006 documentary Evidence of Revision. In the same documentary, several other Johnson associates also voiced their suspicions of Johnson. Dr. Charles Crenshaw authored the 1992 book JFK: Conspiracy of Silence, along with conspiracy theorists Jens Hansen and J. Gary Shaw. Crenshaw was a third-year surgical resident on the trauma team at Parkland Hospital that attended to President Kennedy. He also treated Oswald after he was shot by Jack Ruby.[434] While attending to Oswald, Crenshaw said that he answered a telephone call from Lyndon Johnson. Crenshaw said that Johnson inquired about Oswald's status, and that Johnson demanded a "death-bed confession from the accused assassin [Oswald]".[434] Crenshaw said that he relayed Johnson's message to Dr. Shires, but that Oswald was in no condition to give any statement.[431][435] Critics of Crenshaw's allegation state that Johnson was in his limousine at the moment the call would have been made, that no one in his car corroborated that the call was made, and that there is no record of such a call being routed through the White House switchboard.[436][437] Former CIA agent and Watergate figure E. Howard Hunt accused Johnson, along with several CIA agents whom he named, of complicity in the assassination in his posthumously released autobiography American Spy: My Secret History in the CIA, Watergate, and Beyond. Referencing that section of the book, Tim Weiner of The New York Times called into question the sincerity of the charges, and William F. Buckley, Jr., who wrote the foreword, said material "was clearly ghostwritten".[438][439] Shortly afterwards, an audio-taped "deathbed confession" in which Hunt claimed first-hand knowledge of a conspiracy, as a co-conspirator, was released by his sons;[258] the authenticity of the confession was also met with some skepticism.[256][259][260] In 1984, convicted swindler Billie Sol Estes made statements to a Grand Jury in Texas indicating that he had "inside knowledge" that implicated Johnson in the death of Kennedy and others.[440][441] Historian Michael L. Kurtz wrote that there is no evidence suggesting that Johnson ordered the assassination of Kennedy.[442] According to Kurtz, Johnson believed Fidel Castro was responsible for the assassination and that Johnson covered up the truth because he feared the possibility that retaliatory measures against Cuba might escalate to nuclear war with the Soviet Union.[442] In 2012, biographer Robert Caro published his fourth volume on Johnson's career, The Passage of Power, which chronicles Johnson's communications and actions as Vice President, and describes the events leading up to the assassination.[443] Caro wrote that "nothing that I have found in my research" points to involvement by Johnson.[444] Political consultant and convicted felon Roger Stone believes that Johnson orchestrated Kennedy's assassination. He also claims that Rafael Cruz, father of Texas Senator and Republican presidential candidate for the 2016 elections Ted Cruz, is tied to Lee Harvey Oswald.[445][446][447] George H. W. Bush conspiracy Some critics of the official findings theorize that George H. W. Bush was involved in the assassination as a CIA operative in Dealey Plaza.[448] In the book Plausible Denial: Was the CIA Involved in the Assassination of JFK?, American attorney Mark Lane suggests that Bush worked out of a Houston office as a CIA agent at the time of the assassination.[449][450][451] In the book Family of Secrets, Russ Baker contends that Bush became an intelligence agent in his teenage years and was later at the center of a plot to assassinate Kennedy that included his father, Prescott Bush, Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, CIA Director Allen Dulles, Cuban and Russian exiles and emigrants, and various Texas oilmen.[452] According to Baker, Bush was in Dallas on the night before and morning of the assassination.[453][454] On November 29, 1963, exactly one week after the assassination, an employee of the FBI wrote in a memo that "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency" was given a briefing on the reaction to the assassination by Cuban exiles living in Miami. Joseph McBride speculated that the "George Bush" cited in the memo was the future U.S. president, George H. W. Bush, who was appointed head of the CIA by president Gerald Ford in 1976, 13 years after the assassination.[455] During Bush's presidential campaign in 1988, the memo resurfaced, prompting the CIA to claim that the memo was referring to an employee named George William Bush.[456] George William Bush disputed this suggestion, declaring under oath that "I am not the George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency referred to in the memorandum."[455] In 1998, the ARRB instructed the CIA to review its personnel files of former President Bush and to provide a definitive statement as to whether he was the person referred to in the memo. The CIA responded that it had no record of any association with former President Bush during the 1963 time period.[457] On the website JFK Facts, author Jefferson Morley writes that any communication by Bush with the FBI or CIA in November 1963 does not necessarily demonstrate culpability in the assassination, and that it is unclear whether Bush had any affiliation with the CIA prior to his appointment to head the agency in 1976.[458] Cuban government conspiracy In its report, the Warren Commission stated that it had investigated "dozens of allegations of a conspiratorial contact between Oswald and agents of the Cuban Government" and had found no evidence of Cuban involvement in the assassination of President Kennedy.[459] The House Select Committee on Assassinations also wrote: "The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Cuban Government was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy".[355] Some conspiracy theorists continue to allege that Fidel Castro ordered the assassination of Kennedy in retaliation for the CIA's previous attempts to assassinate him.[404] In the early 1960s, Clare Boothe Luce, wife of Time-Life publisher Henry Luce, was one of a number of prominent Americans who sponsored anti-Castro groups. This support included funding exiles in commando speedboat raids against Cuba. In 1975, Clare Luce said that on the night of the assassination, she received a call from a member of a commando group she had sponsored. According to Luce, the caller's name was "something like" Julio Fernandez and he claimed he was calling her from New Orleans.[460][461] According to Luce, Fernandez told her that Oswald had approached his group with an offer to help assassinate Castro. Fernandez further claimed that he and his associates eventually found out that Oswald was a communist and supporter of Castro. He said that with this new-found knowledge, his group kept a close watch on Oswald until Oswald suddenly came into money and went to Mexico City and then Dallas.[462] According to Luce, Fernandez told her, "There is a Cuban Communist assassination team at large and Oswald was their hired gun."[463] Luce said that she told the caller to give his information to the FBI. Luce revealed the details of the incident to both the Church Committee and the HSCA. Both committees investigated the incident, but were unable to uncover any evidence to corroborate the allegations.[464] In May 1967, CIA Director Richard Helms told President Lyndon Johnson that the CIA had tried to assassinate Castro. Helms further stated that the CIA had employed members of the Mafia in this effort, and "... that CIA plots to assassinate Fidel Castro dated back to August of 1960 – to the Eisenhower Administration." Helms said that the plots against Castro continued into the Kennedy Administration and that Attorney General Robert Kennedy had known about both the plots and the Mafia's involvement.[465] On separate occasions, Johnson told two prominent television newsmen that he believed that JFK's assassination had been organized by Castro as retaliation for the CIA's efforts to kill Castro. In October 1968, Johnson told veteran newsman Howard K. Smith of ABC that "Kennedy was trying to get to Castro, but Castro got to him first." In September 1969, in an interview with Walter Cronkite of CBS, Johnson said in regard to the assassination, "[I could not] honestly say that I've ever been completely relieved of the fact that there might have been international connections", and referenced unnamed "others". Finally, in 1971, Johnson told his former speechwriter Leo Janos of Time magazine that he "never believed that Oswald acted alone".[465] In 1977, Castro was interviewed by newsman Bill Moyers. Castro denied any involvement in Kennedy's death, saying: It would have been absolute insanity by Cuba. ... It would have been a provocation. Needless to say, it would have been to run the risk that our country would have been destroyed by the United States. Nobody who's not insane could have thought about [killing Kennedy in retaliation].[406][466] When Castro was interviewed later in 2013 by Atlantic editor, Jeffrey Goldberg, Castro said: There were people in the American government who thought Kennedy was a traitor because he didn't invade Cuba when he had the chance, when they were asking him. He was never forgiven for that.[467] Soviet government conspiracy The Warren Commission reported that they found no evidence that the Soviet Union was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.[10] The House Select Committee on Assassinations also wrote: "The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Soviet Government was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy".[355] According to some conspiracy theorists, the Soviet Union, under the leadership of Nikita Khrushchev, was responsible for the assassination, motivated by the humiliation of having to back down during the Cuban Missile Crisis.[404] According to a 1966 FBI document, Colonel Boris Ivanov – chief of the KGB Residency in New York City at the time of the assassination – stated that it was his personal opinion that the assassination had been planned by an organized group, rather than a lone individual. The same document stated, "... officials of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union believed there was some well-organized conspiracy on the part of the 'ultraright' in the United States to effect a 'coup.'"[468] Much later, the high-ranking Soviet Bloc intelligence defector, Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, said that he had a conversation with Nicolae Ceauşescu who told him about "ten international leaders the Kremlin killed or tried to kill", including Kennedy. He claimed that "among the leaders of Moscow's satellite intelligence services there was unanimous agreement that the KGB had been involved in the assassination of President Kennedy."[469] Pacepa later released a book, Programmed to Kill: Lee Harvey Oswald, the Soviet KGB, and the Kennedy Assassination, in 2007. Similar views on the JFK assassination were expressed by Robert Holmes, former First Secretary at the British Embassy in Moscow, in his 2012 book Spy Like No Other. Decoy hearse and wound alteration David Lifton presented a scenario in which conspirators on Air Force One removed Kennedy's body from its original bronze casket and placed it in a shipping casket, while en route from Dallas to Washington. Once the presidential plane arrived at Andrews Air Force Base, the shipping casket with the President's body in it was surreptitiously taken by helicopter from the side of the plane that was out of the television camera's view. Kennedy's body was then taken to an unknown location – most likely Walter Reed Army Medical Center[470] – to surgically alter the body to make it appear that he was shot only from the rear.[471][472][473][474][475][476] Part of Lifton's theory comes from a House Select Committee on Assassinations report of an interview of Lt. Richard Lipsey on January 18, 1978, by committee staff members Donald Purdy and Mark Flanagan. According to the report, Lt. Richard Lipsey said that he and General Wehle had met President Kennedy's body at Andrews Air Force Base. Lipsey "... placed [the casket] in a hearse to be transported to Bethesda Naval Hospital. Lipsey mentioned that he and Wehle then flew by helicopter to Bethesda and took [the body of] JFK into the back of Bethesda." Lipsey said that "a decoy hearse had been driven to the front [of Bethesda]".[477] With Lipsey's mention of a "decoy hearse" at Bethesda, Lifton theorized that the casket removed by Lipsey from Air Force One – from the side of the plane exposed to television – was probably also a decoy and was likely empty.[478][479] Laboratory technologist Paul O'Connor was one of the major witnesses supporting another part of David Lifton's theory that somewhere between Parkland and Bethesda the President's body was made to appear as if it had been shot only from the rear. O'Connor said that President Kennedy's body arrived at Bethesda inside a body bag in "a cheap, shipping-type of casket", which differed from the description of the ornamental bronze casket and sheet that the body had been wrapped in at Parkland Hospital.[480] O'Connor said that the brain had already been removed by the time it got to Bethesda,[480] and that there were "just little pieces" of brain matter left inside the skull.[481] Researcher David R. Wrone dismissed the theory that Kennedy's body was surreptitiously removed from the presidential plane, stating that as is done with all cargo on airplanes for safety precautions, the coffin and lid were held by steel wrapping cables to prevent shifting during takeoff and landing and in case of air disturbances in flight.[473] According to Wrone, the side of the plane away from the television camera "was bathed in klieg lights, and thousands of persons watched along the fence that bent backward along that side, providing, in effect, a well-lit and very public stage for any would-be body snatchers".[473] Federal Reserve conspiracy Jim Marrs, in his book Crossfire, presented the theory that Kennedy was trying to rein in the power of the Federal Reserve, and that forces opposed to such action might have played at least some part in the assassination.[482][483] According to Marrs, the issuance of Executive Order 11110 was an effort by Kennedy to transfer power from the Federal Reserve to the United States Department of the Treasury by replacing Federal Reserve Notes with silver certificates.[482] Actor and author Richard Belzer named the responsible parties in this theory as American "billionaires, power brokers, and bankers ... working in tandem with the CIA and other sympathetic agents of the government".[484] A 2010 article in Research magazine discussing various controversies surrounding the Federal Reserve stated that "the wildest accusation against the Fed is that it was involved in Kennedy's assassination."[482] Critics of the theory note that Kennedy called for and signed legislation phasing out Silver Certificates in favor of Federal Reserve Notes, thereby enhancing the power of the Federal Reserve; and that Executive Order 11110 was a technicality that only delegated existing presidential powers to the Secretary of the Treasury for administrative convenience during a period of transition.[482][483] Israeli government conspiracy Immediately following Kennedy's death, speculation that he was assassinated by a "Zionist conspiracy" was prevalent in much of the Muslim world.[485] Among these views were that Zionists were motivated to kill Kennedy due to his opposition to an Israeli nuclear program, that Lyndon B. Johnson received orders from Zionists to have Kennedy killed, and that the assassin was a Zionist agent.[485] According to Michael Collins Piper in Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Controversy, Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion orchestrated the assassination after learning that Kennedy planned to keep Israel from obtaining nuclear weapons.[486] Piper said that the assassination "was a joint enterprise conducted on the highest levels of the American CIA, in collaboration with organized crime – and most specifically, with direct and profound involvement by the Israeli intelligence service, the Mossad."[487] The theory alleges involvement of Meyer Lansky and the Anti-Defamation League.[486] In 2004, Mordechai Vanunu stated that the assassination was Israel's response to "pressure [Kennedy] exerted on ... Ben-Gurion, to shed light on Dimona's nuclear reactor in Israel".[488] In a speech before the United Nations General Assembly in 2009, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi also alleged that Kennedy was killed for wanting to investigate Dimona.[489] Others Returning from the funeral of President Kennedy, Charles De Gaulle, the president of France, told his confidant Alain Peyrefitte that the Dallas police were linked to far-right segregationist "ultras" in the Ku Klux Klan, and that the far-right John Birch Society manipulated Oswald and used Jack Ruby to silence him.[490][491] Other published theories Secret Service Agent George Hickey holding his AR-15 rifle Reasonable Doubt (1985) by Henry Hurt, who writes about his Warren Commission doubts. Hurt pins the plot on professional crook Robert Easterling, along with Texas oilmen and the supposed Ferrie/Shaw alliance. ISBN 0-03-004059-0. Behold a Pale Horse (1991) by William Cooper alleges that Kennedy was shot by the presidential limousine's driver, Secret Service agent William Greer. In the Zapruder film, Greer can be seen turning to his right and looking backwards, just before speeding away from Dealey Plaza. This theory has come under severe criticism from others in the research community.[492] ISBN 0-929385-22-5. Former Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden's The Echo from Dealey Plaza (2008) (ISBN 978-0-307-38201-6) and Kevin James Shay's Death of the Rising Sun (2017) (ISBN 978-1-881-36556-3) detail plots that occurred shortly before Kennedy's trip to Dallas in 1963, in Chicago and Florida. Within the Secret Service during those chaotic months, "rumors were flying" about Cuban dissidents and right-wing southerners who were stalking Kennedy for a chance to kill him, Bolden wrote. The security threat in Chicago on November 2, 1963, involved former Marine Thomas Arthur Vallee, who was arrested after police found two M-1 rifles, a handgun, and 2,500 rounds of ammunition in his apartment.[493] A high-powered rifle was confiscated from another suspected conspirator in Chicago shortly before Kennedy's trip there was canceled, Bolden said. Authorities also cited similar threats in Kennedy's Tampa, Fla., and Miami visits on November 18. Mark North's Act of Treason: The Role of J. Edgar Hoover in the Assassination of President Kennedy, (1991) implicates the FBI Director. North documents that Hoover was aware of threats against Kennedy by organized crime before 1963, and suggests that he failed to take proper action to prevent the assassination. North also charges Hoover with failure to work adequately to uncover the truth behind Kennedy's murder, ISBN 0-88184-877-8. Mortal Error: The Shot That Killed JFK (1992) by Bonar Menninger (ISBN 0-312-08074-3) alleges that while Oswald did attempt to assassinate JFK and did succeed in wounding him, the fatal shot was accidentally fired by Secret Service agent George Hickey, who was riding in the Secret Service follow-up car directly behind the presidential limousine. The theory alleges that after the first two shots were fired the motorcade sped up while Hickey was attempting to respond to Oswald's shots and he lost his balance and accidentally pulled the trigger of his AR-15 and the shot fatally hit JFK. Hickey's testimony says otherwise: "At the end of the last report (shot) I reached to the bottom of the car and picked up the AR 15 rifle, cocked and loaded it, and turned to the rear." (italics added).[494] George Hickey sued Menninger in April 1995 for what he had written in Mortal Error. The case was dismissed as its statute of limitations had run out. The theory received public attention in 2013 when it was supported by Colin McLaren's book and documentary titled JFK: The Smoking Gun (ISBN 978-0-7336-3044-6). No Secret Service agent fired a weapon that day. Who Shot JFK? : A Guide to the Major Conspiracy Theories (1993) by Bob Callahan and Mark Zingarelli explores some of the more obscure theories regarding JFK's murder, such as "The Coca-Cola Theory". According to this theory, suggested by the editor of an organic gardening magazine, Oswald killed JFK due to mental impairment stemming from an addiction to refined sugar, as evidenced by his need for his favorite beverage immediately after the assassination. ISBN 0-671-79494-9. Passport to Assassination (1993) by Oleg M. Nechiporenko, the Soviet consular official (and highly placed KGB officer) who met with Oswald in Mexico City in 1963. He was afforded the unique opportunity to interview Oswald about his goals including his genuine desire for a Cuban visa. His conclusions were: (1) that Oswald killed Kennedy due to extreme feelings of inadequacy versus his wife's professed admiration for JFK, and (2) that the KGB never sought intelligence information from Oswald during his time in the USSR as they did not trust his motivations. ISBN 1-55972-210-X. Norman Mailer's Oswald's Tale: An American Mystery (1995) concludes that Oswald was guilty, but holds that the evidence may point to a second gunman on the grassy knoll, who, purely by coincidence, was attempting to kill JFK at the same time as Oswald. "If there was indeed another shot, it was not necessarily fired by a conspirator of Oswald's. Such a gun could have belonged to another lone killer or to a conspirator working for some other group altogether."[495] ISBN 0-679-42535-7. David Wrone's The Zapruder Film (2003) concludes that JFK's head wound and his throat and back wounds were caused by in-and-through shots originating from the grassy knoll. Three shots were fired from three different angles, none of them from the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository. Wrone is a professor of history (emeritus) at the University of Wisconsin–Stevens Point. ISBN 0-7006-1291-2. The Gemstone File: A Memoir (2006), by Stephanie Caruana, posits that Oswald was part of a 28-man assassination team that included three U.S. Mafia hitmen (Jimmy Fratianno, John Roselli, and Eugene Brading). Oswald's role was to shoot John Connally. Bruce Roberts, author of the Gemstone File papers, claimed that the JFK assassination scenario was modeled after a supposed attempted assassination of President F.D. Roosevelt. Roosevelt was riding in an open car with Mayor Anton Cermak of Chicago. Cermak was shot and killed by Giuseppe Zangara. In Dallas, JFK was the real target, and Connally was a secondary target. The JFK assassination is only a small part of the Gemstone File's account. ISBN 1-4120-6137-7. In "Allegations of PFC Eugene Dinkin",[496] the Mary Farrell Foundation summarizes and archives documents related to Private First Class Eugene B. Dinkin, a cryptographic code operator stationed in Metz, France, who went AWOL in early November 1963, entered Switzerland using a false ID, and visited the United Nations' press office and declared that officials in the U.S. government were planning to assassinate President Kennedy, adding that "something" might happen to the Commander in Chief in Texas. Dinkin was arrested nine days before Kennedy was killed, placed in psychiatric care (deemed a mad man?), and released shortly thereafter. His allegations eventually made their way to the Warren Commission, but according to the Ferrell Foundation account, the Commission "took no interest in the matter, and indeed omitted any mention of Dinkin from its purportedly encyclopedic 26 volumes of evidence."[497] Described by the Associated Press as "one of the strangest theories",[498] Hugh McDonald's Appointment in Dallas stated that the Soviet government contracted with a rogue CIA agent named "Saul" to have Kennedy killed.[499] McDonald said he worked for the CIA "on assignment for $100 a day" and met "Saul" at the Agency's headquarters after the Bay of Pigs Invasion.[500] According to McDonald, his CIA mentor told him that "Saul" was the world's best assassin.[501] McDonald stated that after the assassination, he recognized the man's photo in the Warren Commission report and eventually tracked him to a London hotel in 1972.[500][501] McDonald stated that "Saul" assumed he, too, was a CIA agent and confided to him that he shot Kennedy from a building on the other side of the street from the Texas School Book Depository.[498] Judyth Vary Baker claims that during the summer of 1963, she had an adulterous affair with Oswald in New Orleans while working with him on a CIA bioweapons project to kill Fidel Castro. According to John McAdams, Baker presents a "classic case of pushing the limits of plausibility too far".[502] A Woman I Know: Female Spies, Double Identities, and a New Story of the Kennedy Assassination (2023) by Mary Haverstick, identifies and interviews the real-life retired (female) pilot Jerrie Cobb, who died in 2019, and suggests that she either was the same person as, or impersonated June Cobb (d. 2015), a known CIA operative who may have been part of the team that attempted to assassinate Fidel Castro. She provides statements to the effect that Cobb (apparently as "June") piloted a small twin-engined plane to the Redbird private airport (now Dallas Executive Airport) in Dallas, where it remained with engines running during the assassination of the president, purportedly to assist in spiriting away Lee Harvey Oswald, and may also herself have been involved in the assassination as a second shooter in the vicinity of the presidential limousine; her conclusion, which has received mixed responses from reviewers, is that Oswald was "set up" to conduct the assassination by a clandestine team within the CIA including William King Harvey and Arnold M. Silver.[503][504][505] See also Conspiracy theories in United States politics Martin Luther King Jr. assassination conspiracy theories Robert F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories Assassination of John F. Kennedy in popular culture Notes The Warren Commission never asked Reynolds what the man he saw was wearing, despite Reynolds saying he later learned that the man left his "coat" in a parking lot (in fact, a zipper jacket was found there). Among those who believe that the Zapruder film has been altered are John Costella,[134] James H. Fetzer,[134] David Lifton,[134] David Mantik,[134] Jack White,[134] Noel Twyman,[135] and Harrison Livingstone, who has called it "the biggest hoax of the 20th century".[134] In Bill Newman's voluntary statement to the Sheriff's Department, signed and notarized on November 22, 1963, he wrote that the gunshot "had come from the garden directly behind me, that was on an elevation from where I was as I was right on the curb. I do not recall looking toward the Texas School Book Depository. I looked back in the vacinity [sic] of the garden."[173] see "Testimony of James B. Wilcott, a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency" (PDF). HSCA hearings. March 22, 1978. According to the Warren Commission, after Earlene Roberts saw Oswald standing near the bus stop outside his rooming house, "[he] was next seen about nine-tenths of a mile (1.4 km) away at the southeast corner of 10th Street and Patton Avenue, moments before the Tippit shooting."[298] References "Findings". Report of the Select Committee on Assassinations U.S. House of Representatives. August 15, 2016. p. 149 – via National Archives.; HSCA Appendix to Hearings, vol. 9, p. 336, par. 917, Joseph Campisi. Ancestry.com, Social Security Death Index [database on-line], Provo, Utah: The Generations Network, Inc., 2007. Ancestry.com, Texas Death Index, 1903–2000 [database on-line], Provo, UT: The Generations Network, Inc., 2006.; Summers, Anthony (1998). Not in Your Lifetime. New York: Marlowe & Company. p. 346. ISBN 1-56924-739-0. "One JFK conspiracy theory that could be true". CNN. November 18, 2013. Warren Commission 1964, p. 198, "Chapter 5". Tippit murder affidavit: text, cover. Kennedy murder affidavit: text, cover. Knight 2007, p. 75 Krauss, Clifford (January 5, 1992). "28 Years After Kennedy's Assassination, Conspiracy Theories Refuse to Die". The New York Times. Retrieved April 26, 2017. Bugliosi, Vincent (2007). Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. p. 989. ISBN 978-0-393-04525-3. "Oswald Innocent? A Lawyer's Brief". National Guardian (published December 19, 1963). November 22, 1963. Archived from the original on January 26, 2013. Donovan, Barna William (2011). Conspiracy Films: A Tour of Dark Places in the American Conscious. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company. p. 34. ISBN 978-0-7864-3901-0. Warren Commission 1964, p. 374, "Chapter 6". WILSON, PATRICIA. "CLAY SHAW DIARY RECALLS HORROR OF TRIAL IN JFK DEATH". The Buffalo News. Retrieved November 21, 2021. Ogg, E. Jerald (2004). "Life and the Prosecution of Clay Shaw: A More Curious Silence". Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association. 45 (2): 133–149. ISSN 0024-6816. JSTOR 4233998. Retrieved November 21, 2021. Myers, Shelby. "The New Orleans connection to JFK's assassination". FOX10 News. Archived from the original on November 21, 2021. Retrieved November 21, 2021. "Clay Shaw Trial Transcripts – JFK Collection, HSCA, February 28, part d, p. 11" – via History Matters Archive. HSCA Final Report (Report). pp. 65–75. "Summary of Findings". August 15, 2016. "National Archives Releases JFK Assassination Records". October 26, 2017. "Presidential Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies". whitehouse.gov – via National Archives. Pruitt, Sarah. "Trump Holds Some JFK Assassination Files Back, Sets New 3-Year Deadline". HISTORY. Bender, Brian (October 24, 2021). "What Biden is keeping secret in the JFK files". POLITICO. Retrieved October 25, 2021. "Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on the Temporary Certification Regarding Disclosure of Information in Certain Records Related to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy". The White House. October 23, 2021. Retrieved October 25, 2021. "National Archives releases 13,173 more JFK assassination files". CBS News. December 15, 2022. "JFK Assassination Records - 2022 Additional Documents Release". National Archives. December 15, 2022. Fossum, Sam (July 1, 2023). "National Archives concludes review of JFK assassination documents with 99% made public | CNN Politics". CNN. Retrieved December 1, 2023. Krajicek, David. "JFK Assassination". truTV.com. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. p. 1. Archived from the original on April 19, 2012. Retrieved March 25, 2012. Broderick, James F.; Miller, Darren W. (2008). "Chapter 16: The JFK Assassination". Web of Conspiracy: A Guide to Conspiracy Theory Sites on the Internet. Medford, New Jersey: Information Today, Inc./CyberAge Books. p. 203. ISBN 978-0-910965-81-1. Perry, James D. (2003). Peter, Knight (ed.). Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, Inc. p. 383. ISBN 1-57607-812-4. Bugliosi 2007, p. xiv. Bugliosi 2007, p. 974. Kidd, Colin (August 2011). "The Warren Commission and the Dons: An Anglo-American Microhistory". Modern Intellectual History. 8 (2). Cambridge University Press (published July 28, 2011): 411. doi:10.1017/S1479244311000242. S2CID 144003532. Retrieved October 22, 2022. Bugliosi 2007. Trillin, Calvin (June 2, 1967). "The Buffs: Was Lee Harvey Oswald innocent?". New Yorker (published June 10, 1967). Retrieved October 22, 2022. Appleton, Sheldon (October–November 1998). "The Mystery of the Kennedy Assassination: What the American Public Believes" (PDF). The Public Perspective. Storrs, Connecticut: The Roper Center: 13–17. Retrieved October 24, 2022. Sheatsley, Paul B.; Feldman, Jacob J. (Summer 1964). "The Assassination of President Kennedy: A Preliminary Report on Public Reactions and Behavior". The Public Opinion Quarterly. 28 (2). Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research: 189–215. doi:10.1086/267237. JSTOR 2746986. LCCN 38005920. OCLC 45001845. Saad, Lydia (November 21, 2003). "Americans: Kennedy Assassination a Conspiracy". Gallup, Inc. Langer, Gary (November 16, 2003). "John F. Kennedy's Assassination Leaves a Legacy of Suspicion" (PDF). ABC News. Retrieved May 16, 2010. Summers 2013, p. xii. "Majority in U.S. Still Believe JFK Killed in a Conspiracy: Mafia, federal government top list of potential conspirators". Gallup, Inc. November 15, 2013. Goodhart, Arthur L. (January 1, 1968). "Three Famous Legal Hoaxes". Alberta Law Review. 6 (1). Alberta Law Review Society: 14. doi:10.29173/alr1964. Retrieved October 21, 2022. Davis, Susan (September 3, 2009). "Kennedy Memoirs Reflect on Chappaquiddick, Drinking and JFK Assassination". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved October 23, 2009. Kennedy, Edward M. (2009). "1963". True Compass: A Memoir. London, England: Hachette. ISBN 9780748123353. Retrieved October 23, 2022. Orbis Books, JFK and the Unspeakable "RFK Jr: Dad believed Warren Commission 'shoddy'". CBS News. Associated Press. January 12, 2013. Retrieved December 19, 2020. Shenon, Philip (October 12, 2014). "Was RFK a JFK Conspiracy Theorist?". Politico. Retrieved November 30, 2020. "JFK files show Hoover wanted the public convinced Oswald acted alone". NBC News. "HSCA Hearings – Volume 3, pp. 471–473" – via History Matters Archive. "Read J. Edgar Hoover's Memo on Oswald's Death". The New York Times. October 26, 2017. Telephone Conversation Between President Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover, November 23, 1963, Declassified October 26, 1993. "Oswald, the CIA, and Mexico City". Frontline. Bender, Bryan. "Why the last of the JFK files could embarrass the CIA". Politico Magazine. Oswald, the CIA, and Mexico City ("Lopez Report"), 1996 Release. Summers 2013, p. 276. "Telephone conversation between President Johnson and Senator Richard Russell, November 29, 1963". American Public Media. Walter Pincus (September 23, 1993). "Transcripts Show LBJ's Maneuvers in Setting Up Warren Commission". Washington Post. Katzenbach, Nicholas (November 25, 1963). "Memorandum for Mr. Moyers". Retrieved September 30, 2014 – via History Matters Archive. "Testimony of Nicholas Katzenbach" (PDF). HSCA Report, Volume 3, Investigation of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy. p. 644. Retrieved September 30, 2014 – via History Matters Archive. Savage, David G. (May 10, 2012). "Nicholas Katzenbach dies at 90; attorney general under Johnson". Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles. Retrieved December 12, 2014. Lane, Mark (1993). Rush to Judgment. Basic Books. ISBN 1560250437. Hurt, Henry (1986). Reasonable Doubt: An Investigation into the Assassination of John F. Kennedy. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. ISBN 0-03-004059-0. Kurtz, Michael L. (2006). The JFK Assassination Debates: Lone Gunman versus Conspiracy. University of Kansas Press. ISBN 9780700614745. McKnight, Gerald D. (2005). Breach of Trust: How the Warren Commission Failed the Nation and Why. University of Kansas Press. ISBN 9780700613908. Summers, Anthony (2013). Not in Your Lifetime. New York: Open Road. ISBN 978-1-4804-3548-3. Weisberg, Harold (1965). Whitewash: The Report on the Warren Report. Skyhorse Press; originally self-published. "A CBS News Inquiry: The Warren Report – Part 4 – Why Doesn't America Believe the Warren Report?". June 28, 1967. Interview of Richard Schweiker, Face the Nation, CBS News, June 27, 1976. Summers 2013, p. 243. Drummond, Roscoe (November 3, 1966). "Those Warren Report Rumors". The Deseret News. Salt Lake City, Utah. p. A26. Retrieved December 23, 2014. Buyer, Richard (2009). Why the JFK Assassination Still Matters: The Truth for My Daughter Kennedy and for Generations to Come. Tucson, Arizona: Wheatmark. p. 162. ISBN 978-1-60494-193-7. Sloan, Bill; Hill, Jean (1992). JFK: The Last Dissenting Witness. Gretna, Louisiana: Pelican Publishing Company. pp. 101, 186, 212, 219. ISBN 1-58980-672-7. Retrieved February 26, 2012. Marrs, Jim (1989). Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy. New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc. pp. 318–319. ISBN 978-0-88184-648-5. Marrs 1989, p. 87. Marrs 1989, p. 88. Testimony of Warren Allen Reynolds, Warren Commission Hearings, vol. 11, pp. 434–442 "FBI interview of WARREN REYNOLDS". Archived from the original on May 25, 2021. Retrieved May 25, 2021. Marrs 1989, p. 342. Bugliosi 2007, p. 1012. "Testimony of Jacqueline Hess". Hearings before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives. Vol. IV. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. 1979. pp. 454–468 – via Mary Ferrell Foundation. Bugliosi 2007, pp. 1012, 1276. Jones, Penn Jr. (November 22, 1966). Hinckle, Warren (ed.). "The Legacy of Penn Jones, Jr". Ramparts. Vol. 5, no. 5. San Francisco: Edward M. Keating. pp. 31–38. ISSN 0033-9164. Welsh, David (November 22, 1966). Hinckle, Warren (ed.). "The Legacy of Penn Jones, Jr". Ramparts. Vol. 5, no. 5. San Francisco: Edward M. Keating. pp. 39–50. ISSN 0033-9164. "Kennedy Killing: Ten Meet Violent Death". The Prince George Citizen. Vol. 10, no. 202. Prince George, British Columbia: W. L. Griffith. Reuters. October 25, 1966. p. 1. Retrieved October 3, 2022. "10 mystery deaths linked with assassination". The Ottawa Citizen. Vol. 124, no. 235. Ottawa: R. W. Southam. Reuters. October 25, 1966. p. 16. Retrieved October 3, 2022. "10 Strange Deaths: Bizarre JFK Aftermath" (PDF). Vancouver Sun. Reuters. October 25, 1966. p. 40. Retrieved October 3, 2022. "Ramparts Authors Ask Ruby Inquiry" (PDF). San Francisco Chronicle. October 31, 1966. Retrieved October 3, 2022. "The Mythmakers". Nation. Time. Vol. 88, no. 20. November 11, 1966. pp. 33–34. Retrieved September 18, 2022. Marrs 1989, pp. 555–566. Marrs, Jim; Schuster, Ralph (2002). "A Look at the Deaths of Those Involved". Assassination Research. Elias, Marilyn (Winter 2013). "Conspiracy Act". Intelligence Report (152). Southern Poverty Law Center. Retrieved December 22, 2014. Harrison, Ken (November 10, 2015). "Justice sought for newspaper woman dead since 1965". San Diego Reader. Retrieved December 19, 2016. Armstrong, John. [Jack Ruby "Jack Ruby"]. www.harveyandlee.net. Retrieved March 12, 2018. "Journalist Dorothy Kilgallen wrote in the New York Journal American (June 6, 1964): "It is known that 10 persons have signed sworn depositions to the Warren Commission that they knew Oswald and Ruby to have been acquainted."" {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help) "Editorial: Earl Warren's 'Lost Cause'" (PDF). National Guardian. New York City. August 29, 1964. "In the 'Journal American' it filled several pages over three days and was accompanied by revealing commentary by Miss Kilgallen who has reported on the assassination inquiry with a most unusual zeal. Her analysis of the testimony seemed accurate. "It is a fascinating document," she wrote. "fascinating for what it leaves unsaid, as well as for what it says." And, she might have added, fascinating for what was not asked of Ruby by the Chief Justice." Israel, Lee (1979). Kilgallen. Delacorte Press. p. 369. ISBN 0-440-04522-3. Shaw, Mark (2018). Denial of Justice: Dorothy Kilgallen, Abuse of Power, and the Most Compelling JFK Assassination in History. New York: Simon & Schuster. pp. 309–311. ISBN 978-1-6429-3058-0. Marrs 1989, pp. 424–425. Israel 1979, pp. 403–404. "Miss Kilgallen Death Ascribed to Mixture of Alcohol, Barbiturates". The Philadelphia Inquirer. Associated Press. November 16, 1965. p. 1. Bugliosi 2007, p. 1014. Bugliosi 2007, pp. 1016–1017. Kroth, Jerome A. (2003). Conspiracy in Camelot: The Complete History of the Assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Algora Publishing. p. 195. ISBN 0-87586-247-0. Smith, Matthew (2005). Conspiracy: The Plot to Stop the Kennedys. New York: Citadel Press. pp. 104–108. ISBN 978-0-8065-2764-2. "Rose Cherami". www.maryferrell.org. "Rose Cheramie". Appendix to Hearings before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives. Vol. X. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. March 1979. pp. 197–205 – via Mary Ferrell Foundation. Marrs 1989, p. 401. Appendix to Hearings before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives, Volume X 1979, p. 201. Appendix to Hearings before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives, Volume X 1979, p. 202. Appendix to Hearings before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives, Volume X 1979, p. 200. Appendix to Hearings before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives, Volume X 1979, p. 199. Schmidt, Theresa. "I wanna know: JFK Eunice connection". KPLC News. By the evening of November 22, five of them (Helen Markham, Barbara Davis, Virginia Davis, Ted Callaway, Sam Guinyard) had identified Oswald in police lineups as the man they saw. A sixth (William Scoggins) did so the next day. Three others (Harold Russell, Pat Patterson, Warren Reynolds) subsequently identified Oswald from a photograph. Two witnesses (Domingo Benavides, William Smith) testified that Oswald resembled the man they had seen. One witness (L.J. Lewis) felt he was too distant from the gunman to make a positive identification. Warren Commission Hearings, CE 1968, Location of Eyewitnesses to the Movements of Lee Harvey Oswald in the Vicinity of the Tippit Killing. 10 mystery deaths linked with assassination of JFK. The Ottawa Citizen, 25 October 1966. Posner, Gerald (2003). Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK. Anchor Books. pp. 489–491. ISBN 978-1-4000-3462-8. Retrieved July 8, 2013. Bugliosi 2007, p. 984. "'3 Gunmen Involved in JFK's Slaying; 4 Bullets Fired'". St. Joseph Gazette. St. Joseph, MO. UPI. November 16, 1967. pp. 1A–2A. Retrieved March 8, 2012. Golz, Earl (August 27, 1978). "SS 'Imposters' Spotted by JFK Witness". The Dallas Morning News. Dallas, TX. pp. 1A, 4A. Retrieved November 5, 2022. "Kennedy Site: Secret Service Stories Heard". The Victoria Advocate. Victoria, Texas. AP. August 28, 1978. p. 2A. Retrieved November 5, 2022. "British TV documentary says mobsters killed JFK". The Bryan Times. Bryan, OH. UPI. October 26, 1988. p. 10. Retrieved November 5, 2022. Marrs 1989, p. 36. Turner, Nigel (1991). "The Forces of Darkness". The Men Who Killed Kennedy. "Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board". Assassination Records Review Board. September 1998. Athan G. Theoharis (1992). "Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board, Chapter 1: The Problem of Secrecy and the Solution of the JFK Act". "Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board, Chapter 1". sgp.fas.org. Morley, Jefferson (November 22, 2010). "The Kennedy Assassination: 47 Years Later, What Do We Really Know?". The Atlantic. "Evidence Tampering?". Archived from the original on May 1, 2012. Retrieved July 15, 2013 – via Mary Ferrell Foundation. Findings. Archives.gov. Retrieved on July 15, 2013. Testimony of Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald, Warren Commission Hearings, vol. 1, p. 15. Farid, Hany (2009). "The Lee Harvey Oswald backyard photos: real or fake?" (PDF). Perception. 38 (11): 1731–1734. doi:10.1068/p6580. ISSN 1468-4233. PMID 20120271. S2CID 12062689. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 24, 2015. Retrieved January 8, 2015. Ramer, Holly (November 5, 2009). "Lee Harvey Oswald photo not a fake, college professor says". The Times-Picayune. New Orleans, LA. Retrieved January 7, 2015. Groden, Robert J. (1995). The Search for Lee Harvey Oswald: A Comprehensive Photographic Record. New York: Penguin Books. pp. 90–95. ISBN 978-0-670-85867-5. "Autopsy photographs of JFK were forged: Technician". Daily Reporter. Spencer, Iowa. UPI. July 9, 1979. pp. 1, 3. Retrieved January 6, 2015. "JFK Autopsy Photos Fake?". Observer-Reporter. Washington, Pennsylvania. AP. July 10, 1979. p. A-6. "Forgery Claim On JFK Photos Called 'False'" (PDF). The Washington Post. Washington, D.C. July 10, 1979. Retrieved January 6, 2015. "I.A.". Report of the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. 1979. p. 45. "Chapter Six, Part II: Clarifying the Federal Record" (PDF). Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. September 30, 1998. p. 124. Bugliosi 2007, pp. 504–512. Twyman, Noel (1997). Bloody Treason: On Solving History's Greatest Murder Mystery, The Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Rancho Santa Fe, CA: Laurel Pub. ISBN 0-9654399-0-9. "Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board, Chapter 6, Part II". fas.org. Retrieved February 5, 2020. Roland Zavada. "Analysis of Selected Motion Picture Photographic Evidence" September 7, 1998. study I. Janney, Peter (October 2016) [2013]. Mary's Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary Pinchot Meyer, and Their Vision for World Peace (3 ed.). New York: Skyhorse Publishing, Inc. p. 292. ISBN 978-1-51070-8921. Lifton, David. Best Evidence: Disguise and Deception in the Assassination of John F. Kennedy, (New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, 1988), pp. 678–683, 692–699, 701–702. Warren Commission 1964, pp. 18–19, "Chapter 1". "Seymour Weitzman's affidavit". November 23, 1963. Archived from the original on March 6, 2009. Retrieved March 9, 2010. Ray La Fontaine; Mary La Fontaine (1996). Oswald Talked. Pelican. p. 372. ISBN 978-1-56554-029-3. Mark Lane interview of Roger Craig (1976). Two Men in Dallas. Tapeworm Video Distributors. ASIN B000NHDFBQ. Barry Ernest (2013). The Girl on the Stairs: The Search for a Missing Witness to the JFK Assassination. Pelican Publishing. p. 128. ISBN 9781455617838. Warren Commission 1964, p. 235, "Chapter 5". Marrs 1989, pp. 439–440. Groden 1995, p. 118. Gilbride, Richard (2009). Matrix for Assassination: The JFK Conspiracy. Trafford Publishing. p. 267. ISBN 978-1-4269-1390-7. Warren Commission 1964, p. 645, "Appendix 12". Testimony of Dr. Robert Shaw, Warren Commission Hearings, vol. 4, pp. 113–114. Testimony of Commander James Humes, Warren Commission Hearings, vol. 2, pp. 374–376. Testimony of Lieutenant Colonel Pierre Finck, Warren Commission Hearings, vol. 2, p. 382. Josiah Thompson. "Six Seconds in Dallas". pp. 147–151. Retrieved September 17, 2010. Smith, Matthew P. (June 19, 1993). "Wecht presses to recover Connally bullet fragments". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Pittsburgh, PA USA. p. A-5. George Lardner Jr. (June 18, 1993). "Connally Takes Bullet Pieces to Grave". Washington Post. Hearst Newspapers (June 18, 1993). "Connally Buried with Bullet Fragments". Orlando Sentinel. Warren Commission 1964, "Chapter 3". Shipman, Tim (July 1, 2007). "Oswald 'had no time to fire all Kennedy bullets'". The Telegraph. Archived from the original on January 11, 2022. Retrieved January 17, 2019. Helinski, Paul (November 11, 2013). "Lee Harvey Oswald's Carcano Rifle – Shooting It Today". Guns America. Retrieved January 17, 2019. Summers 2013, pp. 31–. "Report of the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives". United States National Archives. 1979. Retrieved May 16, 2010. Warren Report, chapter 1, p. 19. Report of the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives, Chapter I, Section A 1979, p. 44. "Was Mary Moorman In The Street?". JFK Lancer. Archived from the original on February 25, 2021. Retrieved March 25, 2012. Nellie Connally's statement bbc.co.uk: September 3, 2006. Appendix to Hearings before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives. Vol. VI. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. 1979. pp. 306–308 – via Mary Ferrell Foundation. Feldman, Harold (March 1965). Arnoni, Menachem (ed.). "Fifty-one Witnesses: The Grassy Knoll". The Minority of One. 64. 7 (3). Menachem Arnoni: 16–25. Archived from the original on February 4, 2012. Retrieved March 3, 2012. Bugliosi 2007, p. 847. "A Primer of Assassination Theories: The Whole Spectrum of Doubt, from the Warren Commissioners to Ousman Ba". Esquire: 205 ff. December 1966. Archived from the original on February 14, 2012. McFadden, Dennis (November 16, 2021). "Why Did the Earwitnesses to the John F. Kennedy Assassination Not Agree About the Location of the Gunman?". Frontiers in Psychology. 12. Frontiers Media SA: 763432. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.763432. ISSN 1664-1078. OCLC 701805890. PMC 8637832. PMID 34867663. Warren Commission Hearings, vol. 7, p. 287–288, Testimony of Lee E. Bowers, Jr., April 2, 1964. Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1966[page needed] "Decker Ex 5323 – Dallas County Sheriff's Office record of the events surrounding the assassination". Warren Commission Hearings. Vol. XIX. 1964. p. 490 – via Mary Ferrell Foundation. "A Second Primer of Assassination Theories". Esquire: 104 ff. May 1967. Archived from the original on October 7, 2011. Prouty, L. Fletcher (2011) [2005]. JFK: The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy. New York: Skyhorse Publishing. ISBN 978-1-61608-291-8. Groden, Robert (1993). The Killing of a President. pp. 142–144. "Review of Murder in Dealey Plaza from The Citizens' Voice". Retrieved September 30, 2014. Turner, Nigel (2003). "The Smoking Guns". The Men Who Killed Kennedy. Fiester, Sherry Pool Gutierrez (Winter 1996). "What the Blood Tells Us". KenRahn.Com (originally published by "The Kennedy Assassination Chronicles"). Retrieved April 22, 2014. G Paul Chambers. Head Shot. The Science Behind the JFK Assassination. Prometheus Books NY 2012 p 207. Richard B. Trask, Pictures of the Pain (Danvers, Mass.: Yeoman, 1994), p. 124. Circumstantial Evidence of a Head Shot From The Grassy Knoll W. Anthony Marsh, Presented at The Third Decade conference June 18–20, 1993 Bugliosi 2007, p. 994. Simon, Art (1996). "Chapter 1: The Zapruder Film". Dangerous Knowledge: The JFK Assassination in Art and Film. Culture and the Moving Image. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. ISBN 978-1-56639-379-9. Krajicek, David. "JFK Assassination". truTV.com. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. p. 11. Archived from the original on April 20, 2012. Retrieved March 25, 2012. "Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board, Chapter 1". sgp.fas.org. Retrieved November 21, 2021. "Intelligence - Rockefeller Commission Report - Final (4)" (PDF). Richard B. Cheney Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Retrieved November 21, 2021. Bugliosi 2007, p. 377. Campbell, Ballard C. (2008). Disasters, Accidents, and Crises in American History: A Reference Guide to the Nation's Most Catastrophic Events. Infobase Publishing. p. 1936. ISBN 978-1-4381-3012-5. Retrieved September 1, 2013. Holland, Max (June 1994). "After Thirty Years: Making Sense of the Assassination". Reviews in American History. 22 (2): 191–209. doi:10.2307/2702884. JSTOR 2702884. Martin, John (September 2011). "The Assassination of John F. Kennedy – 48 Years On". Irish Foreign Affairs. Knight 2007, p. 72 Olmsted, Kathryn S. (2011). Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy, World War I to 9/11. Oxford University Press. pp. 169–170. ISBN 978-0-19-975395-6. Retrieved September 4, 2013. Testimony of Mark Weiss and Ernest Aschkenasy, 5 HSCA 617. G. Robert Blakey and Richard N. Billings, The Plot to Kill the President, Times Books, 1981, p. 103. ISBN 978-0-8129-0929-6. Greg Jaynes. "Afterward". The Scene of the Crime. "Separate Views of Hons. Samuel L. Devine and Robert W. Edgar". HSCA Report. pp. 492–493. Report of the Committee on Ballistic Acoustics. Nap.edu. 1982. doi:10.17226/10264. ISBN 978-0-309-25372-7. Retrieved December 24, 2012. Committee on Ballistic Acoustics, National Research Council (October 1982). "Reexamination of Acoustic Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination". Science. 218 (8): 127–133. doi:10.1126/science.6750789. George Lardner Jr. (March 26, 2001). "Study Backs Theory of 'Grassy Knoll'". The Washington Post. p. A03. Pellegrini, Frank (March 26, 2001). "The Grassy Knoll Is Back". Time Magazine. Archived from the original on April 13, 2001. Thomas DB (2001). "Echo Correlation Analysis and the Acoustic Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination Revisited" (PDF). Science & Justice. 41 (1): 21–32. doi:10.1016/S1355-0306(01)71845-X. PMID 11215295. Archived from the original (PDF) on February 15, 2010. Retrieved April 10, 2010. Linsker R, Garwin RL, Chernoff H, Horowitz P, Ramsey NF (2005). "Synchronization of the acoustic evidence in the assassination of President Kennedy" (PDF). Science & Justice. 45 (4): 207–226. doi:10.1016/S1355-0306(05)71668-3. PMID 16686272. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 13, 2013. Retrieved December 7, 2013. Thomas, Donald Byron (2010). Hear No Evil: Social Constructivism and the Forensic Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination. Mary Ferrell Foundation Press. ISBN 978-0980121391. Marrs 1989, pp. 55–89. "HSCA Appendix to Hearings – Volume 7, pp. 37–39" – via History Matters Archive. Newton, Michael; French, John L. (2007). "Magic Bullet Theory". The Encyclopedia of Crime Scene Investigation. Infobase Publishing. p. 173. ISBN 978-1438129839. Wecht M.D., J.D., Dr. Cyril, Cause of Death, Penguin Group, 1993. ISBN 0-525-93661-0.[page needed] "MD 6 – White House Death Certificate (Burkley – 11/23/63)". p. 2. Retrieved February 7, 2013 – via History Matters Archive. "Gerald Ford's Terrible Fiction". JFK Lancer. Archived from the original on August 11, 2021. Retrieved February 29, 2008. Autopsy Descriptive Sheet (commonly called "Face Sheet"), Assassinations Records Review Board, MD 1, p. 1. "Appendix 9: Autopsy Report and Supplemental Report". Report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. 1964. p. 544. Jim Kelly; Andy Purdy (August 29, 1977). Memorandum (Report). pp. 2, 5. Retrieved September 16, 2022. George Lardner Jr. (November 10, 1998). "Archive Photos Not of JFK's Brain, Concludes Aide to Review Board". The Washington Post. p. A03. Duboff, Josh (October 21, 2013). "DID RFK STEAL JFK'S BRAIN?". Vanity Fair. Retrieved September 16, 2022. Douglass 2010, pp. 311–312. The Clay Shaw Trial Testimony of Pierre Finck, State of Louisiana vs. Clay L. Shaw, February 24, 1969. "Exit (outshoot) wound of the side of the head". Appendix to Hearings before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives. Vol. VII. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. March 1979. pp. 122–124 – via Mary Ferrell Foundation. Douglass 2010, pp. 283–284, 461. Warren Commission 1964, p. 195, "Chapter 4". Warren Commission 1964, p. 191, "Chapter 4". "Marine Corps Weapons Qualification Course". April 13, 2021. Aaronovitch, David (2010). Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History. Penguin. pp. 107–. ISBN 978-1-59448-895-5. Retrieved March 21, 2012. Bugliosi 2007, p. xxxviii. Warren Commission 1964, p. [1], "Chapter 7". Speculations and Rumors: Oswald and U.S. Government Agencies, Warren Commission Report, Appendix XII, p. 660. Broderick & Miller 2008, pp. 206–207. Marrs 1989, pp. 189–196, 226–235. Douglass 2010, pp. 222–223, 226–228, 332–337. Goldman, Peter; Lindsay, John J. (April 28, 1975). "Dallas: New Questions and Answers" (PDF). Newsweek. New York. p. 37. Retrieved January 3, 2013. Johnson, Tom (November 6, 1969). "'Not Sure' on Oswald, Author Curry Indicates". Dallas Morning News. Dallas, Texas. Retrieved December 16, 2014. "Will Fritz's Notes from Interrogation of Oswald". www.maryferrell.org. November 22, 1963. Retrieved October 23, 2021. Testimony of Harry D. Holmes, Warren Commission Hearings, vol. 7, p. 306. Dane, Stan. Prayer Man: The Exoneration of Lee Harvey Oswald (Martian Publishing, 2015), p. 322. ISBN 1944205012 Rumors that Oswald was an undercover agent, J. Lee Rankin, General Council for the Warren Commission – via Mary Ferrell Foundation. Commission Exhibit 826, Warren Commission Hearings, vol. 17, pp. 758–764. HSCA Final Report (Report). p. 195. Destruction of the Oswald Note – via Mary Ferrel

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ A family farm is generally understood to be a farm owned and/or operated by a family.[3] It is sometimes considered to be an estate passed down by inheritance. Although a recurring conceptual and archetypal distinction is that of a family farm as a smallholding versus corporate farming as large-scale agribusiness, that notion does not accurately describe the realities of farm ownership in many countries. Family farm businesses can take many forms, from smallholder farms to larger farms operated under intensive farming practices. In various countries, most farm families have structured their farm businesses as corporations (such as limited liability companies) or trusts, for liability, tax, and business purposes. Thus, the idea of a family farm as a unitary concept or definition does not easily translate across languages, cultures, or centuries, as there are substantial differences in agricultural traditions and histories between countries and between centuries within a country. For example, in U.S. agriculture, a family farm can be of any size, as long as the ownership is held within a family. A 2014 USDA report shows that family farms operate 90 percent of the nation's farmland, and account for 85 percent of the country's agricultural production value.[4] However, that does not at all imply that corporate farming is a small presence in U.S. agriculture; rather, it simply reflects the fact that many corporations are closely held. In contrast, in Brazilian agriculture, the official definition of a family farm (agricultura familiar) is limited to small farms worked primarily by members of a single family;[5] but again, this fact does not imply that corporate farming is a small presence in Brazilian agriculture; rather, it simply reflects the fact that large farms with many workers cannot be legally classified under the family farm label because that label is legally reserved for smallholdings in that country. Farms that would not be considered family farms would be those operated as collectives, non-family corporations, or in other institutionalised forms. At least 500 million of the world's [estimated] 570 million farms are managed by families, making family farms predominant in global agriculture.[6][7] Definitions An "informal discussion of the concepts and definitions" in a working paper published by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 2014 reviewed English, Spanish and French definitions of the concept of "family farm". Definitions referred to one or more of labor, management, size, provision of family livelihood, residence, family ties and generational aspects, community and social networks, subsistence orientation, patrimony, land ownership and family investment.[8] The disparity of definitions reflects national and geographical differences in cultures, rural land tenure, and rural economies, as well as the different purposes for which definitions are coined. The 2012 United States Census of Agriculture defines a family farm as "any farm where the majority of the business is owned by the operator and individuals related to the operator, including relatives who do not live in the operator’s household"; it defines a farm as "any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, during a given year."[9] The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations defines a "family farm" as one that relies primarily on family members for labour and management.[10] In some usages, "family farm" implies that the farm remains within the ownership of a family over a number of generations.[11] Being special-purpose definitions, the definitions found in laws or regulations may differ substantially from commonly understood meanings of "family farm". For example, In the United States, under federal Farm Ownership loan regulations, the definition of a "family farm" does not specify the nature of farm ownership, and management of the farm is either by the borrower, or by members operating the farm when a loan is made to a corporation, co-operative or other entity. The complete definition can be found in the US Code of Federal Regulations 7 CFR 1943.4. History Dispersed settlement landscape in Carinthia. Mountain farms in South Tyrol. In the Roman Republic, latifundia, great landed estates, specialised in agriculture destined for export, producing grain, olive oil, or wine, corresponding largely to modern industrialized agriculture but depending on slave labour instead of mechanization, developed after the Second Punic War and increasingly replaced the former system of family-owned small or intermediate farms in the Roman Empire period. The basis of the latifundia in Spain and Sicily was the ager publicus that fell to the dispensation of the state through Rome's policy of war in the 1st century BC and the 1st century AD. In the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, the largely self-sufficient villa-system of the latifundia remained among the few political-cultural centres of a fragmented Europe. These latifundia had been of great importance economically, until the long-distance shipping of wine and oil, grain and garum disintegrated, but extensive lands controlled in a single pair of hands still constituted power: it can be argued that the latifundia formed part of the economic basis of the European social feudal system, taking the form of Manorialism, the essential element of feudal society,[12] and the organizing principle of rural economy in medieval Europe.[13] Manorialism was characterised by the vesting of legal and economic power in a Lord of the Manor, supported economically from his own direct landholding in a manor (sometimes called a fief), and from the obligatory contributions of a legally subject part of the peasant population under the jurisdiction of himself and his manorial court. Manorialism died slowly and piecemeal, along with its most vivid feature in the landscape, the open field system. It outlasted serfdom as it outlasted feudalism: "primarily an economic organization, it could maintain a warrior, but it could equally well maintain a capitalist landlord. It could be self-sufficient, yield produce for the market, or it could yield a money rent."[14] The last feudal dues in France were abolished at the French Revolution. In parts of eastern Germany, the Rittergut manors of Junkers remained until World War II.[15] The common law of the leasehold estate relation evolved in medieval England. That law still retains many archaic terms and principles pertinent to a feudal social order. Under the tenant system, a farm may be worked by the same family over many generations, but what is inherited is not the farm's estate itself but the lease on the estate. In much of Europe, serfdom was abolished only in the modern period, in Western Europe after the French Revolution, in Russia as late as in 1861. In contrast to the Roman system of latifundia and the derived system of manoralism, the Germanic peoples had a system based on heritable estates owned by individual families or clans. The Germanic term for "heritable estate, allodium" was *ōþalan (Old English ēþel), which incidentally was also used as a rune name; the gnomic verse on this term in the Anglo-Saxon rune poem reads: [Ēðel] byþ oferleof æghwylcum men, gif he mot ðær rihtes and gerysena on brucan on bolde bleadum oftast. "[An estate] is very dear to every man, if he can enjoy there in his house whatever is right and proper in constant prosperity." In the inheritance system known as Salic patrimony (also gavelkind in its exceptional survival in medieval Kent) refers to this clan-based possession of real estate property, particularly in Germanic context. Terra salica could not be sold or otherwise disposed; it was not alienable. Much of Germanic Europe has a history of overlap or conflict between the feudal system of manoralism, where the estate is owned by noblemen and leased to the tenants or worked by serfs, and the Germanic system of free farmers working landed estates heritable within their clan or family. Historical prevalence of the Germanic system of independent estates or Höfe resulted in dispersed settlement (Streusiedlung) structure, as opposed to the village-centered settlements of manoralism. Mention of "hofe" in Beowulf In German-speaking Europe, a farmyard is known as a Hof; in modern German this word designates the area enclosed by the farm buildings, not the fields around them, and it is also used in other everyday situations for courtyards of any type (Hinterhof = 'back yard', etc.). The recharacterized compound Bauernhof was formed in the early modern period to designate family farming estates and today is the most common word for 'farm', while the archaic Meierhof designated a manorial estate. Historically, the unmarked term Hof was increasingly used for the royal or noble court.[16] The estate as a whole is referred to by the collective Gehöft (15th century); the corresponding Slavic concept being Khutor. Höfeordnung is the German legal term for the inheritance laws regarding family farms, deriving from inheritance under medieval Saxon law. In England, the title of yeoman was applied to such land-owning commoners from the 15th century. In the early modern and modern period, the dissolution of manoralism went parallel to the development of intensive farming parallel to the Industrial Revolution. Mechanization enabled the cultivation of much larger areas than what was typical for the traditional estates aimed at subsistence farming, resulting in the emergence of a smaller number of large farms, with the displaced population partly contributing to the new class of industrial wage-labourers and partly emigrating to the New World or the Russian Empire (following the 1861 emancipation of the serfs). The family farms established in Imperial Russia were again collectivized under the Soviet Union, but the emigration of European farmers displaced by the Industrial Revolution contributed to the emergence of a system of family estates in the Americas (Homestead Act of 1862). Thomas Jefferson's argument that a large number of family estates are a factor in ensuring the stability of democracy was repeatedly used in support of subsidies.[17] Developed world Perceptions of the family farm In developed countries the family farm is viewed sentimentally, as a lifestyle to be preserved for tradition's sake, or as a birthright. It is in these nations very often a political rallying cry against change in agricultural policy, most commonly in France, Japan, and the United States, where rural lifestyles are often regarded as desirable. In these countries, strange bedfellows can often be found arguing for similar measures despite otherwise vast differences in political ideology. For example, Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader, both candidates for the office of President of the United States, held rural rallies together and spoke for measures to preserve the so-called family farm. On other economic matters they were seen as generally opposed, but found common ground on this one. The social roles of family farms are much changed today. Until recently, staying in line with traditional and conservative sociology, the heads of the household were usually the oldest man followed closely by his oldest sons. The wife generally took care of the housework, child rearing, and financial matters pertaining to the farm. However, agricultural activities have taken on many forms and change over time. Agronomy, horticulture, aquaculture, silviculture, and apiculture, along with traditional plants and animals, all make up aspects of today's family farm. Farm wives often need to find work away from the farm to supplement farm income and children sometimes have no interest in farming as their chosen field of work. Bolder promoters argue that as agriculture has become more efficient with the application of modern management and new technologies in each generation, the idealized classic family farm is now simply obsolete, or more often, unable to compete without the economies of scale available to larger and more modern farms. Advocates argue that family farms in all nations need to be protected, as the basis of rural society and social stability. Viability According to the United States Department of Agriculture, ninety-eight percent of all farms in the U.S. are family farms. Two percent of farms are not family farms, and those two percent make up fourteen percent of total agricultural output in the United States, although half of them have total sales of less than $50,000 per year. Overall, ninety-one percent of farms in the United States are considered "small family farms" (with sales of less than $250,000 per year), and those farms produce twenty-seven percent of U.S. agricultural output.[18] Depending on the type and size of independently owned operation, some limiting factors are: Economies of scale: Larger farms are able to bargain more competitively, purchase more competitively, profit from economic highs, and weather lows more readily through monetary inertia than smaller farms. Cost of inputs: fertilizer and other agrichemicals can fluctuate dramatically from season to season, partially based on oil prices, a range of 25% to 200% is common over a period of a few years. oil prices: Directly (for farm machinery) and somewhat less directly (long-distance transport; production cost of agrichemicals), the cost of oil significantly impacts the year-to-year viability of all mechanized conventional farms. commodity futures: the predicted price of commodity crops, hogs, grain, etc., can determine ahead of a season what seems economically viable to grow. technology user agreements: a less publicly known factor, patented GE seed that is widely used for many crops, like cotton and soy, comes with restrictions on use, which can even include who the crop can be sold to. wholesale infrastructure: A farmer growing larger quantities of a crop than can be sold directly to consumers has to meet a range of criteria for sale into the wholesale market, which include harvest timing and graded quality, and may also include variety, therefore, the market channel really determines most aspects of the farm decisionmaking. availability of financing: Larger farms today often rely on lines of credit, typically from banks, to purchase the agrichemicals, and other supplies needed for each growing year. These lines are heavily affected by almost all of the other constraining factors. government economic intervention: In some countries, notably the US and EU, government subsidies to farmers, intended to mitigate the impact on domestic farmers of economic and political activities in other areas of the economy, can be a significant source of farm income. Bailouts, when crises such as drought or the "mad cow disease" problems hit agricultural sectors, are also relied on. To some large degree, this situation is a result of the large-scale global markets farms have no alternative but to participate in. government and industry regulation: A wide range of quotas, marketing boards and legislation governing agriculture impose complicated limits, and often require significant resources to navigate. For example, on the small farming end, in many jurisdictions, there are severe limits or prohibitions on the sale of livestock, dairy and eggs. These have arisen from pressures from all sides: food safety, environmental, industry marketing. real estate prices: The growth of urban centers around the world, and the resulting urban sprawl have caused the price of centrally located farmland to skyrocket, while reducing the local infrastructure necessary to support farming, putting effectively intense pressure on many farmers to sell out. Over the 20th century, the people of developed nations have collectively taken most of the steps down the path to this situation. Individual farmers opted for successive waves of new technology, happily "trading in their horses for a tractor", increasing their debt and their production capacity. This in turn required larger, more distant markets, and heavier and more complex financing. The public willingly purchased increasingly commoditized, processed, shipped and relatively inexpensive food. The availability of an increasingly diverse supply of fresh, uncured, unpreserved produce and meat in all seasons of the year (oranges in January, freshly killed steers in July, fresh pork rather than salted, smoked, or potassium-impregnated ham) opened an entirely new cuisine and an unprecedented healthy diet to millions of consumers who had never enjoyed such produce before. These abilities also brought to market an unprecedented variety of processed foods, such as corn syrup and bleached flour. For the family farm this new technology and increasingly complex marketing strategy has presented new and unprecedented challenges, and not all family farmers have been able to effectively cope with the changing market conditions. Intensive wheat farming in western North Dakota.[19] Local food and the organic movement This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2007) (Learn how and when to remove this message) In the last few decades there has been a resurgence of interest in organic and free range foods. A percentage of consumers have begun to question the viability of industrial agriculture practices and have turned to organic groceries that sell products produced on family farms including not only meat and produce but also such things as wheat germ breads and natural lye soaps (as opposed to bleached white breads and petroleum based detergent bars). Others buy these products direct from family farms. The "new family farm" provides an alternative market in some localities with an array of traditionally and naturally produced products. Such "organic" and "free-range" farming is attainable where a significant number of affluent urban and suburban consumers willingly pay a premium for the ideals of "locally produced produce" and "humane treatment of animals". Sometimes, these farms are hobby or part-time ventures, or supported by wealth from other sources. Viable farms on a scale sufficient to support modern families at an income level commensurate with urban and suburban upper-middle-class families are often large scale operations, both in area and capital requirements. These farms, family owned and operated in a technologically and economically conventional manner, produce crops and animal products oriented to national and international markets, rather than to local markets. In assessing this complex economic situation, it is important to consider all sources of income available to these farms; for instance, the millions of dollars in farm subsidies which the United States government offers each year. As fuel prices rise, foods shipped to national and international markets are already rising in price. United States In 2012, the United States had 2,039,093 family farms (as defined by USDA), accounting for 97 percent of all farms and 89 percent of census farm area in the United States.[20] In 1988 Mark Friedberger warned, "The farm family is a unique institution, perhaps the last remnant, in an increasingly complex world, of a simpler social order in which economic and domestic activities were inextricably bound together. In the past few years, however, American agriculture has suffered huge losses, and family farmers have seen their way of life threatened by economic forces beyond their control."[21] However, by 1981 Ingolf Vogeler argued it was too late—the American family farm had been replaced by large agribusiness corporations pretending to be family operated.[22] A USDA survey conducted in 2011 estimated that family farms account for 85 percent of US farm production and 85 percent of US gross farm income. Mid-size and larger family farms account for 60 percent of US farm production and dominate US production of cotton, cash grain and hogs. Small family farms account for 26 percent of US farm production overall, and higher percentages of production of poultry, beef cattle, some other livestock and hay.[23] Several kinds of US family farms are recognized in USDA farm typology: Small family farms are defined as those with annual gross cash farm income (GCFI) of less than $350,000; in 2011, these accounted for 90 percent of all US farms. Because low net farm incomes tend to predominate on such farms, most farm families on small family farms are extremely dependent on off-farm income. Small family farms in which the principal operator was mostly employed off-farm accounted for 42 percent of all farms and 15 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income was $788. Retirement family farms were small farms accounting for 16 percent of all farms and 7 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income was $5,002. The other small family farm categories are those in which farming occupies at least 50 percent of the principal operator's working time. These are: Low-sales small family farms (with GCFI less than $150,000); 26 percent of all US farms, 18 percent of total US farm area, median net farm income $3,579. Moderate-sales small family farms (with GCFI of $150,000 to $349,999); 5.44 percent of all US farms, 13 percent of total US farm area, median net farm income $67,986. Mid-size family farms (GCFI of $350,000 to $999,999); 6 percent of all US farms, 22 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income $154,538. Large family farms (GCFI $1,000,000 to $4,999,999); 2 percent of all US farms, 14 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income $476,234. Very large family farms (GCFI over $5,000,000); <1 percent of all US farms, 2 percent of total US farm area; median net farm income $1,910,454.[23] Family farms include not only sole proprietorships and family partnerships, but also family corporations. Family-owned corporations account for 5 percent of all farms and 89 percent of corporate farms in the United States. About 98 percent of US family corporations owning farms are small, with no more than 10 shareholders; average net farm income of family corporate farms was $189,400 in 2012. (In contrast, 90 percent of US non-family corporations owning farms are small, having no more than 10 shareholders; average net cash farm income for US non-family corporate farms was $270,670 in 2012.)[20] Canada In Canada, the number of "family farms" cannot be inferred closely, because of the nature of census data, which do not distinguish family and non-family farm partnerships. In 2011, of Canada's 205,730 farms, 55 percent were sole proprietorships, 25 percent were partnerships, 17 percent were family corporations, 2 percent were non-family corporations and <1 percent were other categories.[24] Because some but not all partnerships involve family members, these data suggest that family farms account for between about 73 and 97 percent of Canadian farms. The family farm percentage is likely to be near the high end of this range, for two reasons. The partners in a [Canadian] farm partnership are typically spouses, often forming the farm partnership for tax reasons.[25] Also, as in the US,[26] family farm succession planning can use a partnership as a means of apportioning family farm tenure among family members when a sole proprietor is ready to transfer some or all of ownership and operation of a farm to offspring. Conversion of a sole proprietorship family farm to a family corporation may also be influenced by legal and financial, e.g. tax, considerations. The Canadian Encyclopedia estimates that more than 90 percent of Canadian farms are family operations.[27] In 2006, of Canadian farms with more than one million dollars in annual gross farm receipts, about 63 percent were family corporations and 13 percent were non-family corporations.[28][29] Europe Analysis of data for 59,000 farms in the 12 member states of the European Community found that in 1989, about three-quarters of the farms were family farms, producing just over half of total agricultural output.[30] As of 2010, there were approximately 139,900 family farms in Ireland, with an average size of 35.7 hectares per holding. (Nearly all farms in Ireland are family farms.)[31][32][33] In Ireland, average family farm income was 25,483 euros in 2012. Analysis by Teagasc (Ireland's Agriculture and Food Development Authority) estimates that 37 percent of Irish farms are economically viable and an additional 30 percent are sustainable due to income from off-farm sources; 33 percent meet neither criterion and are considered economically vulnerable.[34] Newly industrialized countries A family farm in Urubici, Santa Catarina State in Brazil. In Brazil, there are about 4.37 million family farms. These account for 84.4 percent of farms, 24.3 percent of farmland area and 37.5 percent of the value of agricultural production.[7] Developing countries In sub-Saharan Africa, 80% of farms are family owned and worked.[35] Sub-Saharan agriculture was mostly defined by slash-and-burn subsistence farming, historically spread by the Bantu expansion. Permanent farming estates were established during colonialism, in the 19th to 20th century. After decolonisation, white farmers in some African countries have tended to be attacked, killed or evicted, notably in South Africa and Zimbabwe.[36] In southern Africa, "On peasant family farms ..., cash input costs are very low, non‐household labour is sourced largely from communal work groups through kinship ties, and support services needed to sustain production are minimal." On commercial family farms, "cash input costs are high, little non‐family labour is used and strong support services are necessary."[37] International Year of Family Farming Logo of International Year of Family Farming 2014 At the 66th session of the United Nations General Assembly, 2014 was formally declared to be the "International Year of Family Farming" (IYFF).[38] The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations was invited to facilitate its implementation, in collaboration with Governments, International Development Agencies, farmers' organizations and other relevant organizations of the United Nations system as well as relevant non-governmental organizations. The goal of the 2014 IYFF is to reposition family farming at the centre of agricultural, environmental and social policies in the national agendas by identifying gaps and opportunities to promote a shift towards a more equal and balanced development. The 2014 IYFF will promote broad discussion and cooperation at the national, regional and global levels to increase awareness and understanding of the challenges faced by smallholders and help identify efficient ways to support family farmers. See also grainAgriculture portal Agricola (board game) Agricultural policy Agroecological restoration Back-to-the-land movement Dairy industry in the United Kingdom Dairy industry in the United States Family farm hog pen Farm Aid Gentleman's farm Hobby farm Local food Peasant movement United Nations Decade of Family Farming United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants Via Campesina References Anton Schroll, Dehio-Handbuch. Die Kunstdenkmäler Österreichs. Kärnten, 2001, 660f. Hans Stofer-Schröter, 250 Jahre Pachtverhältnis der Familie Stofer (1981); sold to Emmen cooperative in 1918. State Archive of Lucerne PA 407/89; now owned by the canton of Lucerne. Listed as Cultural Property of National and Regional Significance (admin.ch Archived 2015-07-12 at the Wayback Machine). Kaddu, Sarah; Haumba Eric (2015). The Role of Community Libraries in Providing Quality Information to Family Farmers: A Case of Huege Community Library in Uganda. AfLIA. Archived from the original on 2020-06-02. Retrieved 2020-05-31. "U.S. Farms, Large and Small | USDA". www.usda.gov. Retrieved 2018-04-13. Farms are those that employ mostly family members, with a maximum of five additional temporary workers. Banco do Nordeste. "Agricultura familiar – apresentação" (in Portuguese). Archived from the original on 2 October 2009. Retrieved 30 September 2009. "FAO - News Article: Putting family farmers first to eradicate hunger". Archived from the original on 2019-04-10. Retrieved 2015-04-16. Lowder, S. K., J. Skoet and S. Singh. 2014. What do we really know about the number and distribution of farms and family farms worldwide? http://www.fao.org/docrep/019/i3729e/i3729e.pdf Garner, E. and A. P. de la O Campos. 2014. Identifying the "family farm" – An informal discussion of the concepts and definitions. ESA Working Paper 14-10. FAO, Rome. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4306e.pdf United States Department of Agriculture. 2015. 2012 Census of Agriculture. Farm typology. Vol. 2. Subject series. Part 10. AC-12-S-10. "FAO - News Article: International Year of Family Farming 2014 launched". Archived from the original on 2015-12-31. Retrieved 2015-04-16. Bjørhaug, H. and A. Blekesaune. 2008. Gender and work in Norwegian family farms. Sociologia ruralis 48: 152–65. "Feudal Society", in its modern sense was coined in Marc Bloch's 1939–40 books of the same name. Bloch (Feudal Society, tr. L.A. Masnyon, 1965, vol. II, p. 442) emphasised the distinction between economic manorialism which preceded feudalism and survived it, and political and social feudalism, or seigneurialism. Sarris, Peter (2004). "The Origins of the Manorial Economy: New Insights from Late Antiquity". The English Historical Review. 119 (481): 279–311. doi:10.1093/ehr/119.481.279. Jones, Andrew (1972). "The Rise and Fall of the Manorial System: A Critical Comment". The Journal of Economic History. 32 (4): 938–944 [p. 938]. doi:10.1017/S0022050700071217. JSTOR 2117261. S2CID 154937254; a comment on North, D.; Thomas, R. (1971). "The rise and fall of the manorial system: a theoretical model". The Journal of Economic History. 31 (4): 777–803. doi:10.1017/S0022050700074623. JSTOR 2117209. S2CID 154616683. Spenkuch, Hartwin (1999). "Herrenhaus und Rittergut: Die Erste Kammer des Landtags und der preußische Adel von 1854 bis 1918 aus sozialgeschichtlicher Sicht". Geschichte und Gesellschaft. 25 (3): 375–403. JSTOR 40185809. Johann Christoph Adelung, Grammatisch-kritisches Wörterbuch (1774). Peterson, E. Wesley F. (2009). A Billion Dollars a Day: The Economics and Politics of Agricultural Subsidies. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 127s. "Custom 404 Page" (PDF). www.ers.usda.gov. Archived from the original on July 28, 2014. according to uploader: a 2007 photograph of a "family-owned wheat planting rig" (Case STX Steiger tractor with Case IH seed drill combination). United States Department of Agriculture. 2014. 2012 Census of agriculture. United States summary and state data. Volume 1. Geographic area series. Part 51 AC-12-A-51. See Mark Friedberger, Farm Families and Change in 20th-Century America Ingolf Vogeler, The myth of the family farm: Agribusiness dominance of US agriculture (1981) excerpt. Hoppe, R.A. 2014. Structure and finances of U.S. farms: family farm report, 2014 edition. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service EIB-132. Statistics Canada. 2011 Census of Agriculture. "Family farm partnerships".[permanent dead link] "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-10-02. Retrieved 2015-04-16. "Farm law". Canadian Encyclopedia. Statistics Canada. "The financial picture of farms in Canada". Kimhi, Ayal; Bollman, Ray (1999). "Family farm dynamics in Canada and Israel: the case of farm exits". Agricultural Economics. 21 (1): 69–79. doi:10.1111/j.1574-0862.1999.tb00584.x. Hill, B. (1993). "The myth of the family farm: defining the family farm and assessing its importance in the European Community". Journal of Rural Studies. 9 (4): 359–70. doi:10.1016/0743-0167(93)90048-O. Teagasc. Agriculture in Ireland "Teagasc - Agriculture in Ireland". Archived from the original on 2015-04-28. Retrieved 2015-04-16. Ireland and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) http://ec.europa.eu/ireland/key-eu-policy-areas/agriculture/index_en.htm 2000 World Census of Agriculture. Main results and metadata by country. 1996–2005. http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1595e/i1595e.pdf http://www.teagasc.ie/publications/2013/1935/NFSincomeestimates Archived 2018-07-25 at the Wayback Machine 2012.pdf European Parliamentary Research Service. 2014 International Year of Family Farming http://epthinktank.eu/2014/04/14/2014-international-year-of-family-farming/ Peta Thornycroft, Zimbabwe mobs widen attacks on white farmers, The Telegraph, 15 August 2001. 'New white farmer attacks' in Zimbabwe news24, 29 October 2010. Robert Rotberg, Zimbabwe: President Mugabe's new attack on white farmers, The Christian Science Monitor, 7 July 2014. "In 2000, when Mugabe began to target whites who farmed the land, there were about 4,000 whites owning tobacco, maize, sugar, wheat, and other profitable agricultural holdings. Now there are fewer than 150 white farmers." Low, A., P. Akwenye and K. Kamwi. 1999. 2008. Small-family farm types: examples from Northern Namibia and implications for agrarian reform in South Africa. Development Southern Africa 16: 335–44. Official Website of the International Year of Family Farming 2014, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 21 November 2013 Further reading Boomershine Jr, J. Michael. "The Battle over America's Farmlands: Corporate Farming Practices and Legislative Attempts at Preserving the Family Farm." Drake Journal of Agricultural Law 21 (2016): 361–388. online. Friedberger, Mark. Farm Families and Change in Twentieth Century America (UP of Kentucky, 1988) online Grant, Michael Johnston et al. eds. Down and Out on the Family Farm: Rural Rehabilitation in the Great Plains, 1929-1945 (2002) excerpt Junkin, Mark Andrew (Andy). "Farming with Family Ain't Always Easy." Junkin, Andy. "Bulletproof Your Farm." Sign up for "Stubborn" book Lobley, Matt, et al. eds. Keeping it in the Family (2016) excerpt Neth, Mary. Preserving the family farm: women, community and the foundations of agribusiness in the Midwest, 1900-1940 (Johns Hopkins UP, 1995). excerpt Salamon, Sonya. Prairie Patrimony: Family, Farming, and Community in the Midwest (U of North Carolina Press, 2014) online Steele, Catherine Baumgarten. "The Steele Brothers: Pioneers in California's Great Dairy Industry." California Historical Quarterly 20.3 (1941): 259–273. online Archived 2022-03-31 at the Wayback Machine Switzer, Robert L. A Family Farm: Life on an Illinois Dairy Farm (2012) Thompson, Nancy L. "Anti-Corporate Farming Laws." Encyclopedia of the Great Plains (2004)online Vogeler, Ingolf. The myth of the family farm: Agribusiness dominance of US agriculture (CRC Press, 2019). How Industrialization is Restructuring Food Production – Hamilton, Neil Nature's Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West – Cronan, William (ISBN 9780393308730) Iowa: Living in the Third World – Wolf, Robert Rural America in a New Century – Drabenstott, Mark The Value of Rural America – Rowley, Thomas D. (https://web.archive.org/web/20120404224325/[1]) Why Americans Value Rural Life – Danbom, David B. Sunset Limited: The Southern Pacific Railroad and the Development of the American West – Orsi, Richard J. (ISBN 9780520200197) External links Wikisource has original text related to this article: United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/66/222 CBC Digital Archives – What's Happening to the Family Farm? Found Family Farm Family farm with educational farm tours Dairy Farming Today Archived 2008-08-21 at the Wayback Machine Family Farm Profiles and an educational virtual farm tour Agriculture Resource for the secondary school teacher Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation's (SDC) newsletter with Focus on Smallholder Family Farming Family Farming Knowledge Platform (FFKP) – FAO digital archive with information on family farming from all over the world Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata International FAST National France BnF data Israel United States Czech Republic Categories: Types of farms Agricultural economics James Allen Hightower (born January 11, 1943) is an American syndicated columnist, progressive[1][2] political activist, and author. From 1983 to 1991 he served as the elected commissioner of the Texas Department of Agriculture. He publishes a monthly newsletter that is notable for its in-depth investigative reporting, The Hightower Lowdown. Life and career Born in Denison in Grayson County in north Texas, Hightower comes from a working class background. He worked his way through college as assistant general manager of the Denton Chamber of Commerce and later landed a spot as a management trainee for the U.S. State Department. He received a Bachelor of Arts in government from the University of North Texas in Denton, where he served as student body president. He later did graduate work at Columbia University in New York City in international affairs. In the late 1960s, he worked in Washington, D.C., as legislative aide to U.S. Senator Ralph Yarborough. In 1970, Hightower co-founded and worked at the Agribusiness Accountability Project in Washington, D.C., which resulted in two of his early books.[3] After managing the presidential campaign of former Senator Fred R. Harris of Oklahoma in 1976, he returned to Texas to become the editor of the magazine The Texas Observer. His first attempt at public office was an unsuccessful bid for the Democratic nomination for the Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates the oil and natural gas industries, rather than the railroads the name of the commission would seem to indicate. In 1982, Hightower was elected Agriculture Commissioner, having unseated fellow Democrat Reagan V. Brown, who had ordered a quarantine of fruit coming into Texas from California. He served as agriculture commissioner until he was unseated in 1990 by the Democrat-turned-Republican Rick Perry, later the governor of Texas. His tenure was noted for fostering organic production, alternative crops, direct marketing by small farmers, and strong gross materials[clarification needed] regulations.[4][5] During that time, he also became a leading national spokesman for Democrats and endorsed Jesse Jackson for president in 1988. Three of Hightower's aides at the Agriculture Commission, Mike Moeller, Pete McRae, and Billie Quicksall, were convicted on bribery charges related to procuring contributions to Hightower's reelection campaign from seed dealers who were subject to the department's oversight. While Hightower was not involved in the plot, it contributed to his defeat by Perry.[6] During the 1992 presidential election, he supported the candidacy of U.S. Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa. After Harkin left the race, Hightower supported Jerry Brown, and cast his superdelegate vote for Governor Bill Clinton at the 1992 Democratic National Convention. Soon after Clinton was elected, Hightower became a critic of the president. He criticized Clinton for having accepted corporate soft money contributions, his support of NAFTA, his health care plan, and his refusal to crack down on "corporate welfare", as well as what Hightower viewed as inadequate efforts at fighting unemployment and poverty. In 2000, he joined with talk show host Phil Donahue and actress Susan Sarandon to co-chair the presidential campaign of Ralph Nader. He also appeared at Nader's "super-rallies" and stumped across the country for him. After the disputed outcome of the 2000 election, Hightower voiced the opinion that it was Vice President Al Gore himself, who lost his home state of Tennessee, and not Ralph Nader, who caused Gore's defeat at the hands of Governor George W. Bush of Texas.[7] Although he issued no endorsement of any candidate during the 2004 presidential primaries, he spoke and wrote approvingly of since defeated U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, calling him a "clear populist with a lifelong history of unambiguous advocacy of populist principles."[8] Once Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts won the nomination, Hightower endorsed him and urged fellow progressives to work for his election, saying, "I don't care if he's a sack of cement, we're going to carry him to victory."[9] During this election, he also campaigned in support of the U.S. Senate bid of Doris "Granny D" Haddock, a friend and fellow activist who was running as a Democrat against incumbent Republican Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire. Since 1993, Hightower has produced Hightower Radio, a daily two-minute commentary carried by over 130 affiliates. He also hosted a weekend talk show on the American Broadcasting Company radio network and a weekday midday talk show on the United Broadcasting Network (later called America Radio Network). Hightower's Chit & Chat aired in thirty-eight markets around the United States.[citation needed] Floyd Domino was his music director[10] and co-host. Susan DeMarco was also a co-host of the program and continues to work with him.[citation needed] Hightower speaking in 2016 In recent years, Hightower has advocated for industrial hemp as a sustainable agricultural crop.[citation needed] Hightower endorsed Bernie Sanders for president in 2016, actively campaigning for the Democratic candidate.[11] In summer 2016, after Hillary Clinton won the party's nomination, Sanders supporters formed the progressive group Our Revolution, and Hightower joined the board of directors.[12][13] Despite the Democratic party losing both houses of Congress in the United States, Hightower talked of his optimism toward a greater progressive revolution after meeting with Sanders.[14] Hightower cited the large number of progressive initiatives passed to counter the idea that Donald Trump and right-wing populism were supplanting progressive ideals.[15] In addition to being on the national board of Our Revolution, Hightower has been working with Our Revolution Texas.[16] Syndicated column Hightower writes a nationally syndicated column carried by seventy-five independent weekly newspapers and other publications[17] through Creators Syndicate.[18] He also writes for The Progressive Populist.[citation needed] The Hightower Lowdown Hightower writes a monthly newsletter, The Hightower Lowdown,[19] which has more than 135,000 subscribers.[18][17] The newsletter is notable for its in-depth investigative reporting and criticism of George W. Bush's administration, which Hightower claimed was beholden to corporations and extremist conservatives. It has received both the Alternative Press Award and the Independent Press Association Award for best national newsletter.[18] In January, 2022, Hightower noted his support for the Rights of Nature movement. After reviewing some history of the movement, he declared that the initiative to put a state constitutional amendment on the 2024 ballot for voters to consider, has made Florida "the epicenter" of today's Rights of Nature movement in the United States.[20] Doug Jones Average The "Doug Jones Average", a concept created by Jim Hightower, is the proposal that in order to check the true health of the American economy, it is less useful to look at the Dow Jones Industrial Average than it is to check up on how the average worker down the street (Doug Jones) is doing. If Doug Jones is on welfare, cannot feed his family, is blowing his savings, and is three weeks behind on his bills, the Doug Jones average is "down". If Doug just got a raise, can pay his bills and Doug and his family are looking into owning a nice but not too expensive house, the Doug Jones average is "up".[21] Awards and honors Puffin/Nation Prize for Creative Citizenship (2009)[22] Books External videos video icon Booknotes interview with Hightower on There's Nothing in the Middle of the Road But Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos, December 21, 1997, C-SPAN Hard Tomatoes, Hard Times: A Report of the Agribusiness Accountability Project on the Failure of America's Land Grant College Complex (1972) Eat Your Heart Out: Food Profiteering in America (1975)[3] There's Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos (1997; ISBN 0-06-092949-9) If the Gods Had Meant Us to Vote, They'd Have Given Us Candidates (2001; ISBN 0-06-093209-0) Thieves in High Places: They've Stolen Our Country—And It's Time to Take It Back (2003; ISBN 0-670-03141-0) Let's Stop Beating Around the Bush (2004; ISBN 0-670-03354-5) Swim against the Current: Even a Dead Fish Can Go With the Flow (2008; ISBN 0-470-12151-3) Archives The official Jim Hightower Archive is at the Wittliff collections of Southwestern Writers, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas.[23] See also 21st Century Democrats References Hazen, Don. "Texas Populist Jim Hightower Makes Progressive 'Hall of Fame,' as Nation Magazine Gathering Grapples with Conflicted Feelings about President Obama". Alternet. Archived from the original on 2010-12-10. Retrieved 2013-05-13. Hightower, Jim. "Meet Jim". Jim Hightower. "Agribusiness Accountability Project Records, MS 68, Special Collections Department, Iowa State University Library". findingaids.lib.iastate.edu. Retrieved 2018-11-05. Taylor, Ronald B. (19 December 1985). "Texas' New-Style Agriculture Commissioner: Jim Hightower Carries His Message of a New Populist Movement Nationwide". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 30 March 2013. "Jim Hightower". Conservation History Association of Texas: Texas Legacy Project. Retrieved 30 March 2013. Ratcliffe, R. G. (November 11, 1993). "Three ex-aides to Hightower are sentenced". Houston Chronicle. Archived from the original on March 2, 2012. Hightower, Jim (28 November 2000). "How Florida Democrats torpedoed Gore". Salon Media Group, Inc. Retrieved 30 March 2013. Hightower, Jim (January 2004). "We the People have driven the Dems to populism". The Hightower Lowdown. Retrieved 2006-05-16.[dead link] Kennedy, Dan (2004-06-30). "Media Log". The Boston Phoenix. Archived from the original on 2006-02-26. Retrieved 2006-05-16. Floyd Domino – Hightower Boogie Woogie (1997) at Discogs "Jim Hightower Delivers Incredible Intro For Bernie Sanders". RealClearPolitics. Retrieved 2016-11-20. "Our Revolution Announces Formation of Board". Our Revolution. Archived from the original on 2017-08-19. Retrieved 2018-11-05. Rosenfeld, Steven (2016-08-31). "Why the New Sanders Group Our Revolution Is Leaving Many Bernie Backers Scratching Their Heads". AlterNet. Retrieved 2018-11-05. "Hightower's statement after meeting with Bernie Sanders and the surrogates • Jim Hightower". Jim Hightower. 2016-06-12. Retrieved 2016-11-20. "Takeaways from the 2016 election • Hightower Lowdown". Hightower Lowdown. Retrieved 2016-11-20. Crowe, Derrick (2017-12-22). "Jim Hightower announces Our Revolution Texas' support for Derrick Crowe for Congress". Huffington Post. Retrieved 2018-11-05. "Jim Hightower". The Progressive. Archived from the original on March 27, 2014. "About Jim Hightower". Creators Syndicate. Archived from the original on December 9, 2018. Retrieved November 29, 2019. The Hightower Lowdown Hightower, Jim, Give nature a seat at the governing table, The Hightower Lowdown, January 5, 2022 Hightower, Jim (February 1993). "The Doug Jones Average". Archived from the original on 2006-10-16. Retrieved 2006-11-16. Puffin/Nation Prize for Creative Citizenship Archived 2010-07-10 at the Wayback Machine, official website. Jim Hightower Papers at The Wittliff Collections, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX. Further reading Greg Palast, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (2002) James Moore and Wayne Slater, Bush's Brain (2003) External links Wikiquote has quotations related to Jim Hightower. Official website Jim Hightower Archive at The Wittliff Collections, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX The Hightower Lowdown Jim Hightower at AlterNet Appearances on C-SPAN Jim Hightower on Charlie Rose Jim Hightower at IMDb Articles and interviews World Internet News: "Big Oil Looking for a Government Handout" Download MP3 of Jim Hightower Interviewed by The Progressive magazine on September 24, 2007 "Thorne Webb Dreyer: Jim Hightower and the 'Populist Moment'", The Rag Blog. Includes podcast of Thorne Dreyer's April 6, 2012, Rag Radio interview with Jim Hightower (57:43) Political offices Preceded by Reagan V. Brown Texas Agriculture Commissioner 1983–1991 Succeeded by Rick Perry vte Agriculture Commissioners of Texas Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata Categories: Agriculture commissioners of TexasAmerican alternative journalistsAmerican male bloggersAmerican bloggersAmerican political writersAmerican male writersAmerican talk radio hostsAnti-corporate activistsUniversity of North Texas alumniSchool of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University alumniPacifica Foundation peoplePeople from Denison, TexasTexas DemocratsLeft-wing populism in the United StatesWriters from Texas1943 birthsLiving peopleJournalists from TexasActivists from Texas21st-century American non-fiction writers20th-century American non-fiction writers Image: Johann Jaritz, CC BY-SA 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/, via Wikimedia Commons

This film ventures into the heart of Mexico, uncovering a stark dichotomy between burgeoning oil riches and pervasive poverty. The documentary navigates the juxtaposition of opulent wealth enjoyed by the elite against the backdrop of millions mired in destitution, exposing the hollow promises of economic growth in a country teetering on the brink of transformation. The documentary unfurls a poignant tapestry of Mexico's turbulent history, tracing its origins from the Aztec era through Spanish conquest, American annexation, and the tumultuous revolution of 1910. Against the vibrant canvas of Diego Rivera's awe-inspiring mural depicting the nation's strife, it weaves the tale of failed uprisings led by Zapata and Villa, revealing a landscape marred by despots and entrenched inequality. Venturing to the border, the film shadows American patrols seeking to stem the tide of impoverished Mexicans fleeing their homeland for the promise of a better life in the United States. Tijuana's hillside shanties overlooking the affluent neighbor stand as a stark testament to the chasm between privilege and hardship. This compelling film captures the paradoxical allure of a nation poised on the edge of transformation, where the rich revel in newfound prosperity while the majority languish in the shadows of neglect. It's a poignant call to those in power to wield their wealth for the upliftment of a country shackled by centuries of inequality and systemic oppression. The written history of Mexico spans more than three millennia. First populated more than 13,000 years ago,[1] central and southern Mexico (termed Mesoamerica) saw the rise and fall of complex indigenous civilizations. Mexico would later develop into a unique multicultural society. Mesoamerican civilizations developed glyphic writing systems, recording the political history of conquests and rulers. Mesoamerican history prior to European arrival is called the prehispanic era or the pre-Columbian era. Following Mexico's independence from the Spanish Empire in 1821, political turmoil wracked the nation. France, with the help of Mexican conservatives, seized control in the 1860s during the Second Mexican Empire but was later defeated. Quiet prosperous growth was characteristic in the late 19th century but the Mexican Revolution in 1910 brought a bitter civil war. With calm restored in the 1920s, economic growth was steady while population growth was rapid. Pre-Columbian civilizations Main article: Pre-Columbian Mexico The Castillo, Chichen Itza, Mexico, ca. 800–900 CE Panel 3 from Cancuen, Guatemala, representing king T'ah 'ak' Cha'an Large and complex civilizations developed in the center and southern regions of Mexico (with the southern region extending into what is now Central America) in what has come to be known as Mesoamerica. The civilizations that rose and declined over millennia were characterized by:[2] significant urban settlements; monumental architecture such as temples, palaces, and other monumental architecture, such as the ball court; the division of society into religious and political elites (such as warriors and merchants) and commoners who pursued subsistence agriculture; transfer of tribute and rending of labor from commoners to elites; reliance on agriculture often supplemented by hunting and fishing and the complete absence of a pastoral (herding) economy, since there were no domesticated herd animals prior to the arrival of the Europeans; trade networks and markets. The history of Mexico before the Spanish conquest is known through the work of archaeologists, epigraphers, and ethnohistorians, who analyze Mesoamerican indigenous manuscripts, particularly Aztec codices, Mayan codices, and Mixtec codices. Accounts written by Spaniards at the time of the conquest (the conquistadores) and by Indigenous chroniclers of the postconquest period constitute the principal source of information regarding Mexico at the time of the Spanish Conquest. Few pictorial manuscripts (or codices) of the Maya, Mixtec, and Mexica cultures of the Post-Classic period survive, but progress has been made particularly in the area of Maya archaeology and epigraphy.[3] Beginnings Variegated maize ears The presence of people in Mesoamerica was once thought to date back 40,000 years, an estimate based on what were believed to be ancient footprints discovered in the Valley of Mexico. After further investigation using radiocarbon dating, it appears this date may not be accurate.[4] It is currently unclear whether 23,000-year-old campfire remains found in the Valley of Mexico are the earliest human remains uncovered so far in Mexico.[5] The first people to settle in Mexico encountered a climate far milder than the current one. In particular, the Valley of Mexico contained several large paleo-lakes (known collectively as Lake Texcoco) surrounded by dense forest. Deer were found in this area, but most fauna were small land animals and fish and other lacustrine animals were found in the lake region.[6] Such conditions encouraged the initial pursuit of a hunter-gatherer existence. Indigenous peoples in western Mexico began to selectively breed maize (Zea mays) plants between 5,000 and 10,000 years ago.[7] The diet of ancient central and southern Mexico was varied, including domesticated corn (or maize), squashes, beans, tomatoes, peppers, cassavas, pineapples, chocolate, and tobacco. The Three Sisters (corn, squash, and beans) constituted the principal diet.[8] Shield Jaguar and Lady Xoc, Maya, lintel 24 of temple 23, Yaxchilan, Mexico, ca. 725 ce. Mesoamericans had belief systems where every element of the cosmos and everything that forms part of nature represented a manifestation of the supernatural. The spiritual pantheon was vast and extremely complex. They frequently took on different characteristics and even names in different areas, but in effect, they transcended cultures and time. Great masks with gaping jaws and monstrous features in stone or stucco were often located at the entrance to temples, symbolizing a cavern or cave on the flanks of the mountains that allowed access to the depths of Mother Earth and the shadowy roads that lead to the underworld.[9] Cults connected with the jaguar and jade especially permeated religion throughout Mesoamerica. Jade, with its translucent green color was revered along with water as a symbol of life and fertility. The jaguar, agile, powerful, and fast, was especially connected with warriors and as spirit guides of shamans. Despite differences of chronology or geography, the crucial aspects of this religious pantheon were shared amongst the people of ancient Mesoamerica.[9] Thus, this quality of acceptance of new gods to the collection of existing gods may have been one of the shaping characteristics for success during the Christianization of Mesoamerica. New gods did not at once replace the old; they initially joined the ever-growing family of deities or were merged with existing ones that seemed to share similar characteristics or responsibilities.[9] Mesoamerica is the only place in the Americas where Indigenous writing systems were invented and used before European colonization. While the types of writing systems in Mesoamerica range from minimalist "picture-writing" to complex logophonetic systems capable of recording speech and literature, they all share some core features that make them visually and functionally distinct from other writing systems of the world.[10] Although many indigenous manuscripts have been lost or destroyed, texts are known Aztec codices, Mayan codices, and Mixtec codices still survive and are of intense interest to scholars. Major civilizations Olmec colossal During the pre-Columbian period, many city-states, kingdoms, and empires competed with one another for power and prestige. Ancient Mexico can be said to have produced five major civilizations: the Olmec, Maya, Teotihuacan, Toltec, and Aztec. Unlike other indigenous Mexican societies, these civilizations (with the exception of the politically fragmented Maya) extended their political and cultural reach across Mexico and beyond. They consolidated power and exercised influence in matters of trade, art, politics, technology, and religion. Over a span of 3,000 years, other regional powers made economic and political alliances with them; many made war on them. But almost all found themselves within their spheres of influence. Olmecs (1500–400 BCE) Main article: Olmec The Olmec first appeared along the Atlantic coast (in what is now the state of Tabasco) in the period 1500–900 BCE. The Olmecs were the first Mesoamerican culture to produce an identifiable artistic and cultural style, and may also have been the society that invented writing in Mesoamerica. By the Middle Preclassic Period (900–300 BCE), Olmec artistic styles had been adopted as far away as the Valley of Mexico and Costa Rica. Maya Main article: Maya civilization Chacmool, Maya, from the Platform of the Eagles, Chichen Itza, Mexico, ca. 800–90 CE Maya cultural characteristics, such as the rise of the ahau, or king, can be traced from 300 BCE onward. During the centuries preceding the classical period, Maya kingdoms sprang up in an area stretching from the Pacific coasts of southern Mexico and Guatemala to the northern Yucatán Peninsula. The egalitarian Maya society of pre-royal centuries gradually gave way to a society controlled by a wealthy elite that began building large ceremonial temples and complexes. The earliest known long-count date, 199 AD, heralds the classic period, during which the Maya kingdoms supported a population numbering in the millions. Tikal, the largest of the kingdoms, alone had 500,000 inhabitants, though the average population of a kingdom was much smaller—somewhere under 50,000 people. Teotihuacan Main article: Teotihuacan Goddess, mural painting from the Tetitla apartment complex at Teotihuacan, Mexico, 650–750 CE Teotihuacan is an enormous archaeological site in the Basin of Mexico, containing some of the largest pyramidal structures built in the pre-Columbian Americas. Apart from the pyramidal structures, Teotihuacan is also known for its large residential complexes, the Avenue of the Dead, and numerous colorful, well-preserved murals. Additionally, Teotihuacan produced a thin orange pottery style that spread through Mesoamerica.[11] Teotihuacan view of the Avenue of the Dead and the Pyramid of the Sun, from the Pyramid of the Moon The city is thought to have been established around 100 BCE and continued to be built until about 250 CE.[12] The city may have lasted until sometime between the 7th and 8th centuries CE. At its zenith, perhaps in the first half of the 1st millennium CE, Teotihuacan was the largest city in the pre-Columbian Americas. At this time it may have had more than 200,000 inhabitants, placing it among the largest cities of the world in this period. Teotihuacan was even home to multi-floor apartment compounds built to accommodate this large population.[12] The civilization and cultural complex associated with the site is also referred to as Teotihuacan or Teotihuacano. Although it is a subject of debate whether Teotihuacan was the center of a state empire, its influence throughout Mesoamerica is well documented. The ethnicity of the inhabitants of Teotihuacan is also a subject of debate. Possible candidates are the Nahua, Otomi or Totonac ethnic groups. Scholars have also suggested that Teotihuacan was a multiethnic state. Toltec Main articles: Toltec and Toltec Empire Colossal atlantids, pyramid B, Toltec, Tula, Mexico, ca. 900–1180 AD The Toltec culture is an archaeological Mesoamerican culture that dominated a state centered in Tula, Hidalgo, in the early post-classic period of Mesoamerican chronology (ca 800–1000 AD). The later Aztec culture saw the Toltecs as their intellectual and cultural predecessors and described Toltec culture emanating from Tollan (Nahuatl for Tula) as the epitome of civilization; indeed, in the Nahuatl language the word "Toltec" came to take on the meaning "artisan". The Aztec oral and pictographic tradition also described the history of the Toltec empire giving lists of rulers and their exploits. Among modern scholars it is a matter of debate whether the Aztec narratives of Toltec history should be given credence as descriptions of actual historical events. Other controversy relating to the Toltecs include how best to understand reasons behind the perceived similarities in architecture and iconography between the archaeological site of Tula and the Maya site of Chichén Itzá – no consensus has emerged yet about the degree or direction of influence between the two sites. Aztec Empire (1325–1521 AD) Main article: Aztec Empire Aztec Empire Diego Rivera mural of the Aztec city of Tenochtitlan Aztec statue of Coatlicue Aztec Sun Stone Aztec warriors in the Florentine Codex. Toltec carving representing the Aztec Eagle, found in Veracruz, 10th–13th century. Metropolitan Museum of Art.[13] The Nahua peoples began to enter central Mexico in the 6th century AD. By the 12th century, they had established their center at Azcapotzalco, the city of the Tepanecs. The Mexica people arrived in the Valley of Mexico in 1248 AD. They had migrated from the deserts north of the Rio Grande[citation needed] over a period traditionally said to have been 100 years. They may have thought of themselves as the heirs to the prestigious civilizations that had preceded them.[citation needed] What the Aztec initially lacked in political power, they made up for with ambition and military skill. In 1325, they established the biggest city in the world at that time, Tenochtitlan. Aztec religion was based on the belief in the continual need for regular offering of human blood to keep their deities beneficent; to meet this need, the Aztec sacrificed thousands of people. This belief is thought to have been common throughout the Nahuatl people. To acquire captives in times of peace, the Aztec resorted to a form of ritual warfare called flower war. The Tlaxcalteca, among other Nahuatl nations, were forced into such wars. In 1428, the Aztec led a war against their rulers from the city of Azcapotzalco, which had subjugated most of the Valley of Mexico's peoples. The revolt was successful, and the Aztecs became the rulers of central Mexico as the leaders of the Triple Alliance. The alliance was composed of the city-states of Tenochtitlan, Texcoco, and Tlacopan. At their peak, 350,000 Aztec presided over a wealthy tribute-empire comprising 10 million people, almost half of Mexico's estimated population of 24 million. Their empire stretched from ocean to ocean, and extended into Central America. The westward expansion of the empire was halted by a devastating military defeat at the hands of the Purepecha (who possessed weapons made of copper). The empire relied upon a system of taxation (of goods and services), which were collected through an elaborate bureaucracy of tax collectors, courts, civil servants, and local officials who were installed as loyalists to the Triple Alliance. By 1519, the Aztec capital, Tenochtitlan, the site of modern-day Mexico City, was one of the largest cities in the world, with an estimated population between 200,000 and 300,000.[14] Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire Main article: Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire Battle of Centla, first time a horse was used in battle in a war in the Americas. Mural in the Palacio Municipal of Paraíso, Tabasco The first mainland explorations were followed by a phase of inland expeditions and conquest. The Spanish crown extended the Reconquista effort, completed in Spain in 1492, to non-Catholic people in new territories. In 1502 on the coast of present-day Colombia, near the Gulf of Urabá, Spanish explorers led by Vasco Núñez de Balboa explored and conquered the area near the Atrato River.[15] The conquest was of the Chibcha-speaking nations, mainly the Muisca and Tairona indigenous people that lived here. The Spanish founded San Sebastian de Uraba in 1509—abandoned within the year, and in 1510 the first permanent Spanish mainland settlement in America, Santa María la Antigua del Darién.[15] The first Europeans to arrive in what is modern day Mexico were the survivors of a Spanish shipwreck in 1511. Only two survived, Gerónimo de Aguilar and Gonzalo Guerrero until further contact was made with Spanish explorers years later. On 8 February 1517, an expedition led by Francisco Hernández de Córdoba left the harbor of Santiago de Cuba to explore the shores of southern Mexico. During this expedition, many of Hernández's men were killed, most during a battle near the town of Champotón against a Maya army. Hernández himself was injured and died a few days shortly after his return to Cuba. This was the Europeans' first encounter with a civilization in the Americas with buildings and complex social organizations which they recognized as being comparable to those of the Old World. Hernán Cortés led a new expedition to Mexico landing ashore at present-day Veracruz on 22 April 1519, a date which marks the beginning of 300 years of Spanish hegemony over the region. The 'Spanish conquest of Mexico' denotes the conquest of the central region of Mesoamerica where the Aztec Empire was based. The fall of the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan in 1521 was a decisive event, but the conquest of other regions of Mexico, such as Yucatán, extended long after the Spaniards consolidated control of central Mexico. The Spanish conquest of Yucatán was a much longer campaign, from 1551 to 1697, against the Maya peoples of the Maya civilization in the Yucatán Peninsula of present-day Mexico and northern Central America. Smallpox (Variola major and Variola minor) began to spread in Mesoamerica immediately after the arrival of Europeans. The indigenous peoples, who had no immunity to it, eventually died in the millions.[16] A third of all the natives of the Valley of Mexico succumbed to it within six months of the Spaniards' arrival. "The Torture of Cuauhtémoc", a 19th-century painting by Leandro Izaguirre Tenochtitlan was almost completely destroyed by fire and cannon fire. Cortés imprisoned the royal families of the valley. To prevent another revolt, he personally tortured and killed Cuauhtémoc, the last Aztec Emperor; Coanacoch, the King of Texcoco, and Tetlepanquetzal, King of Tlacopan. The small contingent of Spaniards controlled central Mexico through existing indigenous rulers of individual political states (altepetl), who maintained their status as nobles in the post-conquest era if they cooperated with Spanish rule. Cortés immediately banned human sacrifice throughout the conquered empire. In 1524, he requested the Spanish king to send friars from the mendicant orders, particularly the Franciscan, Dominican, and Augustinian, to convert the indigenous to Christianity. This has often been called the "spiritual conquest of Mexico".[17] Christian evangelization began in the early 1520s and continued into the 1560s. Many of the mendicant friars, especially the Franciscans and Dominicans, learned the native languages and recorded aspects of native culture.[18] The Spanish colonizers introduced the encomienda system of forced labor. Indigenous communities were pressed for labor and tribute but were not enslaved. Their rulers remained indigenous elites, who retained their status under colonial rule and were useful intermediaries.[19] The Spanish also used forced labor, often outright slavery, in mining.[20] New Spain Main articles: New Spain and Spanish Empire This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Chihuahua Cathedral and a monument to the city's founder, Antonio Deza y Ulloa The capture of Tenochtitlan marked the beginning of a 300-year colonial period, during which Mexico was known as "New Spain" and ruled by a viceroy in the name of the Spanish monarch. Colonial Mexico had key elements to attract Spanish immigrants: dense and politically complex indigenous populations that could be compelled to work, and huge mineral wealth, especially major silver deposits. The Viceroyalty of Peru shared this elements, so that New Spain and Peru were the seats of Spanish power and the source of its wealth until other viceroyalties were created in Spanish South America in the late 18th century. This wealth made Spain a dominant power in Europe. Spain's silver mining and crown mints created high-quality coins, the currency of Spanish America, the silver peso or Spanish dollar that became a global currency. A statue of a Chichimeca Warrior in the city of Querétaro Spain did not bring all areas of the Aztec Empire under its control. After the fall of Tenochtitlan in 1521, it took decades of sporadic warfare to subdue the rest of Mesoamerica, particularly the Mayan regions of southern New Spain, and into what is now Central America. Spanish conquests in the Zapotec and Mixtec regions of southern Mesoamerica were relatively rapid. Outside the zone of settled Mesoamerican civilizations were semi-nomadic northern indios bárbaros ("wild Indians") who fought fiercely against the Spaniards and their indigenous allies, such as the Tlaxcalans, in the Chichimeca War (1550–1590). The northern indigenous populations had gained mobility via the horses that Spaniards had imported to the New World. The region was important to the Spanish because of its rich silver deposits. The Spanish mining settlements and trunk lines to Mexico City needed to be made safe for supplies to move north and silver to move south, to central Mexico. The most important source of wealth was indigenous tribute and compelled labor, mobilized in the first years after the conquest of central Mexico through the encomienda. The encomienda was a grant of the labor of a particular indigenous settlement to an individual Spanish and his heirs. Spaniards were the recipients of traditional indigenous products that had been rendered in tribute to their local lords and to the Aztec empire. The earliest holders of encomiendas, the encomenderos were the conquerors involved in the campaign leading to the fall of Tenochtitlan, and later their heirs and people with influence but not conquerors. Forced labor could be directed toward developing land and industry. Land was a secondary source of wealth during this immediate conquest period. Where indigenous labor was absent or needed supplementing, the Spanish brought slaves, often as skilled laborers or artisans.[citation needed] Europeans, Africans, and indigenous intermixed, creating a mixed-race casta population in a process known as mestizaje. Mestizos, people of mixed European-indigenous ancestry, constitute the majority of Mexico's population.[21] Colonial period (1521–1821) This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Main articles: New Spain and Spanish Empire See also: History of Mexico City Modern group monument of Cortés, Doña Marina, and their mestizo son Martín Equestrian statue of Charles IV in Mexico City Colonial Mexico was part of the Spanish Empire and was administered by the Viceroyalty of New Spain. New Spain became the largest and most important Spanish colony. During the 16th century, Spain focused on conquering areas with dense populations that had produced Pre-Columbian civilizations. These populations were a labor force with a history of tribute and a population to convert to Christianity. Territories populated by nomadic peoples were harder to conquer, and although the Spanish explored much of North America, seeking the fabled "El Dorado", they made no concerted effort to settle the northern desert regions in what is now the United States until the end of the 16th century (Santa Fe, 1598). Spanish and Portuguese empires in 1790 Colonial law with native origins but with Spanish historical precedents was introduced, creating a balance between local jurisdiction (the Cabildos) and the Crown. The administration was based on a racial separation of the population among the Republics of Spaniards, Natives, and Mestizos, autonomous and directly dependent on the king. The population of New Spain was divided into four main groups or classes. The group a person belonged to was determined by racial background and birthplace. The most powerful group was the Spaniards, people born in Spain and sent across the Atlantic to rule the colony. Only Spaniards could hold high-level jobs in the colonial government. The second group, called criollos, were people of Spanish background but born in Mexico. Many criollos were prosperous landowners and merchants. Even the wealthiest Creoles had little say in government. The third group, the mestizos ("mixed"), were people who had some Spanish ancestors and some Native ancestors. Mestizos had a lower position and were looked down upon by both the Spaniards and the Creoles. The poorest, most marginalised group in New Spain was the Natives, descendants of pre-Columbian peoples. They had less power and endured harsher conditions than other groups. Natives were forced to work as laborers on the ranches and farms (called haciendas) of the Spaniards and creoles. In addition to the four main groups, there were also some Africans in colonial Mexico. These Africans were imported as slaves and shared the low status of the Natives. They made up about 4% to 5% of the population, and their mixed-race descendants, called mulattoes, eventually grew to represent about 9%. From an economic point of view, New Spain was administered principally for the benefit of the Empire and its military and defensive efforts. Mexico provided more than half of the Empire's taxes and supported the administration of all North and Central America. Competition with the metropolis was discouraged; for example, cultivation of grapes and olives, introduced by Cortés himself, was banned out of fear that these crops would compete with Spain's.[22] To protect the country from the attacks by English, French, and Dutch pirates, as well as the Crown's revenue, only two ports were open to foreign trade—Veracruz on the Atlantic, connecting through Havana at Cuba to Spain;[23][24] and Acapulco, connecting through Manila at the Philippines, on the Pacific, to Asia.[25][26] Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz Education was encouraged by the Crown: Mexico boasts the first primary school (Texcoco, 1523), the first university, the University of Mexico (1551) and the first printing press (1524) of the Americas. Indigenous languages were studied mainly by the religious orders during the first centuries, and became official languages in the so-called Republic of Natives, only to be outlawed and ignored after independence by the prevailing Spanish-speaking creoles. Mexico produced important cultural achievements during the colonial period, such as the literature of seventeenth-century nun, Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, and Ruiz de Alarcón, as well as cathedrals, civil monuments, forts and colonial cities such as Puebla, Mexico City, Querétaro, Zacatecas and others, today part of Unesco's World Heritage. The syncretism between indigenous and Spanish cultures gave rise to many modern Mexican staples like tequila (since the 16th century), mariachi (18th), jarabe (17th), charros (17th) and Mexican cuisine. American-born Spaniards (creoles), mixed-race castas, and Natives often disagreed, but all resented the small minority of Iberian-born Spaniards who monopolized political power. By the early 1800s, many American-born Spaniards believed that Mexico should become independent of Spain, following the example of the United States. The man who touched off the revolt against Spain was the Catholic priest Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla. He is remembered today as the Father of the Nation.[27] Independence era (1808–1829) This period was marked by unanticipated events that upended the three hundred years of Spanish colonial rule. The colony went from rule by the legitimate Spanish monarch and his appointed viceroy to an illegitimate monarch and viceroy put in place by a coup. Later, Mexico would see the return of the Spanish monarchy and a later stalemate with insurgent guerrilla forces. Events in Spain during the Peninsular War and the Trienio Liberal upended the situation in New Spain. After Spanish military officers overthrew the absolutist monarch Ferdinand VII and returned to the liberal Spanish Constitution of 1812, conservatives in New Spain who had staunchly defended the Spanish monarchy changed course and pursued independence. Royalist army officer Agustín de Iturbide became an advocate of independence and persuaded insurgent leader Vicente Guerrero to join in a coalition, forming the Army of the Three Guarantees. Within six months of that joint venture, royal rule in New Spain collapsed and independence was achieved. The constitutional monarchy envisioned with a European royal on the throne did not come to pass; rather, creole military officer Iturbide became Emperor Agustín I. His increasingly autocratic rule dismayed many and a coup overthrew him in 1823. Mexico became a federated republic and promulgated a constitution in 1824. While General Guadalupe Victoria became the first president, serving his entire term, the presidential transition became a less of an electoral event and more of one by force of arms. Insurgent general and prominent Liberal politician Vicente Guerrero was briefly president in 1829, then deposed and judicially murdered by his Conservative opponents. In the first years after independence, Mexico had experienced political instability and violence, with more to come until the late nineteenth century. The presidency changed hands 75 times in the next half-century.[28] The new republic's situation did not promote economic growth or development, with the silver mines damaged, trade disrupted, and lingering violence.[29][30] Although British merchants established a network of merchant houses in the major cities the situation was bleak. "Trade was stagnant, imports did not pay, contraband drove prices down, debts private and public went unpaid, merchants suffered all manner of injustices and operated at the mercy of weak and corruptible governments."[31] Prelude to independence Viceroy José de Iturrigaray Inspired by the American and French Revolutions, Mexican insurgents saw an opportunity for independence in 1808 when Napoleon invaded Spain and the Spanish king Charles IV was forced to abdicate. Napoleon placed his brother Joseph Bonaparte on the Spanish throne. In New Spain, viceroy José de Iturrigaray proposed to provisionally form an autonomous government, with the support of American-born Spaniards on the city council of Mexico City. Peninsular-born Spaniards in the colony saw this as undermining their own power, and Gabriel J. de Yermo led a coup against the viceroy, arresting him in September 1808. Spanish military officer Pedro de Garibay was named as viceroy by the Spanish conspirators. His tenure was brief, from September 1808 until July 1809, when he was replaced by Francisco Javier de Lizana y Beaumont, whose tenure was also brief, until the arrival of viceroy Francisco Javier Venegas from Spain. Two days after his entry to Mexico City on 14 September 1810, Father Miguel Hidalgo made his call to arms in the village of Hidalgo. Spain was invaded by France and the Spanish king was deposed and Joseph Bonaparte imposed. New Spain's viceroy José de Iturrigaray, who was sympathetic to Creoles, sought to create a legitimate government but was overthrown by powerful Peninsular Spaniards; hard-line Spaniards clamped down on any notion of Mexican autonomy. Creoles who had hoped that there was a path to Mexican autonomy, perhaps within the Spanish Empire, now saw that their only path was independence through rebellion. War of Independence, 1810–1821 Main article: Mexican War of Independence See also: Timeline of Mexican War of Independence Entry into Mexico City by the Mexican army In northern Mexico, Father Miguel Hidalgo, creole militia officer Ignacio Allende, and Juan Aldama met to plot rebellion. When the plot was discovered in September 1810, Hidalgo called his parishioners to arms in the village of Dolores, touching off a massive rebellion in the region of the Bajío. This event of 16 September 1810 is now called the "Cry of Dolores", now celebrated as Independence Day. Shouting "Independence and death to the Spaniards!" From some 80,000 villagers, poorly organized and armed, formed a force that initially rampaged unstopped in Bajío. The viceroy was slow to respond, but once the royal army engaged the untrained, poorly armed and led mass, they routed the insurgents in the Battle of Calderón Bridge. Hidalgo was captured, defrocked as a priest, and executed.[32] Another priest, José María Morelos took over and was more successful in his quest for republicanism and independence. Spain's monarchy was restored in 1814 after Napoleon's defeat, and it fought back and executed Morelos in 1815. The scattered insurgents formed guerrilla bands. In 1820, Spanish royal army brigadier, Agustín de Iturbide, changed sides and proposed independence, issuing the Plan of Iguala. Iturbide persuaded insurgent leader Vicente Guerrero to join in this new push for independence. General Isidoro Montes de Oca with few and poorly armed insurgents inflicted a real defeat on the royalist Gabriel from Armijo and they also got enough equipment to properly arm 1,800 rebels. He stood out for his courage in the Siege of Acapulco in 1813, under the orders of General José María Morelos y Pavón.[33] Isidoro inflicted defeat on the royalist army from Spain. Impressed, Itubide joined forces with Guerrero and demanded independence, a constitutional monarchy in Mexico, the continued religious monopoly for the Catholic Church, and equality for Spaniards and those born in Mexico. Royalists who now followed Iturbide's change of sides and insurgents formed the Army of the Three Guarantees. Within six months, the new army was in control of all but the ports of Veracruz and Acapulco. On September 27, 1821, Iturbide and the last viceroy, Juan O'Donojú signed the Treaty of Córdoba whereby Spain granted the demands. O'Donojú had been operating under instructions that had been issued months before the latest turn of events. Spain refused to formally recognize Mexico's independence and the situation became even more complicated by O'Donojú's death in October 1821.[34] First Mexican Empire Main article: First Mexican Empire Agustín de Iturbide the first Emperor of Mexico When Mexico achieved its independence, the southern portion of New Spain became independent as well, as a result of the Treaty of Córdoba, so Central America, present-day Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and part of Chiapas were incorporated into the Mexican Empire. Although Mexico now had its own government, there was no revolutionary change either socially or economically. The formal, legal racial distinctions were abolished, but power remained in the hands of white elites. Monarchy was the form of government Mexicans knew and it is not surprising that it chose that form of government initially. The political power of the royal government was transferred to the military. The Roman Catholic Church was the other pillar of institutional rule. Both the army and the church lost personnel with the establishment of the new regime. An index of the fall in the economy was the decrease in revenues to the church via the tithe, a tax on agricultural output. Mining especially was hard hit. It had been the motor of the colonial economy, but there was considerable fighting during the war of independence in Zacatecas and Guanajuato, the two most important silver mining sites.[35] In spite of Viceroy O'Donojú's having signed the Treaty of Córdoba giving Mexico its independence, the Spanish government did not recognize it as legitimate and claimed sovereignty over Mexico. Spain set in motion events that brought Iturbide, the son of a provincial merchant, as Emperor of Mexico. With Spain's rejection of the treaty and with no European royal taking up the offer of being Mexico's monarch, many Creoles now decided that having a Mexican as its monarch was acceptable. A local army garrison proclaimed Iturbide emperor. Since the church refused to crown him, the president of the constituent Congress did on 21 July 1822. His long-term rule was doomed. He did not have the respect of the Mexican nobility. Republicans sought that form of government rather than a monarchy. The emperor set up all the trappings of a monarchy with a court. Iturbide became increasingly dictatorial and shut down Congress. Worried that a young colonel, Antonio López de Santa Anna, would raise a rebellion, the emperor relieved him of his command. Rather than obeying the order, Santa Anna proclaimed a republic and hastily called for the reconvening of Congress. Four days later he walked back his republicanism and simply called for the removal of the emperor, in the Plan of Casa Mata. Santa Anna secured the support of insurgent general Guadalupe Victoria. The army signed on to the plan and the emperor abdicated on 19 March 1823.[36] First Mexican Republic Further information: First Mexican Republic and Constitution of 1824 Battle of Tampico (1829) Those who overthrew the emperor then nullified the Plan of Iguala, which had called for a constitutional monarchy, as well as the Treaty of Córdoba, leaving them free to choose any form of government. It was to be a federal republic, and 4 October 1824, the United Mexican States (Estados Unidos Mexicanos) was established. The new constitution was partly modeled on the constitution of the United States. It guaranteed basic human rights and defined Mexico as a representative federal republic, in which responsibilities of government were divided between a central government and a number of smaller units called states. It also defined Catholicism as the official and only religion of the republic. Central America did not join the federated republic and took a separate political path from 1 July 1823. Mexico's establishment of a new form of government did not bring stability. The civilian government contested political power from the army and the Roman Catholic Church. Both the army and the church retained special privileges called fueros. General Guadalupe Victoria was followed in office by General Vicente Guerrero, gaining the position through a coup after losing the 1828 elections, the Conservative Party saw an opportunity to seize control and led a counter-coup under General Anastasio Bustamante, who served as president from 1830 to 1832, and again from 1837 to 1841. The Age of Santa Anna (1829–1854) Political instability Main article: Centralist Republic of Mexico General Santa Anna. In much of Spanish America soon after its independence, military strongmen or caudillos dominated politics, and this period is often called "The Age of Caudillismo". In Mexico, from the late 1820s to the mid-1850s the period is often called the "Age of Santa Anna", named for the general and politician, Antonio López de Santa Anna. Liberals (federalists) asked Santa Anna to overthrow conservative President Anastasio Bustamante. After he did, he declared General Manuel Gómez Pedraza (who won the election of 1828) president. Elections were held thereafter, and Santa Anna took office in 1832. He served as president 11 nonconsecutive terms.[37] Constantly changing his political beliefs, in 1834 Santa Anna abrogated the federal constitution, causing insurgencies in the southeastern state of Yucatán and the northernmost portion of the northern state of Coahuila y Tejas. Both areas sought independence from the central government. Negotiations and the presence of Santa Anna's army caused Yucatán to recognize Mexican sovereignty. Then Santa Anna's army turned to the northern rebellion. The inhabitants of Tejas declared the Republic of Texas independent from Mexico on 2 March 1836 at Washington-on-the-Brazos. They called themselves Texans and were led mainly by recent Anglo-American settlers. At the Battle of San Jacinto on April 21, 1836, Texan militiamen defeated the Mexican army and captured General Santa Anna. The Mexican government refused to recognize the independence of Texas. Comanche conflict Comanchería, territory controlled by the Comaches, prior to 1850 The northern states grew increasingly isolated, economically and politically, due to prolonged Comanche raids and attacks. The local peoples had not recognized the Spanish Empire's claims to the region, nor did they when Mexico became an independent nation. Mexico attempted to convince its citizens to settle in the region but with few takers. Mexico negotiated a contract with Anglo-Americans to settle in the area, with the hope and expectation that they would do so in Comanche territory, the Comancheria. In the 1820s, when the United States began to exert influence over the region, New Mexico had already begun to question its loyalty to Mexico. By the time of the Mexican–American War, the Comanches had raided and pillaged large portions of northern Mexico, resulting in sustained impoverishment, political fragmentation, and general frustration at the inability—or unwillingness—of the Mexican government to discipline the Comanches.[38] In addition to Comanche raids, the First Republic's northern border was plagued with attacks on its northern border from the Apache people, who were supplied with guns by American merchants.[39] Goods including guns and shoes were sold to the Apache, the latter being discovered by Mexican forces when they found traditional Apache trails with American shoe prints instead of moccasin prints.[39] Texas Independence See also: Texas Revolution "The Fall of the Alamo" by Robert Jenkins Onderdonk After the Mexican War of Independence, the Mexican government, to populate its northern territories, awarded extensive land grants in Coahuila y Tejas to thousands of families from the United States, on condition that the settlers convert to Catholicism and become Mexican citizens. The Mexican government also forbade the importation of slaves. These conditions were largely ignored.[40] A key factor in the government's decision to allow those settlers was the belief that they would (a) protect northern Mexico from Comanche attacks and (b) buffer the northern states against US westward expansion. The policy failed on both counts: the Americans tended to settle far from the Comanche raiding zones and used the Mexican government's failure to suppress the raids as a pretext for declaring independence.[38] Surrender of Santa Anna by William Henry Huddle shows the Mexican president and general surrendering to a wounded Sam Houston in 1836. The Texas Revolution or Texas War of Independence was a military conflict between Mexico and settlers in the Texas portion of the Mexican state Coahuila y Tejas. The war lasted from October 2, 1835, to April 21, 1836. However, war at sea between Mexico and Texas continued into the 1840s. The animosity between the Mexican government and the American settlers in Texas, as well as many Texas residents of Mexican ancestry, intensified with the Siete Leyes of 1835 when Mexican President and General Antonio López de Santa Anna abolished the federal Constitution of 1824 and proclaimed the more centralizing 1835 constitution in its place. War began in Texas on October 2, 1835, with the Battle of Gonzales. Early Texian Army successes at La Bahia and San Antonio were soon met with crushing defeat at the same locations a few months later. The war ended at the Battle of San Jacinto where General Sam Houston led the Texian Army to victory over a portion of the Mexican Army under Santa Anna, who was captured soon after the battle. The end of the war resulted in the creation of the Republic of Texas in 1836. In 1845, the U.S. Congress ratified Texas's petition for statehood. Mexican-American War (1846–1848) Main article: Mexican–American War In response to a Mexican attack on a U.S. army detachment in disputed territory, the U.S. Congress declared war on May 13, 1846; Mexico followed suit on 23 May. The Mexican–American War took place in two theaters: the Western (aimed at California) and Central Mexico (aimed at capturing Mexico City) campaigns. A map of Mexico 1845 after Texas annexation by the U.S. In March 1847, U.S. President James K. Polk sent an army of 12,000 soldiers under General Winfield Scott to Veracruz. The 70 ships of the invading forces arrived at the city on 7 March and began a naval bombardment. After landing, Scott began the Siege of Veracruz.[41] The city, at that time still walled, was defended by Mexican General Juan Morales with 3,400 men. Veracruz replied as best it could with artillery to the bombardment from land and sea, but the city walls were reduced. After 12 days, the Mexicans surrendered. Scott marched west with 8,500 men, while Santa Anna was entrenched with artillery and 12,000 troops on the main road halfway to Mexico City. At the Battle of Cerro Gordo, Santa Anna was outflanked and routed. Scott pushed on to Puebla, then Mexico's second-largest city, which capitulated without resistance on 1 May—the citizens were hostile to Santa Anna. After the Battle of Chapultepec (13 September 1847), Mexico City was occupied; Scott became its military governor. Many other parts of Mexico were also occupied. Some Mexican units fought with distinction: a group of six Military College cadets (now considered Mexican national heroes), who fought to the death defending their college during the Battle of Chapultepec. The war ended with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which stipulated that (1) Mexico must sell its northern territories to the US for US$15 million; (2) the US would give full citizenship and voting rights, and protect the property rights of Mexicans living in the ceded territories; and (3) the US would assume $3.25 million in debt owed by Mexico to Americans.[42] Mexico's defeat has been attributed to its problematic internal situation, one of disunity and disorganization. End of Santa Anna's rule Despite Santa Anna's role in the catastrophe of the Mexican–American War, he returned to power again. When the U.S. ambitioned an easier railroad route to California south of the Gila River, Santa Anna sold the Gadsden Strip to the US for $10 million in the Gadsden Purchase in 1853. This loss of more territory provoked outrage among Mexicans, but Santa Anna claimed that he needed money to rebuild the army from the war. In the end, he kept or squandered most of it.[43] Liberals finally coalesced and successfully rebelled against his regime, promulgating the Plan of Ayutla in 1854 and forcing Santa Anna into exile.[44][45] Liberals came to power and began enacting reforms that they had long envisioned. Struggle between liberals and conservatives, 1855–1876 Main articles: La Reforma and Second Mexican Empire Ignacio Comonfort Liberals ousted conservative Santa Anna in the Plan of Ayutla and sought to implement liberal reforms in a series of separate laws, then in a new constitution, which incorporated them. Mexico experienced civil war and foreign intervention that established a monarchy with the support of Mexican conservatives. The fall of the empire of Maximilian of Mexico and his execution in 1867 ushered in a period of relative peace, but economic stagnation during the Restored Republic. In general, the history writing on this era has characterized the liberals as forging a new, modern nation and conservatives as reactionary opponents of that vision, though more recent analyses are more nuanced.[46] La Reforma began with the final overthrow of Santa Anna in the Plan of Ayutla in 1855. Moderate Liberal Ignacio Comonfort became president. The Moderados tried to find a middle ground between the nation's liberals and conservatives. There is less consensus about the ending point of the Reforma.[47] Common dates are 1861, after the liberal victory in the Reform War; 1867, after the republican victory over the French intervention in Mexico; and 1876 when Porfirio Díaz overthrew president Sebastián Lerdo de Tejada. Liberalism dominated Mexico as an intellectual force into the 20th century. Liberals championed reform and supported republicanism, capitalism, and individualism; they fought to reduce the Church's roles in education, land ownership and politics.[47] Also importantly, liberals sought to end the special status of indigenous communities by ending their corporate ownership of land. Alegoría de la Constitución de 1857, Petronilo Monroy, 1869. Liberal Colonel Ignacio Comonfort became president in 1855. Comonfort was a moderate who tried and failed to maintain an uncertain coalition of radical and moderate liberals. Radical liberals drafted the Constitution of 1857, which decreased the power of the executive, incorporated the laws of the Reform, and curtailed traditional powers of the Catholic Church.[48] It granted religious freedom, stating only that the Catholic Church was the favored faith. The anti-clerical liberals scored a major victory with the ratification of the constitution because it weakened the Church and enfranchised non-property-owning men. The constitution was opposed by the army, the clergy, and the other conservatives, as well as moderate liberals such as Comonfort. With the Plan of Tacubaya in December 1857, conservative General Félix Zuloaga led a coup in the capital in January 1858, creating a parallel government in Mexico City. Comonfort resigned from the presidency and was succeeded by the President of the Supreme Court, Benito Juárez, who became President of the Republic, leading Mexican liberals.[48] The revolt led to the War of Reform (1857–1861), which grew increasingly bloody as it progressed and polarized the nation's politics. Many Moderates, convinced that the Church's political power had to be curbed, came over to the side of the Liberals. For some time, the Liberals and Conservatives simultaneously administered separate governments, the Conservatives from Mexico City and the Liberals from Veracruz. The war ended with a Liberal victory, and liberal President Benito Juárez moved his administration to Mexico City. Battle of Miahuatlán The Execution of Emperor Maximilian, 19 June 1867. Gen. Tomás Mejía, left, Maximiian, center, Gen. Miguel Miramón, right. Painting by Édouard Manet 1868. In 1862, the country was invaded by France which sought to collect debts that the Juárez government had defaulted on, but the larger purpose was to install a ruler under French control. Archduke Ferdinand Maximilian of Austria was installed as Emperor Maximilian I of Mexico, with support from the Catholic Church, conservative elements of the upper class, and some indigenous communities. Although the French suffered an initial defeat (the Battle of Puebla on May 5, 1862, now commemorated as the Cinco de Mayo holiday), the French eventually defeated the Mexican army and set Maximilian on the throne. The Mexican-French monarchy set up administration in Mexico City, governing from the National Palace.[49] Maximilian has been praised by some historians for his liberal reforms, his desire to help the people of Mexico, and his refusal to desert his loyal followers. Some accused him of exploiting the nation's resources for themselves and their allies, including favoring the plans of Napoleon III to exploit the mines in the northwest of the country and to grow cotton.[49] Maximilian favored the establishment of a limited monarchy that would share power with a democratically elected congress. This was too liberal for conservatives, while liberals refused to accept any monarch, considering the republican government of Benito Juárez as legitimate. This left Maximilian with few allies within Mexico. Meanwhile, Juárez continued to be recognized by the United States, which was engaged in its Civil War (1861–65) and at that juncture was in no position to aid Juárez directly against the French intervention until 1865. France never made a profit in Mexico and its Mexican expedition grew increasingly unpopular. After the US Civil War was over, the US demanded the withdrawal of French troops from Mexico. Napoleon III quietly complied. In mid-1867, despite repeated Imperial losses in battle to the Republican Army and ever-decreasing support from Napoleon III, Maximilian chose to remain in Mexico rather than return to Europe. He was captured and executed along with two Mexican supporters. Juárez remained in office until his death in 1872. In 1867 with the defeat of the monarchy and execution of Emperor Maximilian, the republic was restored and Juárez was reelected. He continued to implement his reforms. In 1871, he was elected a second time, much to the dismay of his opponents within the Liberal party, who considered reelection to be somewhat undemocratic. Juárez died the following year and was succeeded by Sebastián Lerdo de Tejada. Part of Juárez's reforms included fully secularizing the country. The Catholic Church was barred from owning property aside from houses of worship and monasteries, and education and marriage were put in the hands of the state. Porfiriato (1876–1910) Main articles: Porfirio Díaz and Porfiriato Porfirio Díaz The rule of Porfirio Díaz (1876–1911) was dedicated to the rule by law, suppression of violence and modernization of the country. Diaz was a military commander on the liberal side in the 1860s who seized power in a coup in 1876, established a dictatorship, and ruled in collaboration with the landed oligarchy. He maintained good relations with the United States and Great Britain, which led to a sharp rise in foreign direct investment, especially in mining. The general standard of living rose steadily. He adhered to a coarse social laissez-faire doctrine that primarily benefited the already privileged social classes. Diaz was overthrown by the Mexican Revolution of 1911 and died in exile.[50] This period of relative prosperity is known as the Porfiriato. As traditional ways were under challenge, urban Mexicans debated national identity, the rejection of indigenous cultures, the new passion for French culture once the French were ousted from Mexico, and the challenge of creating a modern nation-state through industrialization and scientific development.[51] Cities were rebuilt with modernizing architects favoring the latest Western European styles, especially the Beaux-Arts style, to symbolize the break with the past. A highly visible exemplar was the Federal Legislative Palace, built 1897–1910.[52] Díaz remained in power by rigging elections and censoring the press. Rivals were destroyed, and popular generals were moved to new areas so they could not build a permanent base of support. Banditry on roads leading to major cities was largely suppressed by the "Rurales", a police force controlled by Díaz, created during a process of military modernization. Banditry remained a major threat in more remote areas because the Rurales comprised fewer than 1000 men.[53] Díaz was an astute military leader and liberal politician who built a national base of supporters. He maintained a stable relationship with the Catholic Church by avoiding the enforcement of constitutional anticlerical laws. The country's infrastructure was greatly improved through increased foreign investment from Britain and the US, and a strong, participatory central government.[54] Increased tax revenue and better administration improved public safety, public health, railways, mining, industry, foreign trade, and national finances. After a half-century of stagnation, where per capita income was merely a tenth of the developed nations such as Britain and the US, the Mexican economy took off during the Porfiriato, growing at an annual rate of 2.3% (1877 to 1910), which was high by world standards.[54] Order, progress, and dictatorship Mexico City street market Díaz reduced the Army from 30,000 to under 20,000 men, which resulted in a smaller percentage of the national budget being committed to the military. The army was modernized, well-trained, and equipped with some of the latest technology. The Army was top-heavy with 5,000 officers, many of them elderly, but politically well-connected veterans of the wars of the 1860s.[55] The political skills that Díaz used so effectively before 1900 faded, as he and his closest advisers were less open to negotiations with younger leaders. His announcement in 1908 that he would retire in 1911 unleashed a widespread feeling that Díaz was on the way out and that new coalitions had to be built. He nevertheless ran for reelection and in a show of U.S. support, Díaz and William Taft planned a summit in El Paso, Texas, and Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, for October 16, 1909, a historic first meeting between a Mexican and a U.S. president and also the first time an American president would cross the border into Mexico.[56] The meeting focused attention on the disputed Chamizal strip and resulted in assassination threats and other serious security concerns.[56] At the meeting, Díaz told John Hays Hammond, "Since I am responsible for bringing several billion dollars in foreign investments into my country, I think I should continue in my position until a competent successor is found."[57] Díaz was re-elected after a highly controversial election, but he was overthrown in 1911 and forced into exile in France after Army units rebelled. Economy Mexican Central Railway train at station, Mexico Fiscal stability was achieved by José Yves Limantour, Secretary of Finance of Mexico from 1893 until 1910. He was the leader of the well-educated technocrats known as Científicos, who were committed to modernity and sound finance. Limantour expanded foreign investment, supported free trade, balanced the budget for the first time, and generated a budget surplus by 1894. However, he was unable to halt the rising cost of food, which alienated the poor.[58] The American Panic of 1907 was an economic downturn that caused a sudden drop in demand for Mexican copper, silver, gold, zinc, and other metals. Mexico in turn cut its imports of horses and mules, mining machinery, and railroad supplies. The result was an economic depression in Mexico in 1908–1909 that soured optimism and raised discontent with the Díaz regime.[59] Mexico was vulnerable to external shocks because of its weak banking system.[citation needed] Mexico had few factories by 1880, but then industrialization took hold in the Northeast, especially in Monterrey. Factories produced machinery, textiles, and beer, while smelters processed ores. Convenient rail links with the nearby US gave local entrepreneurs from seven wealthy merchant families a competitive advantage over more distant cities. New federal laws in 1884 and 1887 allowed corporations to be more flexible. By the 1920s, American Smelting and Refining Company (ASARCO), an American firm controlled by the Guggenheim family, had invested over 20 million pesos and employed nearly 2,000 workers smelting copper and making wire to meet the demand for electrical wiring in the US and Mexico.[60] Education Making cigarettes in the El Buen Tono factory, Mexico City The modernizers insisted that public schools and secular education should replace religious schooling by the Catholic Church.[61] They reformed elementary schools by mandating uniformity, secularization, and rationality. These reforms were consistent with international trends in teaching methods. To break the traditional peasant habits that were seen to hinder industrialization, reforms emphasized children's punctuality, assiduity, and health.[62] In 1910, the National University was opened. Rural unrest Historian John Tutino examines the impact of the Porfiriato in the highland basins south of Mexico City, which became the Zapatista heartland during the Revolution. Population growth, railways, and concentration of land in a few families generated a commercial expansion that undercut the traditional powers of the villagers. Young men felt insecure about the patriarchal roles they had expected to fill. Initially, this anxiety manifested as violence within families and communities. But, after the defeat of Díaz in 1910, villagers expressed their rage in revolutionary assaults on local elites who had profited most from the Porfiriato. The young men were radicalized, as they fought for their traditional roles regarding land, community, and patriarchy.[63] Revolution of 1910–1920 Main article: Mexican Revolution The Mexican Revolution is a broad term to describe political and social changes in the early 20th century. Most scholars consider it to span the years 1910–1920, from Francisco I. Madero's call for armed rebellion in the 1910 Plan of San Luis Potosí until the election of General Álvaro Obregón in December 1920. Foreign powers had important economic and strategic interests in the outcome of power struggles in Mexico, with the United States' involvement in the Mexican Revolution playing an especially significant role.[64] The Revolution grew increasingly broad-based, radical, and violent. Revolutionaries sought far-reaching social and economic reforms by strengthening the state and weakening the conservative forces represented by the Church, rich landowners, and foreign capitalists. Some scholars consider the promulgation of the Mexican Constitution of 1917 as the revolution's endpoint. "Economic and social conditions improved in accordance with revolutionary policies, so that the new society took shape within a framework of official revolutionary institutions," with the constitution providing that framework.[65] Organized labor gained significant power, as seen in Article 123 of the Constitution of 1917. Land reform in Mexico was enabled by Article 27. Economic nationalism was also enabled by Article 27, restricting ownership of enterprises by foreigners. The Constitution restricted the Catholic Church; implementing the restrictions in the late 1920s resulted in the Cristero War. A ban on the re-election of the president was enshrined in the Constitution and practice. Political succession was achieved in 1929 with the creation of the Partido Nacional Revolucionario (PNR), the political party that dominated Mexico's politics for the remainder of the 20th century, now called the Institutional Revolutionary Party. One major effect of the revolution was the disappearance of the Federal Army in 1914, defeated by revolutionary forces of the various factions in the Mexican Revolution.[66] The Mexican Revolution was based on popular participation. At first, it was based on the peasantry who demanded land, water, and a more representative national government. Wasserman finds that: Popular participation in the revolution and its aftermath took three forms. First, everyday people, though often in conjunction with elite neighbors, generated local issues such as access to land, taxes, and village autonomy. Second, the popular classes provided soldiers to fight in the revolution. Third, local issues advocated by campesinos and workers framed national discourses on land reform, the role of religion, and many other questions.[67] Election of 1910 and popular rebellion Porfirio Díaz announced in an interview to a US journalist James Creelman that he would not run for president in 1910. This set off a spate of political activity by potential candidates, including Francisco I. Madero, a member of one of Mexico's richest families. Madero was part of the Anti-Reelectionist Party, whose main platform was the end of the Díaz regime. But Díaz reversed his decision to retire and ran again. He created the office of vice president, which could have been a mechanism to ease the presidential transition. But Díaz chose a politically unpalatable running mate, Ramón Corral, over a popular military man, Bernardo Reyes, and a popular civilian Francisco I. Madero. He sent Reyes on a "study mission" to Europe and jailed Madero. Official election results declared that Díaz had won almost unanimously and Madero received only a few hundred votes. This fraud was too blatant, and riots broke out. Uprisings against Díaz occurred in the fall of 1910, particularly in Mexico's north and the southern s

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Vietnam: The video features slides of Vietnam taken by Chris Cunningham, showcasing the landscape, culture, and the people of Vietnam. Rapprochement between the U.S. and the People's Republic of China: This refers to the improvement of diplomatic relations between the United States and the People's Republic of China. Historically, the relationship between the two countries has been complex, marked by periods of tension, such as during the Cold War. The rapprochement refers to specific events or initiatives that led to a thawing of relations, possibly including diplomatic visits, agreements, and treaties. China-Vietnam war: This refers to the conflict between China and Vietnam that occurred in the late 1970s. The war stemmed from various factors, including territorial disputes and ideological differences between the two communist nations. The conflict resulted in significant casualties and had lasting implications for both countries' relations and the geopolitical landscape of Southeast Asia. The Sino-Vietnamese War (also known by other names) was a brief conflict that occurred in early 1979 between China and Vietnam. China launched an offensive in response to Vietnam's invasion and occupation of Cambodia in 1978, which ended the rule of the Chinese-backed Khmer Rouge. The conflict lasted for about a month, with China withdrawing its troops in March 1979. In February 1979, Chinese forces launched a surprise invasion of northern Vietnam and quickly captured several cities near the border. On 6 March of that year, China declared that its punitive mission had been accomplished. Chinese troops then withdrew from Vietnam. However, Vietnam continued to occupy Cambodia until 1989, which means that China did not achieve its goal of dissuading Vietnam from involvement in Cambodia. However, China's operation at least successfully forced Vietnam to withdraw some units, namely the 2nd Corps, from the invasion forces of Cambodia to reinforce the defense of Hanoi.[18] The conflict had a lasting impact on the relationship between China and Vietnam, and diplomatic relations between the two countries were not fully restored until 1991. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Sino-Vietnamese border was finalized. Although unable to deter Vietnam from ousting Pol Pot from Cambodia, China demonstrated that the Soviet Union, its Cold War communist adversary, was unable to protect its Vietnamese ally.[19] Names The Sino-Vietnamese War is known by various names in Chinese and Vietnamese. The neutral names for the war are 中越战争 (Sino-Vietnamese war) in Chinese and Chiến tranh biên giới Việt-Trung (Vietnamese-Chinese border war) in Vietnamese. The Chinese government refers to the war as the "Self-defensive war against Vietnam" (对越自卫反击战)[20] or the "Self-defensive counterattack against Vietnam" (对越自卫还击保卫边疆作战).[21][22][page needed] The Vietnamese government calls it the "War against Chinese expansionism" (Chiến tranh chống bành trướng Trung Hoa).[23] The Sino-Vietnamese War is also known as the Third Indochina War in Western historiography.[24] Background Just as the First Indochina War—which emerged from the complex situation following World War II—and the Vietnam War both arose from the indecisive aftermath of political relations, the Third Indochina War again followed the unresolved problems of the earlier wars.[25] The major allied victors of World War II, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Soviet Union, all agreed that the area belonged to the French.[26] As the French did not have the means to immediately retake Indochina, the major powers agreed that the British would take control and troops would occupy the south while Nationalist Chinese forces would move in from the north.[26] Nationalist Chinese troops entered the country to disarm Japanese troops north of the 16th parallel on 14 September 1945. The parallel divided Indochina into Chinese and British controlled zones (see Timeline of World War II (1945)).[27] The British landed in the south and rearmed the small body of interned French forces as well as parts of the surrendered Japanese forces to aid in retaking southern Vietnam, as there were not enough British troops immediately available.[26] On the urging of the Soviet Union, Ho Chi Minh initially attempted to negotiate with the French, who were slowly reestablishing their control across the area, although still under British control until hostilities had ceased. Once hostilities had ended, the British handed over the territory to the French.[28] In January 1946, the Viet Minh won elections across central and northern Vietnam.[29] On 6 March 1946, Ho signed an agreement allowing French forces to replace Nationalist Chinese forces, in exchange for French recognition of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam as a "free" republic within the French Union, with the specifics of such recognition to be determined by future negotiation.[30][31][32] British forces departed on 26 March 1946, leaving Vietnam in the control of the French.[33] The French landed in Hanoi by March 1946 and in November of that year they ousted the Viet Minh from the city.[28] Soon thereafter, the Viet Minh began a guerrilla war against the French Union forces, beginning the first Indochina War. French colonialism and the First Indochina War Main article: First Indochina War Vietnam first became a French colony when France invaded in 1858. By the 1880s, the French had expanded their sphere of influence in Southeast Asia to include all of Vietnam, and by 1893 both Laos and Cambodia had become French colonies as well.[34] Rebellions against French colonial power were common up to World War I. The European war heightened revolutionary sentiment in Southeast Asia, and the independence-minded population rallied around revolutionaries such as Hồ Chí Minh and others, including royalists. Prior to their attack on Pearl Harbor, the Japanese occupied French Indochina, but left civil administration to the Vichy French administration.[35][36] On 9 March 1945, fearing that the Vichy French were about to switch sides to support the Allies, the Japanese overthrew the Vichy administration and forces taking control of Indochina and establishing their own puppet administration, the Empire of Vietnam. The Japanese surrender in August 1945 created a power vacuum in Indochina, as the various political factions scrambled for control.[37] The events leading to the First Indochina War are subject to historical dispute.[38] When the Việt Minh hastily sought to establish the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, the remaining French acquiesced while waiting for the return of French forces to the region.[36][38] The Kuomintang supported French restoration, but Viet Minh efforts towards independence were helped by Chinese communists under the Soviet Union's influence. The Soviet Union at first indirectly supported Vietnamese communists, but later directly supported Hồ Chí Minh.[39][40] The Soviets nonetheless remained less supportive than China until after the Sino-Soviet split, during the time of Leonid Brezhnev when the Soviet Union became communist Vietnam's key ally. The war itself involved numerous events that had major impacts throughout Indochina. Two major conferences were held to bring about a resolution. Finally, on 20 July 1954, the Geneva Conference resulted in a political settlement to reunite the country, signed with support from China, the Soviet Union, and Western European powers.[39] While the Soviet Union played a constructive role in the agreement, it again was not as involved as China.[39][40] The U.S. did not sign the agreement and swiftly moved to back South Vietnam. Sino-Soviet split Main article: Sino-Soviet split The Chinese Communist Party and the Viet Minh had a long history. During the initial stages of the First Indochina War with France, the recently founded communist People's Republic of China continued the Soviet mission to expand communism. Therefore, they aided the Viet Minh and became the connector between Soviets and the Viet Minh.[41]: 45  After the death of Joseph Stalin in March 1953, relations between the Soviet Union and China began to deteriorate. Mao Zedong believed the new Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev had made a serious error in his Secret Speech denouncing Stalin in February 1956, and criticized the Soviet Union's interpretation of Marxism–Leninism, in particular Khrushchev's support for peaceful co-existence and its interpretation. This led to increasingly hostile relations, and eventually the Sino-Soviet split. From here, Chinese communists played a decreasing role in helping their former allies because the Viet Minh did not support China against the Soviets. Following worsening relations between the Soviet Union and China as a result of the Sino-Soviet split of 1956–1966, as many as 1.5 million Chinese troops were stationed along the Sino-Soviet border in preparation for a full-scale war against the Soviets. Vietnam antagonized China by increasing its alignment with the Soviet Union by joining the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) (and signing the Treaty of Friendship and Co-operation with the Soviet Union, which had the Soviet Union pledge to aid Vietnam if attacked.[42] Following the death of Mao in September 1976, the overthrow of the Gang of Four and the ascent of Deng Xiaoping, the Chinese leadership revised its own positions to become compatible with market aspects, denounced the Cultural Revolution, and collaborated with the US against the Soviet Union. Vietnam War Main article: Vietnam War See also: China in the Vietnam War As France withdrew from a provisionally divided Vietnam in late 1954, the United States increasingly stepped in to support the South Vietnamese leaders due to the Domino theory, which theorized that if one nation would turn to communism, the surrounding nations were likely to fall like dominoes and become communist as well. The Soviet Union and North Vietnam became important allies together due to the fact that if South Vietnam was successfully taken over by North Vietnam, then communism in East Asia would find its strategic position bolstered. In the eyes of the People's Republic of China, the growing Soviet-Vietnamese relationship was a disturbing development; they feared an encirclement by the less-than-hospitable Soviet sphere of influence. The United States and the Soviet Union could not agree on a plan for a proposed 1956 election meant to unify the partitioned Vietnam. Instead, the South held a separate election that was widely considered fraudulent, leading to continued internal conflict with communist factions led by the Viet Cong that intensified through the late 1950s. With supplies and support from the Soviet Union, North Vietnamese forces became directly involved in the ongoing guerrilla war by 1959 and openly invaded the South in 1964. The United States played an ever-increasing role in supporting South Vietnam through the period. The U.S. had supported French forces in the First Indochina War, sent supplies and military advisers to South Vietnam throughout the 1950s and early 1960s, and eventually took over most of the fighting against both North Vietnam and the Viet Cong by the mid-1960s. By 1968, over 500,000 American troops were involved in the Vietnam War. Due to a lack of clear military success and facing increasingly strident opposition to the war in the U.S., American forces began a slow withdrawal in 1969 while attempting to bolster South Vietnam's military so that they could take over the fighting. In accordance with the Paris Peace Accords by 29 March 1973 all U.S. combat forces had left South Vietnam, however North Vietnamese combat forces were allowed to remain in place. North Vietnam attacked South Vietnam in early 1975 and South Vietnam fell on 30 April 1975. The People's Republic of China started talks with the United States in the early 1970s, culminating in high level meetings with Henry Kissinger and later Richard Nixon. These meetings contributed to a re-orientation of Chinese foreign policy toward the United States. Cambodia Main article: Cambodian–Vietnamese War Although the Vietnamese Communists and the Khmer Rouge had previously cooperated, the relationship deteriorated when Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot came to power and established Democratic Kampuchea on 17 April 1975. The People's Republic of China, on the other hand, also supported the Maoist Khmer Rouge against Lon Nol's regime during the Cambodian Civil War and its subsequent take-over of Cambodia. China provided extensive political, logistical and military support for the Khmer Rouge during its rule.[43] After numerous clashes along the border between Vietnam and Cambodia, and with encouragement from Khmer Rouge defectors fleeing purges of the Eastern Zone, Vietnam invaded Cambodia on 25 December 1978. By 7 January 1979 Vietnamese forces had entered Phnom Penh and the Khmer Rouge leadership had fled to western Cambodia. The offensive took the Chinese by surprise, and its Phnom Penh embassy fled to the jungle with the Khmer Rouge where it remained for 15 days.[44] However, the fall of the Khmer Rouge was not a surprise, but from China's perspective, Vietnam's occupation of Cambodia threatened China's interests on the Indochina peninsula and its position among non-communist Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) states of Southeast Asia.[45] Members of ASEAN saw Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia as a blatant violation of international borders and an act of aggression.[46] Ethnic minorities Main articles: United Front for the Liberation of Oppressed Races, FULRO insurgency against Vietnam, Degar, and Hmong insurgency China supported the ethnic minority United Front for the Liberation of Oppressed Races against Vietnam during the FULRO insurgency against Vietnam.[citation needed] The Vietnamese executed collaborators who worked for the Chinese, regardless of ethnicity.[47] The Chinese received a significant number of defectors from the Thu Lao ethnic minority in Vietnam during the war.[48] During the war China received as migrants the entire A Lù based population of the Phù Lá ethnic minority.[49] China received so many defectors from the ethnic minorities in Vietnam that it raised shock among Vietnam which had to launch a new effort to re-assert dominance over the ethnic minorities and classify them.[50] Post Vietnam War, an insurgency against Vietnam lasted among the indigenous Mon-Khmer and Malayo-Polynesians of the Central Highlands.[51] Assistance was sought from China by the Hmong ethnic minority.[52] The border was frequently crossed by Chinese, Lao, Kinh, Hmong, Yao, Nung, and Tai.[53] The Laotian Hmong and FULRO were both supported against Vietnam by China and Thailand.[47][54] China attacks Vietnam China, now under Deng Xiaoping, was starting the Chinese economic reform and opening trade with the West, in turn, growing increasingly defiant of the Soviet Union. China grew concerned about the strong Soviet influence in Vietnam, fearing that Vietnam could become a pseudo-protectorate of the Soviet Union.[55] Vietnam's claim to be the world's third largest military power following its victory in the Vietnam War also increased Chinese apprehensions.[55] In the Chinese view, Vietnam was pursuing a regional hegemonic policy in an attempt to control Indochina.[55] In July 1978, the Chinese Politburo discussed possible military action against Vietnam in order to disrupt Soviet deployments and, two months later, PLA General Staff recommended punitive actions against Vietnam.[55] The major breakdown in the Chinese view of Vietnam occurred in November 1978.[55] Vietnam joined the CMEA and, on 3 November, the Soviet Union and Vietnam signed a 25-year mutual defense treaty, which made Vietnam the "linchpin" in the Soviet Union's "drive to contain China".[56] (However, the Soviet Union had shifted from open animosity towards more normalized relations with China soon after.)[57] Vietnam called for a special relationship between the three Indochinese countries, but the Khmer Rouge regime of Democratic Kampuchea rejected the idea.[55] On 25 December 1978, Vietnam invaded Democratic Kampuchea, overrunning most of the country, deposing the Khmer Rouge, and installing Heng Samrin as the head of the new Cambodian government.[58] The move antagonized China, which now viewed the Soviet Union as capable of encircling its southern border.[59] On 29 January 1979, Chinese Vice-premier Deng Xiaoping visited the United States for the first time and told U.S. President Jimmy Carter: "The child is getting naughty, it is time he got spanked" (小朋友不听话，该打打屁股了).[60] Deng sought an endorsement from the United States in order to deter the Soviet Union from intervening when China launched a punitive attack against Vietnam.[59] He informed Carter that China could not accept Vietnam's "wild ambitions" and was prepared to teach it a lesson.[59] According to United States National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter reserved judgment, an action which Chinese diplomats interpreted as tacit approval.[59] Deng returned to China on 8 February 1979, and on 9 February, made the final decision to invade Vietnam.[61] On 15 February, the first day that China could have officially announced the termination of the 1950 Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance and Mutual Assistance, Deng Xiaoping declared that China planned to conduct a limited attack on Vietnam. Thus, he further developed China's burgeoning cooperation with the United States against the Soviet Union and would take a similar stance later regarding Afghanistan.[62] According to academic Suisheng Zhao, "The proximity in the timing of the military thrust against Vietnam, was to take advantage of the normalization to bluff the Soviets with a nonexistent US endorsement."[61] The reason cited for the attack was to support China's ally, the Khmer Rouge of Cambodia, in addition to the mistreatment of Vietnam's ethnic Chinese minority and the Vietnamese occupation of the Spratly Islands which were claimed by China. To prevent Soviet intervention on Vietnam's behalf, Deng warned Moscow the next day that China was prepared for a full-scale war against the Soviet Union; in preparation for this conflict, China put all of its troops along the Sino-Soviet border on an emergency war alert, set up a new military command in Xinjiang, and even evacuated an estimated 300,000 civilians from the Sino-Soviet border.[63] In addition, the bulk of China's active forces (as many as one-and-a-half million troops) were stationed along China's border with the Soviet Union.[64] Order of battle This section may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may interest only a particular audience. Please help by spinning off or relocating any relevant information, and removing excessive detail that may be against Wikipedia's inclusion policy. (November 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this message) Chinese forces Although the People's Liberation Army vastly outnumbered the Vietnamese forces, the Soviet-Vietnamese alliance compelled the Chinese to deploy the majority of their forces along China's northern frontier with the Soviet Union (as well as, to a lesser extent, Soviet-allied Mongolia) as a deterrent to Soviet intervention. The Chinese force that engaged the Vietnamese consisted of units from the Kunming Military Region, Chengdu Military Region, Wuhan Military Region and Guangzhou Military Region, but commanded by the headquarters of Kunming Military Region on the western front and Guangzhou Military Region in the eastern front. Guangxi Direction (East Front) commanded by the Front Headquarter of Guangzhou Military Region in Nanning. Commander-Xu Shiyou, Political Commissar-Xiang Zhonghua, Chief of Staff-Zhou Deli North Group: Commander-Ou Zhifu (Deputy Commander of Guangzhou Military Region) 41st Army Commander-Zhang Xudeng, Political Commissar-Liu Zhanrong 121st Infantry Division Commander-Zheng Wenshui 122nd Infantry Division Commander-Li Xinliang 123rd Infantry Division Commander-Li Peijiang South Group: Commander-Wu Zhong (Deputy Commander of Guangzhou Military Region) 42nd Army Commander-Wei Huajie, Political Commissar-Xun Li 124th Infantry Division Commander-Gu Hui 125th Infantry Division 126th Infantry Division East Group: Commander-Jiang Xieyuan (Deputy Commander of Guangzhou Military Region) 55th Army Commander-Zhu Yuehua, Temporary Political Commissar-Guo Changzeng 163rd Infantry Division Commander-Bian Guixiang, Political Commissar-Wu Enqing, Chief of Staff-Xing Shizhong 164th Infantry Division Commander-Xiao Xuchu (also Deputy Commander of 55th Corps) 165th Infantry Division 1st Artillery Division Reserve Group (came from Wuhan Military Region except 50th Corps from Chengdu Military Region), Deputy Commander-Han Huaizhi (Commander of 54th Corps) 43rd Army Commander-Zhu Chuanyu, Temporary Political Commissar-Zhao Shengchang 127th Infantry Division Commander-Zhang Wannian (also as the Deputy Commander of 43rd Corps) 128th Infantry Division 129th Infantry Division 54th Army Commander-Han Huaizhi (pluralism), Political Commissar-Zhu Zhiwei 160th Infantry Division (commanded by 41st Corp in this war) Commander-Zhang Zhixin, Political Commissar-Li Zhaogui 161st Infantry Division 162nd Infantry Division Commander-Li Jiulong 50th Army Temporary Commander-Liu Guangtong, Political Commissar-Gao Xingyao 148th Infantry Division 150th Infantry Division 20th Army (only dispatched the 58th Division into the war) 58th Infantry Division (commanded by the 50th Corps during the war) Guangxi Military Region (as a provincial military region) Commander-Zhao Xinran Chief of Staff-Yin Xi 1st Regiment of Frontier Defense in Youyiguan Pass 2nd Regiment of Frontier Defense in Baise District 3rd Regiment of Frontier Defense in Fangcheng County The Independent Infantry Division of Guangxi Military Region[65] Air Force of Guangzhou Military Region (armed patrol in the sky of Guangxi, did not see combat) 7th Air Force Corps 13th Air Force Division (aerotransport unit came from Hubei province) 70th Antiaircraft Artillery Division The 217 Fleet of South Sea Fleet 8th Navy Aviation Division The Independent Tank Regiment of Guangzhou Military Region 83rd Bateau Boat Regiment 84th Bateau Boat Regiment Yunnan Direction (the West Front) commanded by the Front Headquarter of Kunming Military Region in Kaiyuan. Commander-Yang Dezhi, Political Commissar-Liu Zhijian, Chief of Staff-Sun Ganqing 11th Army (consisted of two divisions) Commander-Chen Jiagui, Political Commissar-Zhang Qi 31st Infantry Division 32nd Infantry Division 13th Army(camed from Chengdu Military Region) Commander-Yan Shouqing, Political Commissar-Qiao Xueting 37th Infantry Division 38th Infantry Division 39th Infantry Division 14th Army Commander-Zhang Jinghua, Political Commissar-Fan Xinyou 40th Infantry Division 41st Infantry Division 42nd Infantry Division 149th Infantry Division (from Chengdu Military Region, belonged to 50th Corps, assigned to Yunnan Direction during the war) Yunnan Military Region (as a provincial military region) 11th Regiment of Frontier Defence in Maguan County 12th Regiment of Frontier Defence in Malipo County 13th Regiment of Frontier Defence in 14th Regiment of Frontier Defence in 1st Garrison Division of Chengdu Military Region commanded by 11th Army in the war 65th Antiaircraft Artillery Division 4th Artillery Division Independent Tank Regiment of Kunming Military Region 86th Bateau Boat Regiment 23rd Logistic Branch (consisted of five army service stations, six hospitals, eleven medical establishments) 17th Automobile Regiment commanded by 13th Corps during the war 22nd Automobile Regiment 5th Air Force Corps 44th Air Force Division (fighter unit) Independent unit of 27th Air Force Division 15th Air Force Antiaircraft Artillery Division Vietnamese forces The Vietnamese government claimed they only had a force of about 60,000 including several army regular divisions in its northern area.[66] 1st Military Region: commanded by Major General Đàm Quang Trung, responsible for the defense at Northeast region.[67] Main forces: 3rd Infantry Division (Golden Star Division), consisted of 2nd Infantry Regiment, 12th Infantry Regiment, 141st Infantry Regiment and 68th Artillery Regiment. All were located at Dong Dang, Van Dang, Cao Loc and Lạng Sơn town of Lạng Sơn Province 338th Infantry Division, consisted of 460th Infantry Regiment, 461st Infantry Regiment, 462nd Infantry Regiment and 208th Artillery Regiment. All were located at Loc Binh and Dinh Lap of Lạng Sơn Province 346th Infantry Division (Lam Son Division), consisted of 246th Infantry Regiment, 677th Infantry Regiment, 851st Infantry Regiment and 188th Artillery Regiment. All were located at Tra Linh, Ha Quang and Hoa An of Cao Bằng Province 325th-B Infantry Division, consisted of 8th Infantry Regiment, 41st Infantry Regiment, 288th Infantry Regiment and 189th Artillery Regiment. All were located at Tien Yen and Binh Lieu of Quảng Ninh Province 242nd Infantry Brigade, located at coastlines and islands of Quảng Ninh Province Local forces: At Cao Bằng Province: 567th Infantry Regiment, 1 artillery battalion, 1 battalion of air defense artillery and 7 infantry battalions At Lạng Sơn Province: 123rd Infantry Regiment, 199th Infantry Regiment and 7 infantry battalions At Quảng Ninh Province: 43rd Infantry Regiment, 244th Infantry Regiment, 1 artillery battalion, 4 battalions of air defense artillery and 5 infantry battalions Armed police forces (Border guard): 12th Mobile Regiment at Lang Son, 4 battalions at Cao Bang and Quang Ninh, some companies and 24 border posts 2nd Military Region: commanded by Major General Vũ Lập, responsible for the defense at Northwest region.[67] Main forces: 316th Infantry Division (Bong Lau Division), consisted of 98th Infantry Regiment, 148th Infantry Regiment, 147th Infantry Regiment and 187th Artillery Regiment. All were located at Binh Lu and Phong Tho of Lai Châu Province 345th Infantry Division, consisted of 118th Infantry Regiment, 121st Infantry Regiment, 124th Infantry Regiment and 190th Artillery Regiment. All were located at Bao Thang of Hoang Lien Son province 326th Infantry Division, consisted of 19th Infantry Regiment, 46th Infantry Regiment, 541st Infantry Regiment and 200th Artillery Regiment. All were located at Tuan Giao and Dien Bien of Lai Châu Province Local forces: At Ha Tuyen: 122nd Infantry Regiment, 191st Infantry Regiment, 1 artillery battalion and 8 infantry battalions At Hoang Lien Son: 191st Infantry Regiment, 254th Infantry Regiment, 1 artillery battalion and 8 infantry battalions At Lai Châu: 193rd Infantry Regiment, 741st Infantry Regiment, 1 artillery battalion and 5 infantry battalions Armed police forces (Border guard): 16th Mobile Regiment at Hoang Lien Son, some companies and 39 border posts In addition, Vietnamese forces were supported by about 50,000 militia at each Military Region Air force 372nd Air Division[68] 1 air flight of ten F-5s (captured after Vietnam War) 1 air flight of ten A-37s (captured after Vietnam War) 1 air flight of seven UH-1s and three UH-7s (captured after Vietnam War) 919th Air Transport Regiment[68] responsible for transporting troops Several C-130, C-119 and C-47 (captured after Vietnam War) 371st Air Division[69] 916th Helicopter Regiment Several Mi-6 and Mi-8 918th Air Transport Regiment 923rd Fighter Regiment Several MiG-17s and MiG-21 The Vietnam People's Air Force did not participate in the combat directly, instead they provided support to the ground troops, transported troops from Cambodia to northern Vietnam as well as performed reconnaissance missions. Air Defence[70] Northern and Northwestern regions: 267th Air Defence Regiment 276th Air Defence Regiment 285th Air Defence Regiment 255th Air Defence Regiment 257th Air Defence Regiment Northeastern region: 274th Air Defence Regiment History and conscriptions Course of the war See also: Battle of Lạng Sơn (1979), Battle of Dong Dang (1979), Battle of Lao Cai, and Battle of Cao Bang (1979) On 17 February 1979, a People's Liberation Army (PLA) force of about 200,000 troops supported by 200 Type 59, Type 62, and Type 63 tanks entered northern Vietnam in the PLA's first major combat operation since the end of the Korean War in 1953.[71] The PLA invasion was conducted in two directions: western and eastern Western direction, commanded by Xu Shiyou, aimed to attack Cao Bằng, Lạng Sơn and Quảng Ninh Provinces:[72] Eastern direction, commanded by Yang Dezhi, aimed to attack Ha Tuyen, Hoang Lien Son and Lai Châu Provinces Vietnam quickly mobilized all its main forces in Cambodia, southern Vietnam and central Vietnam to the northern border. From 18 to 25 February, the 327th Infantry Division of Military District 3 and the 337th Infantry Division of Military District 4 were deployed to join Military District 1 for the defense of northwestern region. From 6 to 11 March the Second Corp (Huong Giang Corp) stationed in Cambodia was deployed back to Hanoi. The 372nd Air Division in central Vietnam as well as the 917th, 935th and 937th Air Regiments in southern Vietnam were quickly deployed to the north.[70] The PLA quickly advanced about 15–20 kilometres into Vietnam, with fighting mainly occurring in the provinces of Cao Bằng, Lào Cai and Lạng Sơn. The Vietnamese avoided mobilizing their regular divisions, and held back some 300,000 troops for the defence of Hanoi.[citation needed] The People's Army of Vietnam (VPA) tried to avoid direct combat and often used guerrilla tactics.[citation needed] The initial PLA attack soon lost its momentum and a new attack wave was sent in with eight PLA divisions joining the battle. After capturing the northern heights above Lạng Sơn, the PLA surrounded and paused in front of the city in order to lure the VPA into reinforcing it with units from Cambodia. This was the main strategic ploy in the Chinese war plan as Deng did not want to risk escalating tensions with the Soviet Union. After three days of bloody house-to-house fighting, Lạng Sơn fell on 6 March. The PLA then took the southern heights above Lạng Sơn[73] and occupied Sa Pa. The PLA claimed to have crushed several of the VPA regular units.[10] Supporting attacks were also conducted by the PLA at Quảng Ninh Province in the Battle of Mong Cai and Battle of Cao Ba Lanh but were unsuccessful.[74] However, Bangkok analysts gave a completely different count, heavy Vietnamese resistance near Lao Cai in the west and Cao Bang in the middle of the front also resulted in Vietnamese defeats. The Chinese also captured the far northeastern provincial capital, Mong Cai, analysts said.[75] According to Vietnam,[72] since January 1979 Chinese forces performed numerous reconnaissance activities across the border and made 230 violations into Vietnamese land. To prepare for a possible Chinese invasion, the Central Military Committee of the Communist Party ordered all armed forces across the border to be on stand-by mode. On 6 March, China declared that the gate to Hanoi was open and that their punitive mission had been achieved. Coincidentally, the Vietnamese government called, on the same day, for a nationwide general mobilization for the war.[76] Some analysts said that the belligerent Vietnamese language could indicate a desire to counterattack, or simply an attempt to mount a propaganda campaign that would end in a declaration of Vietnamese victory as the Chinese leave the country.[77] During the withdrawal, the PLA used a scorched-earth policy, destroying local infrastructure and looting useful equipment and resources (including livestock), this severely weakened the economy of Vietnam's northernmost provinces.[10] The PLA crossed the border back into China on 16 March. Both sides declared victory with China claiming to have crushed the Vietnamese resistance and Vietnam claiming to have repelled the invasion using mostly border militias. Henry J. Kenny, a research scientist for US Center for Naval Analyses, noted most Western writers agree that while Vietnam outperformed the PLA on the battlefield, the PLA's seizure of Lang Son did allow the Chinese the option of moving into the Red River Delta and thence into Hanoi. However, Kenny also mentions that Lang Son is farther from Hanoi than it is from the Chinese border, and at least 5 PAVN divisions in the delta remained ready for a counterattack and thirty thousand additional PAVN troops from Cambodia along with several regiments from Laos were moving to their support. Thus, had the PLA decided to attack Hanoi, the PLA would have suffered huge losses.[78] Contrary to the views above, it was reported by the New York Times that Western intelligence analysts believed that even though the border war was coming to an end, and that the provincial Vietnamese troops, who took the brunt of the fighting that started on February 17, suffered such high casualties and became so disorganized as a result of the invasion, they had to be replaced with regular troops.[79] Vietnam sent one regular division, as well as armor and artillery support units, into the fight at the height of the fighting for Lang Son, which was captured by Chinese forces, but the regular division failed to take the town. The Chinese made their withdrawal announcement following their victory at Lang Son, which Hanoi refused to recognize. Analysts interpreted this as a warning to Vietnam that any military objective there may be taken by China. Analysts claimed that regardless of the outcome of the combat, China had managed to permanently divert Vietnamese troops, supplies, attention, and energy to the border region. This was due to Vietnam's intensive resupply and remanning of the border zone.[80] Despite using a force that did not see major combat since the early 1950s and whose weaponry was inferior to the Vietnamese forces, the PLA was considered to have fought well.[81] Most of the weaponry and military vehicles used by the PLA were either outdated or unfit for combat.[81] In contrast, the Vietnamese forces had a combat-seasoned force and modern weaponry from America and the Soviet Union.[81] The PLA pushed Vietnamese forces 25 miles (40 km) from the border and succeeded in severely damaging the area they occupied.[81] Soviet support to Vietnam The Soviet Union, although it did not take direct military action, provided intelligence and equipment support for Vietnam.[82] A large airlift was established by the Soviet Union to move Vietnamese troops from Cambodia to Northern Vietnam. Moscow also provided a total of 400 tanks and armored personnel carriers (APCs), 500 mortar artillery and air defense artillery, 50 BM-21 rocket launchers, 400 portable surface-to-air missiles, 800 anti-tank missiles and 20 jet fighters. About 5,000 to 8,000 Soviet military advisers were present in Vietnam in 1979 to train Vietnamese soldiers. During the Sino-Vietnamese War, the Soviet Union deployed troops at the Sino-Soviet border and Mongolian-Chinese border as an act of showing support to Vietnam, as well as tying up Chinese troops. However, the Soviets refused to take any direct action to defend their ally.[83] The Soviet Pacific Fleet also deployed 15 ships to the Vietnamese coast to relay Chinese battlefield communications to Vietnamese forces.[84] Soviet inaction While the Soviet Union deployed naval vessels and supplied materiel to Vietnam, they felt that there was simply no way that they could directly support Vietnam against China; the distances were too great to be an effective ally, and any sort of reinforcements would have to cross territory controlled by China or U.S. allies.[citation needed] The only realistic option would be to restart the unresolved border conflict with China.[citation needed] Vietnam was important to Soviet policy but not enough for the Soviets to go to war over.[85] When Moscow did not intervene, Beijing publicly proclaimed that the Soviet Union had broken its numerous promises to assist Vietnam. Another reason why Moscow did not intervene was because Beijing had promised both Moscow and Washington that the invasion was only a limited war, and that Chinese forces would withdraw after a short incursion. After moderation by the U.S., Moscow decided to adopt a "wait and see" approach to see if Beijing would actually limit their offense. Because Vietnam's anti-air capabilities were among the best in the world at the time and in order to reassure Moscow it was conducting a limited war, Deng Xiaoping ordered the Chinese navy and air force to remain out of the war; only limited support was provided by the air force.[86] When Beijing kept its promise, Moscow did not retaliate. Aftermath Nam Quan Gate China and Vietnam each lost thousands of troops, and China lost 3.45 billion yuan in overhead, which delayed completion of their 1979–80 economic plan.[87] Following the war, the Vietnamese leadership took various repressive measures to deal with the problem of real or potential collaboration. In the spring of 1979, the authorities expelled approximately 8,000 Hoa people from Hanoi to the southern "New Economic Zones", and partially resettled the Hmong tribes and other ethnic minorities from the northernmost provinces. In response to the defection of Hoàng Văn Hoan, the Communist Party of Vietnam removed from its ranks pro-Chinese elements and persons who had surrendered to the advancing Chinese troops during the war. In 1979, a total of 20,468 members were expelled from the party.[88] After the invasion, Vietnam created a puppet government in Cambodia led by Heng Samrin.[89] Samrin was obligated to consult with the Vietnamese on major decisions.[90] Although Vietnam continued to occupy Cambodia, China successfully mobilized international opposition to the occupation, rallying such leaders as Cambodia's deposed king Norodom Sihanouk, Cambodian anticommunist leader Son Sann, and high-ranking members of the Khmer Rouge to deny the pro-Vietnamese Cambodian People's Party in Cambodia diplomatic recognition beyond the Soviet bloc. The majority of diplomats and analysts concluded that China's long-term strategy was to stretch Vietnamese resources by having the Vietnamese divert their resources from other problems to the border conflict. Problems include Vietnam's difficulties integrating South Vietnam with the North, the burden of administrating Laos and occupying Cambodia, and economic problems caused by two years of disastrous weather.[91] After the war, border skirmishes at the Chinese-Vietnamese border continued; the Vietnamese government intensified its discriminatory policies against the Chinese community in Vietnam; and the Vietnamese were not deterred from maintaining their occupation of Cambodia, increasing its control over Laos and threatening the security of Thailand, which turned Vietnam into a greater threat to ASEAN than before.[5] The Vietnamese government intensified its persecution of overseas Chinese living in Vietnam. Vietnamese authorities confiscated property owned in Vietnam by overseas Chinese, and expelled many Chinese from Vietnam to a number of provinces in southern China.[92] However, China caused Vietnam to suffer from serious economic and military hardship by threatening to launch a second invasion, and by supporting Pol Pot guerrillas in Cambodia. The Vietnamese government had to spend money on maintaining a military presence at the Chinese-Vietnamese border, and on supporting its puppet government in Cambodia. Vietnam's scarce resources were drained, and economic conditions were bad throughout Vietnam.[5] Assessments of the strategic consequences of the war vary considerably. Journalist Howard W. French quoted some historians of the opinion that "the war was started by Mr. Deng (China's then paramount leader Deng Xiaoping) to keep the army preoccupied while he consolidated power ..."[93] However, China strengthened its relations with ASEAN countries – particularly Thailand and Singapore – due to their fear of Vietnamese aggression. Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew wrote in 2000: "The Western press wrote off the Chinese punitive action as a failure. I believe it changed the history of East Asia."[94] In contrast, Vietnam's decreasing prestige in the region led it to be more dependent on the Soviet Union, to which it leased a naval base at Cam Ranh Bay.[95] Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger wrote that "China succeeded in exposing the limits of...[Soviet] strategic reach" and speculated that the desire to "compensate for their ineffectuality" contributed to the Soviets' decision to intervene in Afghanistan a year later.[96] Chinese casualties The number of casualties during the war is disputed. Shortly after China had announced the withdrawal of its troops from Vietnam, the state-run Vietnam News Agency claimed that the PLA had suffered over 44,000 casualties, a figure which Western analysts at the time considered to be greatly inflated.[97] Other Vietnamese sources claimed the PLA had suffered 62,500 total casualties, including 550 military vehicles and 115 artillery pieces destroyed.[98] Leaks from Chinese military sources indicate that China suffered 6,954 dead.[6][10][99] Deputy chief of the General Staff Wu Xiuquan revealed in a meeting with a French military delegation that Vietnam suffered 50,000 casualties, whereas China had suffered 20,000 casualties. Regardless of the accuracy of the Vietnamese casualties, it can be concluded that the Chinese losses were severe, according to Daniel Tretiak.[100] Vietnamese casualties Like their Chinese counterparts, the Vietnamese government has never officially announced any information on its actual military casualties. China estimated that Vietnam lost 57,000 soldiers and 70,000 militia members during the war.[101][102][103] The Vietnamese state newspaper Nhân Dân claimed that Vietnam suffered more than 10,000 civilian deaths during the Chinese invasion[104][105] and earlier on 17 May 1979, reported statistics on heavy losses of industry and agricultural properties.[104] Prisoners Captured Vietnamese soldiers at a Chinese prison camp Chinese POWs guarded by the Vietnamese The Chinese held 1,636 Vietnamese prisoners and the Vietnamese held 238 Chinese prisoners; they were exchanged in May–June 1979.[14][15] PLA reforms Deng subsequently used the PLA's poor performance to overcome resistance from PLA leadership to further military reforms.[106] Sino-Vietnamese relations after the war Main article: China–Vietnam relations See also: Sino-Vietnamese conflicts, 1979–1991; Battle of the Paracel Islands; and Johnson South Reef Skirmish Border skirmishes continued throughout the 1980s, including a significant skirmish in April 1984 and a naval battle over the Spratly Islands in 1988 known as the Johnson South Reef Skirmish. Armed conflict only ended in 1989 after the Vietnamese agreed to fully withdraw from Cambodia. Both nations planned the normalization of their relations in a secret summit in Chengdu in September 1990, and officially normalized ties in November 1991. In 1999, after many years of negotiations, China and Vietnam signed a border pact.[107] There was an adjustment of the land border, resulting in Vietnam giving China part of its land which was lost during the battle, including the Ai Nam Quan Gate which served as the traditional border marker and entry point between Vietnam and China, which caused widespread frustration within Vietnamese communities.[108] A new bridge spanning the Red River between Hekou and Kim Thành, on the main road between Kunming and Hanoi The December 2007 announcement of a plan to build a Hanoi–Kunming highway was a landmark in Sino-Vietnamese relations. The road will traverse the border that once served as a battleground. It is predicted to contribute to demilitarizing the border region, as well as facilitating trade and industrial cooperation between the nations.[109] In popular culture Chinese media There are a number of Chinese songs, movies and TV programs depicting and discussing this conflict from the Chinese viewpoint. These vary from the patriotic song "Bloodstained Glory" originally written to laud the sacrifice and service of the Chinese military, to the 1986 film The Big Parade which carried veiled criticism of the war.[citation needed] The 1984 Xie Jin film Wreaths at the Foot of the Mountain was the earliest mainland China film to depict the war, although its narrative was that the Chinese were on the defensive after Vietnamese attacked the Chinese border first with the objective of Nanning. The male protagonist of the television series Candle in the Tomb was a veteran of conflict.[110] The 2017 Chinese movie Youth covers the period of the Sino-Vietnamese conflict from the perspective of the larger cultural changes taking place in China during that period of time. Vietnamese media The war was mentioned in the film Đất mẹ (Motherland) directed by Hải Ninh in 1980 and Thị xã trong tầm tay (Town at the Fingertips) directed by Đặng Nhật Minh in 1982.[111] Besides in 1982, a documentary film called Hoa đưa hương nơi đất anh nằm (Flowers over Your Grave) was directed by Truong Thanh, the film told a story of a Japanese journalist who died during the war.[112] During the war, there were numerous patriotic songs produced to boost the nationalism of Vietnamese people, including "Chiến đấu vì độc lập tự do" ("Fight for Independence and Freedom") composed by Phạm Tuyên, "Lời tạm biệt lúc lên đường" ("Farewell When Leaving") by Vu Trong Hoi, "40 thế kỷ cùng ra trận" ("40 Centuries We Fought Side By Side") by Hong Dang, "Những đôi mắt mang hình viên đạn" ("The Eyes Shaped Like Bullets") by Tran Tien and "Hát về anh" (Sing for you) by The Hien. The Sino-Vietnamese War also appeared in some novels such as: Đêm tháng Hai (Night of February) written by Chu Lai in 1979 and Chân dung người hàng xóm (Portrait of My Neighbors[113]) written by Duong Thu Huong in 1979. See also flagChina portalflagVietnam portal List of wars involving the People's Republic of China List of wars involving Vietnam China–Vietnam relations Cambodia–Vietnam relations Cambodian–Vietnamese War Sino-Soviet border conflict Sino-Soviet relations Sino-Soviet split Sino-Vietnamese conflicts (1979–1991) Notes References Citations Nayan Chanda, "End of the Battle but Not of the War", p. 10. Khu vực có giá trị tượng trưng tinh thần nhất là khoảng 300m đường xe lửa giữa Hữu Nghị Quan và trạm kiểm soát biên giới Việt Nam. Nguyen, Can Van. "Sino-Vietnamese Border Issues". NGO Realm. Archived from the original on 31 August 2014. Retrieved 6 October 2014. Nguyen, Can Van. "INTERVIEW ON TERRITORY AND TERRITORIAL WATERS". vlink.com. Archived from the original on 12 January 2015. Retrieved 6 October 2014. Gompert, David C.; Binnendijk, Hans; Lin, Bonny. Blinders, Blunders, and Wars: What America and China Can Learn (PDF) (Report). RAND Corporation. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 November 2016. Retrieved 1 August 2020. Tretiak 1979, p. 753. Zhang Xiaoming, "China's 1979 War with Vietnam: A Reassessment" Archived October 31, 2007, at the Wayback Machine, China Quarterly, Issue no. 184 (December 2005), pp. 851–874. Actually thought to have been 200,000 with 400–550 tanks. Zhang writes that: "Existing scholarship tends towards an estimate of as many as 25,000 PLA killed in action and another 37,000 wounded. Recently available Chinese sources categorize the PLA's losses as 6,594 dead and approximately 31,000 injured, giving a total of 24,000 casualties from an invasion force of 200,000." Nga, Đỗ Thu. "Trung Quốc – đi hùng hổ, về ê chê ở CT biên giới 1979: Nhìn số lượng và thiệt hại về xe tăng là biết". songdep.com.vn (in Vietnamese). Sống Đẹp. Archived from the original on 22 February 2022. Retrieved 9 March 2022. Copper 2009, p. 71. King V. Chen (1987): China's War With Việt Nam, 1979. Hoover Institution Press, Stanford University, page 103 对越自卫反击作战工作总结 [Work summary on counter strike (1979–1987)], The rear services of Chinese Kunming Military Region China at War: An Encyclopedia, p. 413, at Google Books Howard, Russell D. (September 1999). "USAF Institute for National Security Studies, USAF Academy" (PDF). Regional Security Series. INSS Occasional Paper. 28. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 October 2021. Retrieved 3 October 2021. Tonnesson, Bởi Stein (2010). Vietnam 1946: How the War Began. University of California Press. p. 2. ISBN 9780520256026. Chan, Gerald (1989). China and international organizations: participation in non-governmental organizations since 1971 (illustrated ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 80. ISBN 0195827384. Archived from the original on 12 October 2022. Retrieved 19 May 2018. Military Law Review, Volumes 119–122. Vol. 119. Contributors United States. Dept. of the Army, Judge Advocate General's School (United States. Army). Headquarters, Department of the Army. 1988. p. 72. Archived from the original on 12 October 2022. Retrieved 19 May 2018. King C. Chen (1983). "China's war against Vietnam, 1979: a military analysis". Journal of East Asian Affairs. 3 (1). Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 1 August 2020. Chen, King C. (1987). China's War with Vietnam, 1979: Issues, Decisions, and Implications. Hoover Press. p. 114. ISBN 9780817985738. Archived from the original on 16 October 2017. Retrieved 16 October 2017. "Nghệ thuật chỉ đạo đấu tranh trong Cuộc chiến đấu bảo vệ biên giới phía Bắc". baotintuc.vn (in Vietnamese). 18 February 2019. Retrieved 8 August 2023. Elleman, Bruce A. (2001). Modern Chinese Warfare, 1795–1989. Routledge. p. 297. ISBN 0415214742. Vincent, Travis. "Why Won't Vietnam Teach the History of the Sino-Vietnamese War?". thediplomat.com. The Diplomat. Archived from the original on 18 February 2022. Retrieved 18 February 2022. Quang, Nguyen Minh (23 February 2017). "The Bitter Legacy of the 1979 China-Vietnam War". thediplomat.com. Archived from the original on 16 November 2021. Retrieved 16 November 2021. Kissinger, Henry (2011). On China. Penguin Canada. ISBN 9780143179474. Whitson, William W. (1976). Foreign policy and U.S. national security: major postelection issues. Praeger. p. 142. ISBN 9780275565404. O'Dowd 2007, p. 4. Burns, R.D. and Leitenberg, M. (1984). The Wars in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, 1945–1982: A Bibliographic Guide. Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio Information Services, p. xxvi. Neale 2001, p. 20. Willbanks 2009, p. 8 Neale 2001, p. 24. Neale 2001, pp. 23–4. Willbanks 2009, p. 9 "Franco-Vietnam Agreement of March 6, 1946". Vietnamgear.com. 6 March 1946. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 29 April 2011. "Pentagon Papers, Gravel Edition, Chapter !, Section 2". Mtholyoke.edu. Archived from the original on 2 September 2015. Retrieved 29 April 2011. Peter Dennis (1987). Troubled days of peace: Mountbatten and South East Asia command, 1945–46. Manchester University Press ND. p. 179. ISBN 978-0-7190-2205-0. Dunnigan, J. F. & Nofi, A. A. (1999). Dirty Little Secrets of the Vietnam War. New York: St. Martins Press, p. 27. Dunnigan, J. F. & Nofi, A. A. (1999). Dirty Little Secrets of the Vietnam War. New York: St. Martins Press, pp. 27–38. Hood, S. J. (1992). Dragons Entangled: Indochina and the China-Vietnam War. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe, p. 16. Logevall, Fredrik (2012). Embers of War: The Fall of an Empire and the making of America's Vietnam. Random House. pp. 67–91. ISBN 978-0-375-75647-4. Burns, R. D. and Leitenberg, M. (1984). The Wars in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, 1945–1982: A Bibliographic Guide. Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio Information Services, p. xx. Hood, S. J. (1992). Dragons Entangled: Indochina and the China-Vietnam War. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 13–19. Chen, Min. (1992). The Strategic Triangle and Regional Conflict: Lessons from the Indochina Wars. Boulder: Lnne Reinner Publications, pp. 17–23. Calkins, Laura Marie (2013). China and the first Vietnam War, 1947–54. London: Routledge. ISBN 9780415632331. OCLC 844435588. Tretiak 1979, pp. 740–741. Storey, Ian (April 2006). "China's tightening relationship with Cambodia". China Brief. 6 (9). Archived from the original on 16 June 2007. Retrieved 17 June 2008. Zhao, Suisheng (2023). The dragon roars back : transformational leaders and dynamics of Chinese foreign policy. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. p. 56. ISBN 978-1-5036-3415-2. OCLC 1332788951. Tretiak 1979, p. 742. "Sovereignty principle was at stake in Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia in 1978 | the Straits Times". The Straits Times. 8 June 2019. Archived from the original on 7 September 2022. Retrieved 7 September 2022. O'Dowd 2007, p. 70. Ito 2013, p. 121. Ito 2013, p. 123. Ito 2013, p. 42. Ito 2013, p. 14. O'Dowd 2007, p. 186. O'Dowd 2007, p. 68. O’Dowd, Edward C. (9 April 2012). "CHIẾN DỊCH NĂM 1979: CHIẾN TRANH KHÔNG QUY ƯỚC". Trí Nhân Media. Marine Corps University, Quantico. Archived from the original on 29 December 2017. Zhao, Suisheng (2023). The dragon roars back : transformational leaders and dynamics of Chinese foreign policy. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. p. 55. ISBN 978-1-5036-3415-2. OCLC 1332788951. Scalapino, Robert A. (1982) "The Political Influence of the Soviet Union in Asia" In Zagoria, Donald S. (editor) (1982) Soviet Policy in East Asia Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, page 71. Scalapino, Robert A. (1987), O’Neill, Robert (ed.), "Soviet Influence in East Asia and the Pacific in the Coming Decade: Part I", East Asia, the West and International Security, International Institute for Strategic Studies Conference Papers, London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 107–122, doi:10.1007/978-1-349-09845-3_10, ISBN 978-1-349-09845-3 Zhao, Suisheng (2023). The Dragon Roars Back: Transformational Leaders and Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy. Stanford: Stanford University Press. pp. 55–56. doi:10.1515/9781503634152. ISBN 978-1-5036-3415-2. Zhao, Suisheng (2023). The Dragon Roars Back Transformational Leaders and Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy. Stanford: Stanford University Press. p. 56. ISBN 978-1-5036-3415-2. OCLC 1346366969. 中共對侵越戰爭八股自辯 [The CCP's Stereotyped Defense of the War of Invasion of Vietnam] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 27 April 2009. Retrieved 23 February 2009. Zhao, Suisheng (2023). The Dragon Roars Back Transformational Leaders and Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy. Stanford: Stanford University Press. p. 59. ISBN 978-1-5036-3415-2. OCLC 1346366969. Mair, Victor H. (2013). Chinese Lives: The people who made a civilization. London: Thames & Hudson. p. 217. ISBN 9780500251928. Chang, Pao-min (1985). Kampuchea Between China and Vietnam. Singapore: Singapore University Press. pp. 88–89. ISBN 978-9971690892. Scalapino, Robert A. (1986). "Asia in a Global Context: Strategic Issue for the Soviet Union". In Solomon, Richard H.; Kosaka, Masataka (eds.). The Soviet Far East Military Buildup. Dover, MA: Auburn House Publishing Company. p. 28. 对越自卫反击战烈士牺牲30年后家人才知葬何处 母亲生前几乎哭瞎 [The martyrs of the counterattack in the self-defense against Vietnam died 30 years before their families knew where they were buried, and their mothers almost cried themselves blind before they died (4)] (in Chinese). 24 April 2016. Archived from the original on 13 September 2016. VnExpress. "Biên giới 1979 trước 'biển người' phương Bắc - VnExpress". vnexpress.net (in Vietnamese). Retrieved 14 April 2024. "Lực lượng phòng thủ của Việt Nam tại biên giới phía Bắc". VnExpress. 12 February 2014. Archived from the original on 14 February 2014. Retrieved 16 February 2014. "Lưới lửa phòng không trên bầu trời miền Bắc năm 1979". soha.vn. 16 February 2015. Archived from the original on 16 April 2016. Retrieved 31 July 2016. "Những máy bay tham gia bảo vệ miền Bắc năm 1979". soha.vn. 14 February 2015. Archived from the original on 16 April 2016. Retrieved 31 July 2016. "Chiến tranh Biên giới 1979: Cuộc chuyển quân thần tốc". soha.vn. 18 February 2015. Archived from the original on 2 August 2016. Retrieved 31 July 2016. "ChinaDefense.com – The Political History of Sino-Vietnamese War of 1979, and the Chinese Concept of Active Defense". Archived from the original on 5 December 2004. "Biên giới phía Bắc 1979: 30 ngày không thể nào quên (1)". soha.vn. 16 February 2015. Archived from the original on 20 March 2016. Retrieved 31 July 2016. Armchair General magazine[volume & issue needed] O’Dowd, page 64 "China Announces End of Invasion". The Washington Post. Retrieved 8 August 2023. King C. Chen, China's war Against Vietnam: a Military Analysis, 1983, P22 China Announces End of Invasion, By Jay Mathews and Lee Lescaze, the Washington Post Xiabing Li. A History of the Modern Chinese Army. University Press of Kentucky. Retrieved 9 July 2014. "China Quitting Vietnam, Leaving a Trail of Debris (Published 1979)". The New York Times. 9 March 1979. Retrieved 8 August 2023. "China Quitting Vietnam, Leaving a Trail of Debris (Published 1979)". The New York Times. 9 March 1979. Retrieved 8 August 2023. Tretiak 1979, p. 751. "Liên Xô "chia lửa" với Việt Nam trong chiến tranh biên giới thế nào?". dantri.com.vn. 7 May 2013. Archived from the original on 5 July 2015. Retrieved 31 July 2016. "Sino-Soviet Relations and the February 1979 Sino-Vietnamese Conflict". ttu.edu. Archived from the original on 28 April 2016. Retrieved 31 July 2016. Kelemen, Paul (March 1984). "Soviet Strategy in Southeast Asia: The Vietnam Factor". Asian Survey. 24 (3). University of California Press: 342. doi:10.2307/2644070. ISSN 0004-4687. JSTOR 2644070. Legvold, Robert (28 January 2009). "The Soviet Union and the Vietnam War". Foreign Affairs. No. September/October 1996. ISSN 0015-7120. Archived from the original on 25 March 2017. Retrieved 24 March 2017. Gin, Christopher M. (2016). How China wins : a case study of the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War (PDF). Fort Leavenworth, Kansas: The Army Press. ISBN 9781940804309. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 September 2021. Retrieved 3 October 2021. "China "Should Learn from its Losses" in the War against Vietnam" from "August 1" Radio, People's Republic of China, 1400 GMT, 17 February 1980, as reported by BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 22 February 1980 Szalontai, Balazs (15 April 2010). "Hoàng Văn Hoan và vụ thanh trừng sau 1979". BBC News Tiếng Việt (in Vietnamese). Archived from the original on 21 September 2021. Retrieved 3 October 2021. "Sovereignty principle was at stake in Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia in 1978 | the Straits Times". The Straits Times. 8 June 2019. Archived from the original on 7 September 2022. Retrieved 7 September 2022. "Sovereignty principle was at stake in Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia in 1978 | the Straits Times". The Straits Times. 8 June 2019. Archived from the original on 7 September 2022. Retrieved 7 September 2022. "China Quitting Vietnam, Leaving a Trail of Debris (Published 1979)". The New York Times. 9 March 1979. Retrieved 8 August 2023. Tretiak 1979, p. 740. French, Howard W. (1 March 2005). "Was the War Pointless? China Shows How to Bury It". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 16 April 2009. Retrieved 28 February 2009. Lee, Kuan Yew, 1923–2015 (2000), From Third World to first : the Singapore story, 1965–2000 / Kuan Yew Lee, HarperCollins Publishers, p. 603, ISBN 0060197765 MacFarquhar, Roderick; Fairbank, John K., eds. (1991). The Cambridge History of China, Volume 15: The People's Republic, Part 2: Revolutions Within the Chinese Revolution, 1966–1982. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 447–449. ISBN 978-0-521-24337-7. Kissinger, H. (2011), On China, New York:Penguin Press, p. 304-305, ISBN 9781101445358 Mathews, Jay; Lescaze, Lee (6 March 1979). "China Announces End of Invasion". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 28 August 2021. "35 năm cuộc chiến biên giới phía Bắc". vnexpress.net. Archived from the original on 27 July 2016. Retrieved 31 July 2016. Tom Hancock. "China's Vietnam veterans fighting new battle". abs-cbnnews.com. Archived from the original on 3 May 2015. Retrieved 31 July 2016. Tretiak 1979, p. 757. "TestPage". Archived from the original on 30 April 2015. Retrieved 28 January 2012. 许世友的最后一战 [The last fight of General Xu Shiyou]. Zhou Deli, Jiangshu People's press. June 1990. Archived from the original on 30 December 2014. 中越战俘生活实录 [Life of war prison camp in 1979 count strike war]. Shi Wenying. Spring breeze literature press. March 1991. Archived from the original on 30 December 2014. Xem các nguồn Edward C. O'Dowd, Bùi Xuân Quang, Laurent Cesari, Gilles Férier. P148 "35 năm cuộc chiến biên giới phía Bắc". vnexpress.net. Archived from the original on 27 July 2016. Retrieved 31 July 2016. Meyskens, Covell F. (2020). Mao's Third Front: The Militarization of Cold War China. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. p. 230. doi:10.1017/9781108784788. ISBN 978-1-108-78478-8. OCLC 1145096137. S2CID 218936313. "China-Vietnam pact signed". BBC News. 25 December 2000. Archived from the original on 22 February 2014. Retrieved 16 February 2014. "In Westminster, an Internet Bid to Restore Viet Land". Los Angeles Times. 30 June 2002. Archived from the original on 29 June 2015. Retrieved 27 June 2015. Greenlees, Donald "Approval near for Vietnam–China highway" International Herald Tribune, 13 December 2007 精绝古城 纪录片第1集 战争戏把靳东虐哭了 [Candle in The Tomb Episode 1: This War Scene Made Jin Dong Cru]. China TV. 22 December 2016. Archived from the original on 13 February 2017. Retrieved 8 February 2017. "Cha – con và chiến tranh". 24 December 2005. Archived from the original on 14 November 2012. Nguyễn Duy Chiến + theo dõi (1225) (23 June 2008). "Thăm một nhà văn vừa ... mãn hạn tù treo". Tienphong.vn. Archived from the original on 21 February 2014. Retrieved 16 February 2014. Kiernan, Ben (2017). Viet Nam: A History from Earliest Times to the Present. Oxford University Press. p. 582. Sources Books Ito, Masako (2013). Politics of Ethnic Classification in Vietnam. Kyoto University Press. ISBN 978-1-920901-72-1. Archived from the original on 12 October 2022. Retrieved 13 May 2020. Liegl, Markus B. China's use of militar

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Situation in Iran: Middle East Studies professor Najm Bezirgan provides insights into the political, social, and economic situation in Iran. Discussions about Iran's government structure, its relations with other countries, domestic issues such as human rights, and economic challenges like sanctions. Human Rights Violations in Romania: A local representative of Amnesty International reports on human rights violations in Romania. This encompasses various aspects such as freedom of speech, political repression, discrimination, treatment of minorities, and conditions in prisons or detention centers. Welfare for the Rich: This segment delves into the phenomenon where wealthy individuals or corporations receive tax breaks, subsidies, and other favorable legislation that contribute to their economic advantage. Discussions cover how such policies impact income inequality, social welfare programs, and the overall economy. Irresponsible Usage of Chemicals: This part of the program examines the consequences of using chemicals irresponsibly in both the economy and the environment. It includes discussions about pollution, health hazards, ecological damage, and regulatory frameworks governing the use of chemicals in various industries. Corporate welfare is a phrase used to describe a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other special favorable treatment for corporations. The definition of corporate welfare is sometimes restricted to direct government subsidies of major corporations, excluding tax loopholes and all manner of regulatory and trade decisions. Origin of term The term "corporate welfare" was reportedly coined in 1956 by Ralph Nader.[1][2] Alternative adages "Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor" Main article: Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor Believed to have been first popularised by Michael Harrington's 1962 book The Other America[3][4] in which Harrington cited Charles Abrams,[5] a noted authority on housing. Variations on this adage have been used in criticisms of the United States' economic policy by Joe Biden,[6] Martin Luther King Jr.,[7][8] Gore Vidal,[9][10][11] Joseph P. Kennedy II,[12] Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.,[13] Dean Baker,[14] Noam Chomsky,[15] Robert Reich,[16] John Pilger,[17] Bernie Sanders,[18] and Yanis Varoufakis.[19] "Privatizing profits and socializing losses" "Privatizing profits and socializing losses" refers to the idea that corporations want to reserve financial gains for themselves and pass along losses to the rest of society, potentially through lobbying the government for assistance. This practice was criticized in the Wall Street bailout of 2008.[20] By country United States Transfer payments to (persons) as a percent of Federal revenue in the United States Transfer payments to (persons + business) in the United States Background Subsidies considered excessive, unwarranted, wasteful, unfair, inefficient, or bought by lobbying are often called corporate welfare.[21] The label of corporate welfare is often used to decry projects advertised as benefiting the general welfare that spend a disproportionate amount of funds on large corporations, and often in uncompetitive, or anti-competitive ways. For instance, in the United States, agricultural subsidies are usually portrayed as helping independent farmers stay afloat. In actuality, the majority of income gained from commodity support programs has gone to large agribusiness corporations such as Archer Daniels Midland, as they own a considerably larger percentage of production.[22] Alan Peters and Peter Fisher, Associate Professors at the University of Iowa,[23] have estimated that state and local governments provide $40–50 billion annually in economic development incentives,[24] which critics characterize as corporate welfare.[25] Multiple economists have considered the 2008 bank bailouts in the United States to be a form of corporate welfare.[26][27] U.S. politicians have also contended that zero-interest loans from the Federal Reserve System to financial institutions during and after the financial crisis of 2007–2008 were a hidden, backdoor form of corporate welfare.[28] The term gained increased prominence in 2018 when Senator Bernie Sanders introduced a bill, singling out Amazon and Walmart in particular, to require a company with 500 or more employees to pay the full cost of welfare benefits received by its workers.[29][30][31][32] Comprehensive analyses Independent Daniel D. Huff, professor emeritus of social work at Boise State University, published a comprehensive analysis of corporate welfare in 1993.[33] Huff reasoned that a very conservative estimate of corporate welfare expenditures in the United States would have been at least US$170 billion in 1990.[33] Huff compared this number with social welfare: In 1990 the federal government spent 4.7 billion dollars on all forms of international aid. Pollution control programs received 4.8 billion dollars of federal assistance while both secondary and elementary education were allotted only 8.4 billion dollars. More to the point, while more than 170 billion dollars is expended on assorted varieties of corporate welfare the federal government spends 11 billion dollars on Aid for Dependent Children. The most expensive means tested welfare program, Medicaid, costs the federal government 30 billion dollars a year or about half of the amount corporations receive each year through assorted tax breaks. S.S.I., the federal program for the disabled, receives 13 billion dollars while American businesses are given 17 billion in direct federal aid.[33] Huff argued that deliberate obfuscation was a complicating factor.[33] Good Jobs First has a Subsidy Tracker database. United Kingdom In 2015, Kevin Farnsworth, a senior lecturer in Social Policy at the University of York published a paper in which he claimed that the government was providing corporate subsidies of £93 billion.[34][35] This amount includes the role of the government in increasing trade, tax relief for businesses that invest in new plants and machinery (estimated by Farnsworth at £20 billion), not charging fuel duty on fuel used by railways or airlines, green energy subsidies, a lower corporation tax rate for small companies, regional development grants and government procurement for businesses (which Farnsworth suggests often favours British businesses even when these are not the best value option available).[34] However, The Register wrote that Farnsworth's figure for tax relief for investment was incorrect and that he had made mistakes in his calculations, noting that he was not an accountant. It also stated that not charging businesses taxes under certain circumstances (when the reliefs applied) was not the same as giving them a subsidy.[36] Fuel duty is not charged on airlines due to the Convention on International Civil Aviation[37] (a UN agency) which specifies that aeroplanes should be exempt from fuel duties.[38] Political discussion In 2015, Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn said he would "strip out" the £93bn of "corporate tax relief and subsidies" Farnsworth referred to and use the proceeds for public investment.[39] Corbyn did not say which specific policies he would change. The Guardian wrote the policy "sounds wonderful, but careful scrutiny of 'corporate welfare' shows that it includes capital allowances designed to persuade companies to invest, regional aid to boost growth in rundown parts of the UK, and subsidies to keep bus and rail routes open – none of which Corbyn would presumably like to see stopped."[40] Canada The New Democratic Party in Canada picked up the term as a major theme in its 1972 federal election campaign. Its leader, David Lewis, used the term in the title of his 1972 book, Louder Voices: The Corporate Welfare Bums.[41] The Reform Party and its successor the Canadian Alliance were known for opposing most business subsidies, but after their merger with the Progressive Conservative party, they dropped their opposition.[42] India It was observed by The Wire that the effective tax rate was low for the larger corporations which meant companies making smaller profits are competing in an unequal environment against bigger companies with substantial taxation benefits, with the gap in effective tax rates widening over the years.[43] Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi criticised this practice, saying: "Why is it that subsidies going to the well-off are portrayed in a positive manner? Let me give you an example. The total revenue loss from incentives to corporate tax payers was over Rs 62,000 crore... I must confess I am surprised by the way words are used by experts on this matter. When a benefit is given to farmers or to the poor, experts and government officers normally call it a subsidy. However, I find that if a benefit is given to industry or commerce, it is usually an 'incentive' or a 'subvention'."[44] See also Crony capitalism Corporatocracy Fossil fuel subsidies Kleptocracy Political corruption Pork barrel Public choice theory Regulatory capture References Ralph Nader on Corporations, OnTheIssues, retrieved September 3, 2014 Chapman, Roger (2010). Culture Wars: An Encyclopedia of Issues, Viewpoints, and Voices. M.E. Sharpe. pp. 119. ISBN 9780765617613. Harrington 1962, p.170, quote: "socialism for the rich and private enterprise for the poor" Engvall, Robert P. (June 1996). "The connections between poverty discourse and educational reform: When did 'Reform' become synonymous with inattention?". The Urban Review. 28 (2): 141–163. doi:10.1007/BF02354382. S2CID 143156198. Michael Harrington (1962) The Other America, p.58, quote: This is yet another case of "socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor," as described by Charles Abrams in the housing field Stein, Sam (March 18, 2010). "Biden On The Bailout: 'Socialism For The Rich And Capitalism For The Poor'". The Huffington Post. Retrieved April 13, 2018. "Pointing to the hundreds of billions of government dollars that have been spent to keep banks from failing, he recalled a "great expression" of his grandfather, Ambrose Finnegan: "It's socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor,"" Biden said." Dyson, Michael Eric (January 18, 1993). "Opinion | King's Light, Malcolm's Shadow". The New York Times. Jackson, Thomas F. (2007). From Civil Rights to Human Rights: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Struggle for Economic Justice. p. 332. ISBN 9780812239690 – via Google Books. Vidal, Gore (1969). Reflections Upon a Sinking Ship. Little, Brown. ISBN 9780434829576. Gore Vidal: Imperial America, September 1, 2004 "'Free enterprise for the poor, socialism for the rich': Vidal's claim gains leverage". irishtimes.com. September 20, 2008. Archived from the original on October 19, 2012. Retrieved March 10, 2014. Kennedy: U.S. oil companies profit; Citgo helps the poor Archived February 27, 2009, at the Wayback Machine, MetroWest Daily News, January 24, 2007 Mark Jacobson: American Jeremiad, New York Magazine, February 5, 2007, see page 4 Baker, Dean (2006). The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer. Washington, D.C.: Center for Economic and Policy Research. ISBN 978-1-4116-9395-1. Reviewed in: Scott Piatkowski: Socialism for the rich Archived February 4, 2008, at the Wayback Machine, rabble.ca, May 25, 2006 Noam Chomsky, "The Passion for Free Markets", Z Magazine, May 1997. Reproduced on Chomsky's official site Archived September 23, 2015, at the Wayback Machine. Interview with Jon Stewart, The Daily Show, October 16, 2008: Available at The Daily Show Site Full transcript of the John Pilger speech at the Sydney Opera House to mark his award of Australia's human rights prize, the Sydney Peace Prize: "ITV - John Pilger - Breaking the great Australian silence". Archived from the original on October 14, 2010. Retrieved March 10, 2014. "Sen. Sanders Held a Tax Cut Filibuster | C-SPAN". January 18, 2014. Archived from the original on January 18, 2014. Retrieved December 12, 2015. Daniel, Will (August 2, 2022). "This hipster economics professor turned rebel Greek finance minister says corporations are experiencing 'lavish socialism' while workers face 'harsh austerity.' Inflation is just the latest twist in the saga". Fortune. Retrieved August 5, 2022. "Governments were cutting public expenditure, jobs, and services. It was nothing short of lavish socialism for capital and harsh austerity for labor. Wages shrunk, and prices and profits were stagnant, but the price of assets purchased by the rich (and thus their wealth) skyrocketed. Thus…capitalists became both richer and more reliant on central-bank money than ever." Staff, Investopedia (April 15, 2012). "Privatizing Profits And Socializing Losses". investopedia.com. Kristof, Nicholas (March 27, 2014). "A Nation of Takers?". The New York Times. Retrieved March 27, 2014. "USDA: American Farms". United States Department of Agriculture. Archived from the original on February 10, 2007. Fisher, Peter S.; Peters, Alan H. (March–April 1997). Tax and Spending Incentives and Enterprise Zones (PDF). New England Economic Review. Boston: Boston Fed. pp. 109–137. Fisher, Peter; Peters, Alan (March 2004). "The Failures of Economic Development Incentives" (PDF). Journal of the American Planning Association. 70 (1): 27–37. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.661.6308. doi:10.1080/01944360408976336. Retrieved April 13, 2018. Reutter, Mark (July 13, 2011). "Tax breaks for developers – economic development or corporate welfare?". Baltimore Brew. Retrieved November 3, 2019. Stiglitz, Joseph (December 8, 2010). "US could cut deficit and gain, but that's unlikely". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved December 22, 2010. Folbre, Nancy (April 20, 2009). "Welfare for Bankers". The New York Times. Schroeder, Peter (December 1, 2010). "Sanders uses 'jaw-dropping' Fed disclosures to call for further inquiry". The Hill. Retrieved December 15, 2010. Robertson, Adi (September 5, 2018). "Bernie Sanders introduces "Stop BEZOS" bill to tax Amazon for underpaying workers". The Verge. Retrieved September 14, 2018. Gibson, Kate (September 5, 2018). "Bernie Sanders targets Amazon, Walmart with 100% tax". CBS. Retrieved September 14, 2018. Stewart, Emily (September 5, 2018). "Bernie Sanders's BEZOS bill takes aim at how Amazon pays workers". Vox. Retrieved September 14, 2018. Delaney, Arthur; Jamieson, Dave (September 5, 2018). "What the Bernie Sanders Amazon welfare fight is really about". HuffPost. Huff, Daniel D.; David A. Johnson (May 1993). "Phantom Welfare: Public Relief for Corporate America". Social Work. 38 (3): 311–316. doi:10.1093/sw/38.3.311. Archived from the original on May 9, 2013. Retrieved November 6, 2012. "The British Corporate Welfare State: Public Provision for Private Businesses" (PDF). November 7, 2022. "The £93bn handshake: businesses pocket huge subsidies and tax breaks". "Taxpayers are NOT giving businesses £93bn". The Register. "Convention on International Civil Aviation". "Does the government subsidise airlines by £10 billion?". January 24, 2012. Grice, Andrew (August 3, 2015). "Jeremy Corbyn allies accuse Chris Leslie of deliberately misrepresenting Labour frontrunner's economic policies". The Independent. London. Elliott, Larry (August 20, 2015). "Jeremy Corbyn has the vision, but his numbers don't yet add up". The Guardian. Lewis, David (1972). Louder voices: the corporate welfare bums. Toronto: James Lewis & Samuel. ISBN 9780888620316. Milke, Mark (January 14, 2010). A Nation of Serfs: How Canada's Political Culture Corrupts Canadian Values. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 9780470675175. "Why 52,911 Profitable Indian Companies Pay 0% Tax". The Wire. Retrieved March 25, 2018. "Modi calls for targeted subsidies, questions corporate tax breaks". Hindustan Times. January 30, 2016. Retrieved March 25, 2018. Further reading Johnston, David Cay. Free Lunch (The Penguin Group, New York, 2007.) Jansson, Bruce S. The $16 trillion mistake: How the U.S. bungled its national priorities from the New Deal to the present (Columbia University Press, 2001) Mandell, Nikki. The corporation as family : the gendering of corporate welfare, 1890-1930 (University of North Carolina Press, 2002). Glasberg, Davita Silfen. Corporate welfare policy and the welfare state: Bank deregulation and the savings and loan bailout (Aldine de Gruyter, NY, 1997). Whitfield, Dexter. Public services or corporate welfare: Rethinking the nation state in the global economy (Pluto Press, Sterling, Va., 2001.) Folsom Jr, Burton W. The Myth of the Robber Barons (Young America) Rothbard, Murray N. Making Economic Sense, Chapter 51: Making Government-Business Partnerships ISBN 0-945466-18-8 (1995) External links Wikiquote has quotations related to Corporate welfare. Anti-subsidy Congressional testimony Articles & sources from an anti-subsidy perspective Anti-subsidy information from NewRules.org A corporate welfare example from N.Y. A pro-subsidy perspective Interview with Samuel Edward Konkin III - 3 types of capitalists, categorizes State support of businesses as dangerous Categories: Business terms Fiscal policy Political terminology of the United States Politics by issue Ralph Nader Subsidies Welfare

More CIA stories from John Stockwell: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The video titled "THE TERRORISM SYNDROME," recorded in May 1986, features a compelling discussion led by John Stockwell, a former CIA official, diving deep into the complex and controversial phenomenon of terrorism within a broader context. The conversation notably examines the Reagan administration's bombing attack on Libya, offering insights from alternative sources that challenge and cast doubt on the claims made by the Reaganites during that time. Throughout the discussion, there is a keen exploration of the pervasive nature of terrorism, both overt and covert, that is supported by the United States globally. The conversation sheds light on the extensive scope and brutality of US-backed terrorism across various regions, highlighting the significant implications and consequences of such actions. This discourse aims to unravel the complexities surrounding terrorism and its multifaceted manifestations within the geopolitical landscape of the era. The United States Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps carried out air strikes, code-named Operation El Dorado Canyon, against Libya on 15 April 1986 in retaliation for the West Berlin discotheque bombing ten days earlier, which U.S. President Ronald Reagan blamed on Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. There were 40 reported Libyan casualties; one U.S. plane was shot down. One of the claimed Libyan deaths was of a baby girl, reported to be Gaddafi's daughter, Hana Gaddafi.[5] However, there are doubts as to whether she was really killed, or whether she truly existed.[6] Origins President Reagan consults bipartisan Congressional leaders about the strike. Libya represented a high priority for President Ronald Reagan shortly after his 1981 inauguration. Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was firmly anti-Israel and had supported violent organizations in the Palestinian territories and Syria. There were reports that Libya was attempting to become a nuclear power[7][8] and Gaddafi's occupation of Chad, which was rich in uranium, was of major concern to the United States. Gaddafi's ambitions to set up a federation of Arab and Muslim states in North Africa were alarming to U.S. interests. Furthermore, then-U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig wanted to take proactive measures against Gaddafi because he had been using former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives to help set up terrorist camps (most notably Edwin P. Wilson and Frank E. Terpil).[9] After the December 1985 Rome and Vienna airport attacks, which killed 19 and wounded approximately 140, Gaddafi indicated that he would continue to support the Red Army Faction, the Red Brigades, and the Irish Republican Army as long as the European governments supported anti-Gaddafi Libyans.[10] After years of occasional skirmishes with Libya over Libyan territorial claims to the Gulf of Sidra, the United States contemplated a military attack to strike targets within the Libyan mainland. In March 1986, the United States, asserting the 12-nautical-mile (22 km; 14 mi) limit to territorial waters according to international law, sent a carrier task force to the region. Libya responded with aggressive counter-maneuvers on 24 March that led to a naval engagement in the Gulf of Sidra. On 5 April 1986, alleged Libyan agents bombed "La Belle" nightclub in West Berlin, killing three people, including two U.S. servicemen and a Turkish woman,[11][12] and injuring 229 people, including 79 Americans.[13] West Germany and the United States obtained cable transcripts from Libyan agents in East Germany who were involved in the attack. More detailed information was retrieved years later when Stasi archives were investigated by the reunited Germany. Libyan agents who had carried out the operation from the Libyan embassy in East Germany were identified and prosecuted by Germany in the 1990s.[13] Preparations President of the United States Ronald Reagan in a briefing with US National Security Council staff on Operation El Dorado Canyon. The attack mission against Libya had been preceded in October 1985 by an exercise in which the 20th TFW stationed at RAF Upper Heyford airbase in the UK, which was equipped with F-111E Aardvarks, received a top-secret order to launch a simulated attack mission on 18 October, with ten F-111Es armed with eight 500-lb practice bombs, against a simulated airfield located in Labrador, Canada south of CFB Goose Bay. The mission was designated Operation Ghost Rider. The mission was a full rehearsal for a long-range strike against Libya. The mission was completed successfully, with the exception of one aircraft that had all but one of its eight bombs hang up on one of its wing racks. The lessons learned were passed on to the 48th TFW which was equipped with the newer F-111F model.[14] Elements of the then-secret 4450th Tactical Group (USAF) were put on standby to fly the strike mission against Libya. Over 30 F-117 Nighthawk stealth attack aircraft had already been delivered to Tactical Air Command (USAF) and were operating from Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada. European Command senior officers knew nothing about the stealth capabilities of the F-117, or that the aircraft even existed. Within an hour of the planned launch of the F-117s, Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger scrubbed the stealth mission, fearing a compromise of the secret aircraft and its development program. The air strike was carried out with conventional U.S. Navy and USAF aircraft. The F-117 would remain completely unknown to the world for several more months, before being unveiled in 1988 and featured prominently in media coverage of Operation Desert Storm. For the Libyan raid, the United States was denied overflight rights by France, Spain, and Italy as well as the use of European continental bases, forcing the USAF portion of the operation to be flown around France and Spain, over Portugal and through the Straits of Gibraltar, adding 1,300 miles (2,100 km) each way and requiring multiple aerial refuelings.[15][16] The French refusal alone added 2,800 km.[17] French President François Mitterrand refused overflight clearance because the United States was interested in limited action in Libya while France was more interested in major action that would remove Gaddafi from power.[17] Another factor in the French decision was the United States' last-minute failure to participate in a retaliatory air raid on Iranian positions after the 1983 Beirut barracks bombings.[18] Targets Ground crew prepares a 48th Tactical Fighter Wing F-111F aircraft for an air strike on Libya After several unproductive days of meetings with European and Arab nations, and influenced by an American serviceman's death, Ronald Reagan, on 14 April, ordered an air raid on the following Libyan targets:[19] Bab al-Azizia Barracks in Tripoli – Gaddafi's command and control center for overseas operations Murrat Sidi Bilal in Tripoli – a training camp for naval commandos and combat frogmen Mitiga International Airport – used by Ilyushin Il-76 transport aircraft Jamahiriyah Guard barracks in Benghazi – an alternative command and control headquarters for overseas operations, and which contained a warehouse for storage of MiG aircraft components Benina International Airport – used as a base by defending fighters Strike force An F-14A Tomcat launched from the USS America (CV-66) during Operation El Dorado Canyon Among operational United States tactical aircraft, only the General Dynamics F-111 and the A-6 Intruder possessed the ability to attack at night with the required precision. Although the F-111s would be required to fly from distant bases, they were essential to mission success, because the eighteen A-6 available aboard USS Coral Sea (CV-43) and USS America (CV-66) could not carry enough bombs to simultaneously inflict the desired damage on the five targets selected.[19] United States Air Force Twenty-eight McDonnell Douglas KC-10 Extenders and Boeing KC-135 Stratotankers took off from RAF Mildenhall and RAF Fairford shortly after 19:00[note 1] on 14 April. These tankers would conduct four silent refueling operations over the 6,000 mi (9,700 km) round-trip route the F-111s would fly to target. Within minutes the tankers were followed by twenty-four F-111F strike aircraft of the 48th Tactical Fighter Wing, flying from RAF Lakenheath and five EF-111A Ravens of the 20th Tactical Fighter Wing from RAF Upper Heyford. Six F-111s and one EF-111 were designated spares who returned to base after the first refueling was completed without any system failures among the designated strike aircraft.[19] United States Navy America was on station in the Gulf of Sidra, but Coral Sea was preparing to leave the Mediterranean, and made a high speed run from Naples through the Strait of Messina. America's air group would strike targets in downtown Benghazi and provide fighter and suppression support for the USAF bombers, while Coral Sea's planes would strike the Benina airfield outside Benghazi and provide fighter and suppression support for the Navy bombers.[20] About 01:00[note 1] America launched six A-6E TRAM Intruder strike aircraft with Mark 82 bombs against the Jamahiriyah Guard barracks and six A-7 Corsair strike support aircraft. Coral Sea, operating east of America simultaneously launched eight A-6E TRAM Intruders and six F/A-18A Hornets. Additional fighters were launched for combat air patrol (CAP).[19] The raid Ilyushin Il-76 targeted by the bombing The raid began in the early hours of 15 April, with the stated objectives of sending a message and reducing Libya's ability to support and train terrorists. Shortly after the raid Reagan warned "Today, we have done what we had to do. If necessary, we shall do it again."[21] Coordinated jamming by the EF-111s and EA-6B Prowlers began at 01:54 (Libyan time)[note 1] as the A-7Es and F/A-18As began launching AGM-88 HARM and AGM-45 Shrike missiles for suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD).[19] The attack began at 0200 hours (Libyan time),[22] and lasted about twelve minutes, with 60 tons of munitions dropped.[23] The F-111 bombers' rules of engagement required target identification by both radar and Pave Tack prior to bomb release to minimize collateral damage. Of the nine F-111s targeting Bab al-Azizia, only three placed their GBU-10 Paveway II bombs on target.[19] One F-111 was shot down by a Libyan SAM over the Gulf of Sidra[22] and one F-111's bombs missed the barracks,[19] striking diplomatic and civilian sites in Tripoli, and narrowly missing the French embassy.[24] All three F-111s assigned to Sidi Bilal released their GBU-10 bombs on target. One of the six F-111s assigned to bomb the Tripoli airfield aborted its mission with a terrain-following radar malfunction, but the remaining five dropped BSU-49 high drag bombs destroying two Il-76 transport aircraft. America's A-6s damaged the Jamahiriyah MiG assembly warehouse and destroyed four MiG shipping crates. Two A-6s from Coral Sea aborted their mission, but five A-6s with CBU-59 APAM cluster bombs and one with Mk 82 bombs struck Benina airfield destroying three or four MiGs, two Mil Mi-8 helicopters, one Fokker F27 Friendship transport, and one small straight-wing aircraft.[19] A Boeing 727 was also reportedly destroyed during the Benina strike.[25] Some Libyan soldiers, reportedly, abandoned their positions in fright and confusion, and officers were slow to give orders.[26] Libyan anti-aircraft fire did not begin until after the planes had passed over their targets.[23][27][28] No Libyan fighters launched,[20] and HARM launches and jamming prevented any of the 2K12 Kub (SA-6), S-75 Dvina (SA-2), S-125 Neva/Pechora (SA-3), or Crotale SAM[19] launches from homing.[20] One SA-6 however was able to track onto an A-6 from VA-34 during the strike on the Jamahiriyah barracks but was evaded successfully.[25] Within twelve minutes, all United States aircraft were "feet wet" outbound over the Mediterranean. Navy strike aircraft had been recovered aboard their carriers by 02:53 (Libyan time)[note 1] and surviving USAF planes, with the exception of one F-111, which landed in Naval Station Rota, Spain, with an overheated engine, had returned to Britain by 10:10 (Libyan time).[note 1][19] Although the bombing operations were staged out of the UK, Akrotiri was employed in the role of an alternate in case of emergency, and was used as such by at least one aircraft. This led to retaliatory action against the British base. U.S. forces and targets Operation results[29][25] Target Planned Actual Aircraft Bombing Aircraft Hit Miss Bab al-Azizia barracks 9× F-111F 36× GBU-10 2,000 lb (910 kg) LGB 3× bombed 1× missed 4× aborts 1× lost 13 3 Murat Sidi Bilal camp 3× F-111F 12× GBU-10 2,000 lb LGB all bombed 12 – Tripoli airfield (fmr. Wheelus Air Base) 6× F-111F 72× Mk 82 500 lb (230 kg) RDB 5× bombed 1× abort 60 – Jamahiriyah (Benghazi) barracks 7× A-6E TRAM VA-34 84× Mk 82 500 lb RDB 6× bombed 1× abort on deck 70 2 Benina airfield 8× A-6E TRAM VA-55 72× Mk 20 500 lb CBU 24× Mk 82 500 lb RDB 6× bombed 2× aborts 60× Mk 20 12× Mk 82 – Air defense networks Tripoli 6× A-7E 8× Shrike 16× HARM all aircraft fired 8× Shrike 16× HARM Benghazi 24× F/A-18A VFA-131, VFA-132 VMFA-314, VMFA-323 20× HARM all aircraft fired 20× HARM Totals 45 aircraft 300 bombs 48 missiles 35 bombed 1 missed 1 lost 8 aborts 227 hits 5 misses 48 homing missiles Support Aircraft Air defense networks Tripoli 5x EF-111A ALQ-99 1× partial abort[25] – – 1x EA-6B VMAQ-2 ALQ-99 None – – Benghazi 3x EA-6B (2x VAQ-135/1x VMAQ-2) ALQ-99 None – – 3x EA-3B VQ-2 EW/AAR None – – Early Warning – 2x E-2C VAW-123 None – – 2x E-2C VAW-127 None – – Libyan air defenses The Libyan air defense network was extensive, and included: 4 Long range S-200 Vega (SA-5 Gammon) anti-aircraft missile units with 24 launchers. 86 S-75 Volkhov (SA-2 Guideline) and S-125 Neva (SA-3 Goa) anti-aircraft missile units with 276 launchers. Covering Tripoli alone were: 7 S-75 Volkhov (SA-2 Guideline) anti-aircraft missile units with 6 missiles launchers per unit giving 42 launchers. 12 S-125 Neva (SA-3 Goa) anti-aircraft missile units with 4 missiles launchers per unit giving 48 launchers. 3 2K12 Kub (SA-6 Gainful) anti-aircraft missile units with 48 launchers. 1 9K33M2 Osa-AK (SA-8 Geko) anti-aircraft regiment with 16 launch vehicles. 2 Crotale II anti-aircraft units with 60 launch pads. Casualties Libyan Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and his family rushed out of their residence in the Bab al-Azizia compound moments before the bombs dropped, forewarned by a telephone call from Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, Malta's Prime Minister. Bonnici had been made aware of the presence of the American strike force by Prime Minister Bettino Craxi of Italy; the latter nation had detected the then-unidentified aircraft off the West coast of Sicily and scrambled a flight of F-104 Starfighters to intercept it, discovering the strike force's presence and being warned away by pilots with obvious American accents.[30] According to medical staff in a nearby hospital, two dozen casualties were brought in wearing military uniforms, and two without uniforms. Total Libyan casualties were estimated at 60, including those at the bombed airbases. An infant girl was among the casualties; her body was shown to American reporters, who were told she was Gaddafi's recently adopted daughter Hana. However, there was and remains much skepticism over the claim.[31][32] She may not have died; the adoption may have been posthumous; or he may have adopted a second daughter and given her the same name after the first one died.[33][34][35][36] American Two U.S. Air Force captains—Fernando L. Ribas-Dominicci and Paul F. Lorence—were killed when their F-111 fighter-bomber (callsign Karma-52) was shot down[37][38] over the Gulf of Sidra. In the hours following the attack, the U.S. military refused to speculate as to whether or not the fighter-bomber had been shot down, with Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger suggesting that it could have experienced radio trouble or been diverted to another airfield.[39] The next day, the Pentagon had announced it was no longer searching for the F-111 believed to be downed by a Libyan missile.[40] On 25 December 1988, Gaddafi offered to release the body of Lorence to his family through Pope John Paul II. The body, returned in 1989, was identified as Ribas-Dominicci's from dental records. An autopsy conducted in Spain confirmed that he had drowned after his plane was shot down over the Gulf of Sidra. Libya denies that it held Lorence's body. However, Lorence's brother said that he and his mother saw television footage of a Libyan holding a white helmet with the name "Lorence" stenciled on the back.[41] Furthermore, William C. Chasey, who toured the Bab al-Azizia barracks, claimed to have seen two flight suits and helmets engraved with the names "Lorence" and "Ribas-Dominicci", as well as the wreckage of their F-111.[42] Gaddafi declared that the raid was a Libyan victory and stated that three American planes had been shot down, but Karma-52 was the only one that failed to return to base.[2] Aftermath In Libya Gaddafi's announcements Gaddafi announced that he had "won a spectacular military victory over the United States" and the country was officially renamed the "Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriyah".[43] Gaddafi said reconciliation between Libya and the United States was impossible so long as Reagan was in the White House; of the president he said, "He is mad. He is foolish. He is an Israeli dog." He said he had no plans to attack the United States or U.S. targets. He claimed that Reagan wanted to kill him, stating "Was Reagan trying to kill me? Of course. The attack was concentrated on my house and I was in my house", he also described how he rescued his family.[44] When asked that if he is in danger of losing power, he told "Really, these reports and writings are not true. As you can see I am fine, and there has been no change in our country."[44] Other events The Government of Libya said that the United States had fallen prey to arrogance and madness of power and wanted to become the world's policeman. It charged that any party that did not agree to become an American vassal was an outlaw, a terrorist, and a devil.[45] Gaddafi quashed an internal revolt, the organization of which he blamed on the United States, although Gaddafi appeared to have left the public sphere for a time in 1986 and 1987.[citation needed] The Libyan Post dedicated several postage stamps issues to the event, from 1986 until 2001. The first issue was released in 1986, 13 July (ref. Scott catalogue n.1311 – Michel catalogue n.1699). The last issue was released in 2001, 15 April (ref. Scott catalogue n.1653 – Michel catalogue n.2748–2763).[46] Libyan retaliation Immediate Libya responded by firing two Scud missiles at a United States Coast Guard station on the Italian island of Lampedusa which fell short of the island and landed in the sea.[47][48] Later Libyan-connected terrorism There was only limited change in Libyan-connected terrorism.[43] The Libyan government was alleged to have ordered the hijacking of Pan Am Flight 73 in Pakistan on 5 September 1986, which resulted in the deaths of 20 people. The allegation did not come to light until it was reported by The Sunday Times in March 2004—days after British Prime Minister Tony Blair paid the first official visit to Tripoli by a Western leader in a generation.[49] In October 1986, Gaddafi financed Jeff Fort's Al-Rukn faction of the Chicago Black P. Stones gang, in their emergence as an indigenous anti-American armed revolutionary movement.[50] Al-Rukn members were arrested for preparing strikes on behalf of Libya, including blowing up US government buildings and bringing down an airplane; the Al-Rukn defendants were convicted in 1987 of "offering to commit bombings and assassinations on US soil for Libyan payment."[50] In May 1987, Australia expelled diplomats and broke off relations with Libya, claiming Libya sought to fuel violence in Australia and Oceania.[51][52] In late 1987 French authorities stopped a merchant vessel, the MV Eksund, which was attempting to deliver 150 tons of Soviet arms from Libya to the Irish Republican Army (IRA),[53][54] partly in retaliation against the British for harboring American fighter planes.[55] In Beirut, Lebanon, two British hostages held by the Libyan-supported Abu Nidal Organization, Leigh Douglas and Philip Padfield, along with an American named Peter Kilburn, were shot dead in revenge. In addition, journalist John McCarthy was kidnapped, and tourist Paul Appleby was murdered in Jerusalem. Another British hostage named Alec Collett was also killed in retaliation for the bombing of Libya. Collett was shown being hanged in a video tape. His body was found in November 2009.[56] On 21 December 1988 Libya bombed Pan Am Flight 103, which exploded in mid-air and crashed on the town of Lockerbie in Scotland after a bomb detonated, killing all 259 people aboard, and 11 people in Lockerbie. Iran was initially thought to have been responsible for the bombing in revenge for the downing of Iran Air flight 655 by the American missile cruiser USS Vincennes over the Persian Gulf, but in 1991 two Libyans were charged, one of whom was convicted of the crime in a controversial judgement[57] on 31 January 2001. The Libyan Government accepted responsibility for the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing on 29 May 2002, and offered $2.7 billion to compensate the families of the 270 victims.[58] The convicted Libyan, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who was suffering from terminal prostate cancer, was released in August 2009 by the Scottish Government on compassionate grounds. He died in 2012. In May 2014 a group of relatives of the Lockerbie victims continued to campaign for al-Megrahi's name to be cleared by reopening the case.[59] International response Immediate This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "1986 United States bombing of Libya" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (April 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) The attack was condemned by many countries. By a vote of 79 in favor to 28 against with 33 abstentions, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 41/38, which "condemns the military attack perpetrated against the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya on 15 April 1986, which constitutes a violation of the Charter of the United Nations and of international law."[60] A meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement said that it condemned the "dastardly, blatant and unprovoked act of aggression". The League of Arab States expressed that it was outraged at the United States aggression and that it reinforced an element of anarchy in international relations. The Assembly of Heads of State of the African Union said that the deliberate attempt to kill Libyans violated the principles of international law. The Government of Iran asserted that the attack constituted a policy of aggression, gunboat diplomacy, an act of war, and called for an extensive political and economic boycott of the United States. Others saw the United States motive as an attempt to eliminate Libya's revolution.[45] China stated that the U.S. attack violated norms of international relations and had aggravated tension in the region. The Soviet Union said that there was a clear link between the attack and U.S. policy aimed at stirring up existing hotbeds of tension and creating new ones, and at destabilizing the international situation. West Germany stated that international disputes required diplomatic and not military solutions, and France also criticized the bombing.[citation needed] Some observers held the opinion that Article 51 of the UN Charter set limitations on the use of force in exercising the legitimate right of self-defense in the absence of an act of aggression, and affirmed that there was no such act by Libya. It was charged that the United States did not exhaust the Charter provisions for settling disputes under Article 33. The Wall Street Journal protested that if other nations applied Article 51 as cavalierly as the United States, then "the Nicaraguan government, very reasonably predicting that the U.S. is planning an attack on its territory, has the right to bomb Washington." British Shadow Foreign Secretary Denis Healey told ABC News that, "by this same rationale of defense against future attack, Britain could bomb apartment blocks in New York and Chicago on the ground that they contained people sending money and military supplies to the Irish Republican Army."[61] Others asserted that Libya was innocent in the bombing of the West Berlin discotheque.[62] The U.S. received support from the UK, Canada, Australia, Israel, and 25 other countries. Its doctrine of declaring a war on what it called "terrorist havens" was not repeated until 1998, when President Bill Clinton ordered strikes on six terrorist camps in Afghanistan. Margaret Thatcher's approval of the use of Royal Air Force bases[63] led to substantial public criticism, including an unprecedented story in The Sunday Times suggesting the Queen was upset by an "uncaring" Prime Minister. However, the Americans strongly endorsed Thatcher, and the long-standing Special Relationship between the United States and Britain was strengthened.[64][65] Although the Soviet Union was ostensibly friendly with Libya, it had, by the time of the Libya bombing, made its increasing ambivalence toward Libya apparent in public communications. Gaddafi had a history of verbally attacking the policy agendas and ideology of the Soviet Union, and he often engaged in various international interventions and meddling that conflicted with Soviet goals in a variety of spheres. During a period where the Soviet Union was apparently attempting to lead a subtle diplomatic effort that could impact its global status, close association with the whims of Gaddafi became a liability. In the entire crisis, the Soviet Union explicitly announced that it would not provide additional help to Libya beyond resupplying basic armaments and munitions. It made no attempt to militarily intimidate the United States, despite the ongoing American operations in the Gulf of Sidra and its previous knowledge that the United States might launch an attack. The Soviet Union did not completely ignore the event, issuing a denunciation of this 'wild' and 'barbaric' act by the United States. After the raid, Moscow did cancel a planned visit to the United States by foreign affairs minister Eduard Shevardnadze. At the same time, it clearly signaled that it did not want this action to affect negotiations about the upcoming summer summit between the United States and the Soviet Union and its plans for new arms control agreements. Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, acting for Libyan citizens who had been killed or injured in the bombing raid by the U.S. using British air bases, brought suit under international law against the United States and the United Kingdom in U.S. federal court. The lawsuit was dismissed as frivolous. A subsequent appeal was denied, and monetary sanctions against Clark were allowed. Saltany v. Reagan, 886 F. 2d 438 (D.C. Cir. 1989). UN response Every year, between at least 1994 and 2006, the United Nations General Assembly scheduled a declaration from the Organization of African Unity about the incident,[66] but systematically deferred the discussion year after year until formally putting it aside (along with several other issues which had been similarly rescheduled for years) in 2005.[67] First anniversary On the first anniversary of the bombing, April 1987, European and North American left-wing activists gathered to commemorate the anniversary. After a day of social and cultural networking with local Libyans, including a tour of Gaddafi's bombed house, the group gathered with other Libyans for a commemoration event.[68] 2009 comment In June 2009, during a visit to Italy, Gaddafi criticized American foreign policy and, asked as to the difference between al-Qaeda attacks and the 1986 U.S. bombing of Tripoli, he commented: "If al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden has no state and is an outlaw, America is a state with international rules."[69] Settlement of claims On 28 May 2008, the United States began negotiations with Libya on a comprehensive claims settlement agreement to resolve outstanding claims of American and Libyan nationals against each country in their respective courts. Gaddafi's son Saif al-Islam publicly announced that an agreement was being negotiated in July of that year.[70] On 14 August 2008, the resulting U.S.-Libya Comprehensive Claims Settlement Agreement was signed in Tripoli by Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Welch and by Libyan Secretary for American Affairs Ahmad Fituri.[71] In October 2008, Libya paid US$1.5 billion (in three installments of $300 million on 9 October 2008, $600 million on 30 October 2008, and US$600 million 31 October 2008) into a fund[72] used to compensate the following victims and their relatives: Lockerbie bombing victims, who were given an additional US$2 million each after having been paid US$8 million earlier;[72] American victims of the 1986 West Berlin discotheque bombing;[72] American victims of the 1989 UTA Flight 772 bombing;[72] and, Libyan victims of the 1986 U.S. bombing of Tripoli and Benghazi.[72] To pay the settlement, Libya demanded US$1.5 billion from global oil companies operating in Libya's oil fields, under threat of "serious consequences" to their leases. Libya's settlement was at least partially funded by several companies, including some based in the U.S., that chose to cooperate with Libya's demand.[73] On 4 August 2008, President George W. Bush signed into law the Libyan Claims Resolution Act,[74] which had unanimously passed Congress on 31 July. The Act provided for the restoration of Libya's sovereign, diplomatic, and official immunities before U.S. courts if the Secretary of State certified that the United States Government has received sufficient funds to resolve outstanding terrorism-related death and physical injury claims against Libya. On 14 August 2008, the United States and Libya signed a comprehensive claims settlement agreement.[75] Full diplomatic relations were restored between the two nations. In songs and books In 1986, hardcore punk band The Meatmen referred to the lack of French cooperation with the raid in their song 'French People Suck': "French people suck, I just gotta' say/made the jet fighter pilots fly out of their way." This song appears on the album Rock & Roll Juggernaut (Caroline Records). In 1987, Neil Young wrote "Mideast Vacation" a song from his live album, Life about the bombing. On Roger Waters's third studio album, Amused to Death the songs "Late Home Tonight, Part I" and "Late Home Tonight, Part II" recall the bombing from the perspective of two "ordinary wives' and a young American F-111 pilot. In Nelson DeMille's book The Lion's Game, published in 2000, there is a detailed but fictionalised description of the attack from the point of view of one of the book's main protagonists. See also flagUnited States portalflagLibya portaliconPolitics portalicon1980s portal Foreign policy of the Ronald Reagan administration#Libya 2011 military intervention in Libya Gulf of Sidra incident (1981), US–Libyan air engagement over territorial claim, two Libyan jets shot down Ouadi Doum air raid (February 1986) Action in the Gulf of Sidra (1986), Naval battle between Libyan and U.S. forces before the April bombing campaign Gulf of Sidra incident (1989), U.S.-Libyan air engagement over territorial claim, two Libyan jets shot down Pan Am Flight 103 (1988) Operation Odyssey Dawn (2011) List of modern conflicts in North Africa Explanatory notes Parks specifies times of events with the time in Washington DC where the attack was coordinated. Parks's times have been adjusted to reflect the time observed where the battle took place. Citations Martel, William C. Victory in War: Foundations of Modern Military Policy, p. 162. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Leone, Dario (14 April 2019). "The sad story of 'Karma 52', the only F-111 lost during Operation El Dorado Canyon". The Aviation Geek Club. Leone, Dario (21 September 2019). "The Libyan Scud Attack on Lampedusa and the Italian Retaliation against Gaddafi that never was". The Aviation Geek Club. Pollack, Kenneth M. Arabs at War: Military Effectiveness 1948–1991, University of Nebraska Press, 2002 Hilsum, Lindsey (2012). Sandstorm: Libya in the Time of Revolution. London: Faber and Faber. ISBN 978-0571288052. Walker, Peter (26 August 2011). "Gaddafi's daughter Hana: dead or a practising doctor?". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 7 June 2016. "Libya Has Trouble Building the Most Deadly Weapons". The Risk Report. 1 (10). December 1995. Archived from the original on 20 April 2013. "1968 to 1990: Program Beginnings". NTI. Hersh, Seymour M. (22 February 1987). "TARGET QADDAFI". The New York Times. St. John, Ronald Bruce (1 December 1992). "Libyan terrorism: the case against Gaddafi". Contemporary Review. [1] Bailey, Thomas; Kennedy, David; Cohen, Lizabeth (1998). The American Pageant (Eleventh ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. p. 1000. ISBN 0-669-39728-8. Flashback: The Berlin disco bombing. BBC on 13 November 2001. Thompson, Warren (May 2010). "To the Bay and Back". Air Forces Monthly. Key Publishing. Overseas Basing of U.S. Military Forces: An Assessment of Relative Costs and Strategic Benefits. RAND Corporation. 15 April 2013. p. 103. ISBN 978-0833079176. Boyne, Walter. "El Dorado Canyon". Airforce-Magazine.com. Air Force Association. Archived from the original on 25 July 2009. Retrieved 28 July 2011. Bernstein, Richard (23 April 1986). "FRENCH SAY THEY FAVORED STRONGER ATTACK ON LIBYA". The New York Times. Retrieved 16 June 2015. Crist, David (19 July 2012). The Twilight War: The Secret History of America's Thirty-Year Conflict with Iran. Penguin. ISBN 978-0143123675. Parks, W. Hays (1986). "Crossing the Line". Proceedings. United States Naval Institute. 112 (11): 40–52. Stumpf, Robert E. (1986). "Air War with Libya". Proceedings. United States Naval Institute. 112 (8): 42–48. "1986 Year in Review: Strike on Qaddafi". UPI. Retrieved 28 October 2014. Jr, James E. Wise; Baron, Scott (14 April 2016). At the Helm of USS America: The Aircraft Carrier and Its 23 Commanders, 1965-1996. McFarland. pp. 143–144. ISBN 978-1-4766-1568-4. Samuels, Richard J. (2006). Encyclopedia of United States National Security. SAGE. p. 431. ISBN 978-0-7619-2927-7. Endicott, Judy G. (23 August 2012). Raid on Libya: Operation ELDORADO CANYON (PDF) (Report). U.S. Department of Defense. p. 153. Retrieved 17 September 2023. Cooper, Tom; Grandolini, Albert; Delalande, Arnaud (2016). Libyan Air Wars - Part 3 : 1986-1989. Helion & Company Limited. Metz, Helen Chapin; Library of Congress, Federal Research Division (1989). Libya : a country study. Washington, D.C.: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. p. 255. Retrieved 18 September 2023. Weinraub, Bernard (15 April 1986). "U.S. Jets Hit 'Terrorist Centers' in Libya; Reagan Warns of New Attacks If Needed". The New York Times. "Libya – Encounters with the United States". Country-data.com. Retrieved 7 June 2016. AIRPOWER VERSUS TERRORISM: THREE CASE STUDIES Archived 10 November 2006 at the Wayback Machine, Thesis, June 2003, p.20 Dario Leone (1 September 2019). "Italy's Prime Minister saved Gaddafi's Life by Warning of Operation El Dorado Canyon". Retrieved 5 March 2023. Kincaid, Cliff (22 February 2011). "NBC's Mitchell Regurgitates Gaddafi Lies". Accuracy in Media. Archived from the original on 12 August 2019. Retrieved 7 June 2016. Müller, Patrick (8 June 2011). "Gaddafis Kinder—Totgesagte leben länger" [Gaddafi's children—Declared dead]. Die Welt. Retrieved 7 June 2015. "Hana Gaddafi soll 1986 beim Angriff amerikanischer Bomber umgekommen sein. Tatsächlich wurde ihr Tod offenbar nur vorgetäuscht. Eine Spurensuche." "[Hana Gaddafi [was said to have been] killed in 1986, during the attack of American bombers. In fact, her death was obviously faked. A search for clues.]" English language translation of same article: "Hana Gaddafi, Libyan Leader's Presumed Dead Daughter, May Be Still Alive". The Huffington Post. 9 August 2011. Retrieved 7 June 2016. Walker, Peter (26 August 2011). "Gaddafi's daughter Hana: dead or a practising doctor?". The Guardian. Retrieved 7 June 2016. "[Subtitle:] "Some accounts say Hana Gaddafi died in a 1986 raid, others that she lived to become a doctor or never existed at all."" Shadid, Anthony (28 August 2011). "Enigmatic in Power, Qaddafi Is Elusive at Large". The New York Times. Retrieved 7 June 2016. Kirkup, James & Watt, Holly (12 August 2011). "Dental records for Hana Gaddafi reopen mystery of Libyan leader's daughter". The Telegraph. Retrieved 7 June 2016. "Files stored in a basement room in one of London's most expensive districts could shed new light on one of the greatest mysteries of Muammar Gaddafi's Libya: the alleged death of his baby daughter Hana." Telegraph Staff (12 August 2011). "Exclusive: Gaddafi's 'dead' daughter Hana alive and well in family video [Ali, Mohammed, videographer]". The Telegraph. Archived from the original (video, with text description) on 23 September 2011. Retrieved 7 June 2016. "The Telegraph has obtained the first video evidence that Hana, the adopted daughter that Col Gaddafi claimed had been killed in an American bombing raid in 1986, was alive years after the attack." The sad note is we have to assume the 2 missing men are dead. Evidence indicates their plane was shot down just off shore after dropping its bombs. Reagan Diaries Volume 2: November 1985 – January 1989, Ronald Reagan, Douglas Brinkley, p. 590, HarperCollins, 2010 Libya soon recovered the body of Captain Ribas-Dominicci but did not return it to the United States until 1989. An autopsy determined the cause of death to be drowning, not massive physical trauma ... the autopsy finding and the eyewitness accounts of several aviators who saw the explosion and the descent of the fireball to the sea support the conclusion that Karma-52 was shot down by a SAM or AAA. El Dorado Canyon, Joseph T. Stanik, p. 190, Naval Institute Press, 2003 "One plane missing after raid". The Evening Independent. 15 April 1986. Retrieved 28 October 2014. Walker, Tony (17 April 1986). "Air Raid Toll Comes Home to Gaddafi". The Age. Melbourne. Kay, Jennifer (29 April 2006). "Lost Over Libya". Associated Press. Archived from the original on 28 June 2009. Chasey, William C. – Pan Am 103: The Lockerbie Cover-Up (Chapter 18) Davis, Brian L. (1990). Qaddafi, terrorism, and the origins of the U.S. attack on Libya. New York: Praeger Publishers. p. 183. ISBN 0-275-93302-4. "Gadhafi: Reagan Tried To Kill Me". Sun Sentinel. Archived from the original on 28 October 2014. Retrieved 28 October 2014. "UN Chronicle, August 1986". Findarticles.com. Archived from the original on 11 July 2012. Retrieved 28 October 2014. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 28 June 2009. Retrieved 3 May 2009. Jr, E. J. Dionne (27 May 1986). "Italian isle, site of U.S. base, is fearful of Qaddafi's anger". The New York Times. Retrieved 17 September 2023. House, Jonathan M. (24 September 2020). A Military History of the Cold War, 1962–1991. University of Oklahoma Press. p. 344. ISBN 978-0-8061-6778-7. Swain, Jon (28 March 2004). "Revealed: Gaddafi's air massacre plot". The Times. London. Retrieved 26 April 2010. Bodansky, Yossef (1993). Target America & the West: Terrorism Today. New York: S.P.I. Books. pp. 301–303. ISBN 978-1-56171-269-4. The Middle East and North Africa 2003 (2002). Eur. p. 758 "A Rogue Returns". AIJAC. February 2003. Archived from the original on 1 March 2003. p. 441, The dirty war: covert strategies and tactics used in political conflicts. Dillon, Martin news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/8241393.stm Kelsey, Tim; Koenig, Peter (20 July 1994). "Libya will not arm IRA again, Gaddafi aide says". The Independent. London. Archived from the original on 25 March 2011. Retrieved 1 September 2011. "Body of Lost British Reporter Found in Lebanon". English.cri.cn. Archived from the original on 22 July 2012. Retrieved 7 June 2016. "UN monitor decries Lockerbie judgement". BBC. 14 March 2002. "Security Council lifts sanctions imposed on Libya after terrorist bombings of Pan Am Flight 103 and UTA Flight 772". "BBC News – Lockerbie bombing: Megrahi conviction review sought by families". BBC Online. 6 May 2014. Retrieved 10 May 2014. A/RES/41/38. United Nations. Cockburn, Alexander (17 April 1986). "Bombing Libya". The Wall Street Journal. United Nations Yearbook, 1986, Volume 40, Department of Public Information, United Nations, New York Morgan, Samuel T. (2023). "Using Process Tracing to Investigate Elite Experience Accrual: Explaining Margaret Thatcher's Support for US Air Strikes Against Libya". Political Research Quarterly. doi:10.1177/10659129231182404. ISSN 1065-9129. John Campbell (2011). The Iron Lady: Margaret Thatcher, from Grocer's Daughter to Prime Minister. Penguin Publishing Group. pp. 279–82. ISBN 978-1-101-55866-9. Charles Moore, Margaret Thatcher: At Her Zenith: In London, Washington and Moscow (2016) pp 513-18 "General Assembly Session 49 meeting 93". 20 December 1994. Archived from the original on 26 September 2007. "General Assembly Session 59 meeting 117". 12 September 2005. Archived from the original on 26 September 2007. US-Libya Relations / Bombing Anniversary Vanderbilt Television News Archive. "Students protest at Gaddafi visit". BBC News. 11 June 2009. Retrieved 2 January 2010. "Libya, Italy to sign compensation deal: Gaddafi son". Reuters. 24 July 2008. Archived from the original on 16 July 2011. Retrieved 25 February 2011. "Libya, US Sign Compensation Agreement". The Tripoli Post. 17 August 2008. Archived from the original on 17 July 2011. Retrieved 25 February 2011. "Libya compensates terror victims". BBC News. 31 October 2008. Retrieved 25 February 2011. Lichtblau, Eric; Rohde, David; Risen, James (24 March 2011). "Shady Dealings Helped Qaddafi Build Fortune and Regime". The New York Times. Retrieved 29 March 2011. Libyan Claims Resolution Act Archived 2 October 2014 at the Wayback Machine. The Library of Congress. U.S. Department of State, Significant Events in U.S.-Libyan Relations . 2 September 2008 Further reading Cogan, Charles G. "The response of the strong to the weak: The American raid on Libya, 1986". Intelligence and National Security 6#3 (1991): 608–620. Cohen, David B., and Chris J. Dolan. "Revisiting El Dorado Canyon: terrorism, the Reagan administration, and the 1986 bombing of Libya." White House Studies 5#2 (2005): 153–175. Fisher, Louis. "The law: military operations in Libya: no war? No hostilities?." Presidential Studies Quarterly 42.1 (2012): 176–189. online Laham, Nicholas. The American bombing of Libya: A study of the force of miscalculation in Reagan foreign policy (McFarland, 2007). Riegert, Kristina (2007). Politicotainment: Television's Take on the Real. Peter Lang. pp. 257–259. ISBN 9780820481142. Stanik, Joseph T. "America's First Strike Against Terrorism" Naval History 25#1 (2011): 24+ Stanik, Joseph T. (2003). El Dorado Canyon: Reagan's Undeclared War With Qaddafi. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press. ISBN 1-55750-983-2. Ulfstein, Geir, and Hege Føsund Christiansen. "The legality of the NATO bombing in Libya." International & Comparative Law Quarterly 62.1 (2013): 159–171. online Venkus, Robert E. (1992). Raid on Qaddafi. New York: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 0-312-07073-X. Winkler, Carol. "Parallels in preemptive war rhetoric: Reagan on Libya; Bush 43 on Iraq." Rhetoric & Public Affairs 10.2 (2007): 303–334. online Zilian, Frederick, Jr. "The US Raid on Libya – and NATO", Orbis (Autumn 1986), pp. 499–519 Zimmermann, Tim. "The American bombing of Libya: A success for coercive diplomacy?." Survival 29#3 (1987): 195–214.

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ In the culminating installment of the series, viewers are not only presented with a comprehensive overview but also offered actionable steps towards ending the scourge of war. Serving as a beacon for proactive engagement, this episode illuminates the endeavors of the Beyond War organization, showcasing its grassroots initiatives aimed at individual and community empowerment. Through education and organization, Beyond War is shown to be forging unconventional communication channels with global citizens and leaders, circumventing traditional governmental power structures. The program features poignant insights from influential figures such as Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur, Olaf Palme, and Ramsey Clark, whose words and archival footage underscore the urgency and necessity of collective action. As the series draws to a close, viewers are encouraged to heed the call to action, contributing to the ongoing struggle for peace and solidarity on a global scale. Dwight David Eisenhower (/ˈaɪzənhaʊ.ər/ EYE-zən-how-ər; born David Dwight Eisenhower; October 14, 1890 – March 28, 1969), nicknamed Ike, was an American military officer and statesman who served as the 34th president of the United States from 1953 to 1961. During World War II, he was Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Europe and achieved the five-star rank as General of the Army. Eisenhower planned and supervised two of the most consequential military campaigns of World War II: Operation Torch in the North Africa campaign in 1942–1943 and the invasion of Normandy in 1944. Eisenhower was born in Denison, Texas, and raised in Abilene, Kansas. His family had a strong religious background, and his mother became a Jehovah's Witness. Eisenhower, however, belonged to no organized church until 1952. He graduated from West Point in 1915 and later married Mamie Doud, with whom he had two sons. During World War I, he was denied a request to serve in Europe and instead commanded a unit that trained tank crews. Following the war, he was promoted to the rank of brigadier general. In 1941, after the United States entered World War II, Eisenhower oversaw the invasions of North Africa and Sicily before supervising the invasions of France and Germany. After the war ended in Europe, he served as military governor of the American-occupied zone of Germany (1945), Army Chief of Staff (1945–1948), president of Columbia University (1948–1953), and as the first supreme commander of NATO (1951–1952). In 1952, Eisenhower entered the presidential race as a Republican to block the isolationist foreign policies of Senator Robert A. Taft, who opposed NATO. Eisenhower won that year's election and the 1956 election in landslides, both times defeating Adlai Stevenson II. Eisenhower's main goals in office were to contain the spread of communism and reduce federal deficits. In 1953, he considered using nuclear weapons to end the Korean War and may have threatened China with nuclear attack if an armistice was not reached quickly. China did agree and an armistice resulted, which remains in effect. His New Look policy of nuclear deterrence prioritized "inexpensive" nuclear weapons while reducing funding for expensive Army divisions. He continued Harry S. Truman's policy of recognizing Taiwan as the legitimate government of China, and he won congressional approval of the Formosa Resolution. His administration provided major aid to help the French fight off Vietnamese Communists in the First Indochina War. After the French left, he gave strong financial support to the new state of South Vietnam. He supported regime-changing military coups in Iran and Guatemala orchestrated by his own administration. During the Suez Crisis of 1956, he condemned the Israeli, British, and French invasion of Egypt, and he forced them to withdraw. He also condemned the Soviet invasion during the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 but took no action. He deployed 15,000 soldiers during the 1958 Lebanon crisis. Near the end of his term, a summit meeting with the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev was cancelled when a US spy plane was shot down over the Soviet Union. Eisenhower approved the Bay of Pigs Invasion, which was left to John F. Kennedy to carry out. On the domestic front, Eisenhower governed as a moderate conservative who continued New Deal agencies and expanded Social Security. He covertly opposed Joseph McCarthy and contributed to the end of McCarthyism by openly invoking executive privilege. He signed the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent Army troops to enforce federal court orders which integrated schools in Little Rock, Arkansas. His administration undertook the development and construction of the Interstate Highway System, which remains the largest construction of roadways in American history. In 1957, following the Soviet launch of Sputnik, Eisenhower led the American response which included the creation of NASA and the establishment of a stronger, science-based education via the National Defense Education Act. The Soviet Union began to reinforce their own space program, escalating the Space Race. His two terms saw unprecedented economic prosperity except for a minor recession in 1958. In his farewell address, he expressed his concerns about the dangers of massive military spending, particularly deficit spending and government contracts to private military manufacturers, which he dubbed "the military–industrial complex". Historical evaluations of his presidency place him among the upper tier of American presidents. Family background Further information: Family of Dwight D. Eisenhower The Eisenhauer (German for "iron hewer" or "iron miner") family migrated from the German village of Karlsbrunn to the Province of Pennsylvania in 1741.[3] Accounts vary as to how and when the German name Eisenhauer was anglicized.[4] David Jacob Eisenhower, Eisenhower's father, was a college-educated engineer, despite his own father's urging to stay on the family farm. Eisenhower's mother, Ida Elizabeth (Stover) Eisenhower, of predominantly German Protestant ancestry, moved to Kansas from Virginia. She married David on September 23, 1885, in Lecompton, Kansas, on the campus of their alma mater, Lane University.[5] David owned a general store in Hope, Kansas, but the business failed due to economic conditions and the family became impoverished. The Eisenhowers lived in Texas from 1889 until 1892, and later returned to Kansas, with $24 (equivalent to $814 in 2023) to their name. David worked as a railroad mechanic and then at a creamery.[5] By 1898, the parents made a decent living and provided a suitable home for their large family.[6] Early life and education The Eisenhower family home in Abilene, Kansas Eisenhower was born David Dwight Eisenhower in Denison, Texas, on October 14, 1890, the third of seven sons born to Ida and David.[7] His mother soon reversed his two forenames after his birth to avoid the confusion of having two Davids in the family.[8] He was named Dwight after the evangelist Dwight L. Moody.[9] All of the boys were nicknamed "Ike", such as "Big Ike" (Edgar) and "Little Ike" (Dwight); the nickname was intended as an abbreviation of their last name.[10] By World War II, only Dwight was still called "Ike".[3] In 1892, the family moved to Abilene, Kansas, which Eisenhower considered his hometown.[3] As a child, he was involved in an accident that cost his younger brother Earl an eye, for which he was remorseful for the remainder of his life.[11] Eisenhower developed a keen and enduring interest in exploring the outdoors. He learned about hunting and fishing, cooking, and card playing from a man named Bob Davis who camped on the Smoky Hill River.[12][13][14] While his mother was against war, it was her collection of history books that first sparked Eisenhower's interest in military history; he became a voracious reader on the subject. Other favorite subjects early in his education were arithmetic and spelling.[15] Eisenhower's parents set aside specific times at breakfast and at dinner for daily family Bible reading. Chores were regularly assigned and rotated among all the children, and misbehavior was met with unequivocal discipline, usually from David.[16] His mother, previously a member (with David) of the River Brethren (Brethren in Christ Church) sect of the Mennonites,[17] joined the International Bible Students Association, later known as Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower home served as the local meeting hall from 1896 to 1915, though Dwight never joined.[18] His later decision to attend West Point saddened his mother, who felt that warfare was "rather wicked", but she did not overrule his decision.[19] Speaking of himself in 1948, Eisenhower said he was "one of the most deeply religious men I know" though unattached to any "sect or organization". He was baptized in the Presbyterian Church in 1953.[17] Eisenhower attended Abilene High School and graduated in 1909.[20] As a freshman, he injured his knee and developed a leg infection that extended into his groin, which his doctor diagnosed as life-threatening. The doctor insisted that the leg be amputated but Dwight refused to allow it, and surprisingly recovered, though he had to repeat his freshman year.[21] He and brother Edgar both wanted to attend college, though they lacked the funds. They made a pact to take alternate years at college while the other worked to earn the tuitions.[22] Edgar took the first turn at school, and Dwight was employed as a night supervisor at the Belle Springs Creamery.[23] When Edgar asked for a second year, Dwight consented. At that time, a friend Edward "Swede" Hazlett was applying to the Naval Academy and urged Dwight to apply, since no tuition was required. Eisenhower requested consideration for either Annapolis or West Point with his Senator, Joseph L. Bristow. Though Eisenhower was among the winners of the entrance-exam competition, he was beyond the age limit for the Naval Academy.[24] He accepted an appointment to West Point in 1911.[24] At West Point, Eisenhower relished the emphasis on traditions and on sports, but was less enthusiastic about the hazing, though he willingly accepted it as a plebe. He was also a regular violator of the more detailed regulations and finished school with a less than stellar discipline rating. Academically, Eisenhower's best subject by far was English. Otherwise, his performance was average, though he thoroughly enjoyed the typical emphasis of engineering on science and mathematics.[25] In athletics, Eisenhower later said that "not making the baseball team at West Point was one of the greatest disappointments of my life, maybe my greatest".[26] He made the varsity football team[27][28] and was a starter at halfback in 1912, when he tried to tackle the legendary Jim Thorpe of the Carlisle Indians.[29] Eisenhower suffered a torn knee while being tackled in the next game, which was the last he played; he reinjured his knee on horseback and in the boxing ring,[3][12][30] so he turned to fencing and gymnastics.[3] West Point yearbook photo, 1915 Eisenhower later served as junior varsity football coach and cheerleader, which caught the attention of General Frederick Funston.[31] He graduated from West Point in the middle of the class of 1915,[32] which became known as "the class the stars fell on", because 59 members eventually became general officers. After graduation in 1915, Second Lieutenant Eisenhower requested an assignment in the Philippines, which was denied; because of the ongoing Mexican Revolution, he was posted to Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, Texas, under the command of General Funston. In 1916, while stationed at Fort Sam Houston, Funston convinced him to become the football coach for Peacock Military Academy;[31] he later became the coach at St. Louis College, now St. Mary's University,[33] and was an honorary member of the Sigma Beta Chi fraternity there.[34] Personal life Main article: Family of Dwight D. Eisenhower While Eisenhower was stationed in Texas, he met Mamie Doud of Boone, Iowa.[3] They were immediately taken with each other. He proposed to her on Valentine's Day in 1916.[35] A November wedding date in Denver was moved up to July 1 due to the impending American entry into World War I; Funston approved 10 days of leave for their wedding.[36] The Eisenhowers moved many times during their first 35 years of marriage.[37] The Eisenhowers had two sons. In late 1917 while he was in charge of training at Fort Oglethorpe in Georgia, his wife Mamie had their first son, Doud Dwight "Icky" Eisenhower, who died of scarlet fever at the age of three.[38] Eisenhower was mostly reluctant to discuss his death.[39] Their second son, John Eisenhower, was born in Denver, Colorado.[40] John served in the United States Army, retired as a brigadier general, became an author and served as Ambassador to Belgium from 1969 to 1971. He married Barbara Jean Thompson and had four children: David, Barbara Ann, Susan Elaine and Mary Jean. David, after whom Camp David is named,[41] married Richard Nixon's daughter Julie in 1968. Mamie Eisenhower, painted in 1953 by Thomas E. Stephens Eisenhower was a golf enthusiast later in life, and he joined the Augusta National Golf Club in 1948.[42] He played golf frequently during and after his presidency and was unreserved in his passion for the game, to the point of golfing during winter; he ordered his golf balls painted black so he could see them better against snow. He had a basic golf facility installed at Camp David, and he became close friends with the Augusta National Chairman Clifford Roberts, inviting Roberts to stay at the White House on numerous occasions.[43] Roberts, an investment broker, also handled the Eisenhower family's investments.[44] He began oil painting while at Columbia University, after watching Thomas E. Stephens paint Mamie's portrait. Eisenhower painted about 260 oils during the last 20 years of his life. The images were mostly landscapes but also portraits of subjects such as Mamie, their grandchildren, General Montgomery, George Washington, and Abraham Lincoln.[45] Wendy Beckett stated that Eisenhower's paintings, "simple and earnest", caused her to "wonder at the hidden depths of this reticent president". A conservative in both art and politics, Eisenhower in a 1962 speech denounced modern art as "a piece of canvas that looks like a broken-down Tin Lizzie, loaded with paint, has been driven over it".[39] Angels in the Outfield was Eisenhower's favorite movie.[46] His favorite reading material for relaxation was the Western novels of Zane Grey.[47] With his excellent memory and ability to focus, Eisenhower was skilled at cards. He learned poker, which he called his "favorite indoor sport", in Abilene. Eisenhower recorded West Point classmates' poker losses for payment after graduation and later stopped playing because his opponents resented having to pay him. A friend reported that after learning to play contract bridge at West Point, Eisenhower played the game six nights a week for five months.[48] Eisenhower continued to play bridge throughout his military career. While stationed in the Philippines, he played regularly with President Manuel Quezon, earning him the nickname the "Bridge Wizard of Manila".[49] An unwritten qualification for an officer's appointment to Eisenhower's staff during World War II was the ability to play bridge. He played even during the stressful weeks leading up to the D-Day landings. His favorite partner was General Alfred Gruenther, considered the best player in the US Army; he appointed Gruenther his second-in-command at NATO partly because of his skill at bridge. Saturday night bridge games at the White House were a feature of his presidency. He was a strong player, though not an expert by modern standards. The great bridge player and popularizer Ely Culbertson described his game as classic and sound with "flashes of brilliance" and said that "you can always judge a man's character by the way he plays cards. Eisenhower is a calm and collected player and never whines at his losses. He is brilliant in victory but never commits the bridge player's worst crime of gloating when he wins." Bridge expert Oswald Jacoby frequently participated in the White House games and said, "The President plays better bridge than golf. He tries to break 90 at golf. At bridge, you would say he plays in the 70s."[50] World War I (1914–1918) See also: Military career of Dwight D. Eisenhower Eisenhower served initially in logistics and then the infantry at various camps in Texas and Georgia until 1918. When the US entered World War I, he immediately requested an overseas assignment but was denied and assigned to Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas.[51] In February 1918, he was transferred to Camp Meade in Maryland with the 65th Engineers. His unit was later ordered to France, but, to his chagrin, he received orders for the new tank corps, where he was promoted to brevet lieutenant colonel in the National Army.[52] He commanded a unit that trained tank crews at Camp Colt – his first command. Though Eisenhower and his tank crews never saw combat, he displayed excellent organizational skills as well as an ability to accurately assess junior officers' strengths and make optimal placements of personnel.[53] His spirits were raised when the unit under his command received orders overseas to France. This time his wishes were thwarted when the armistice was signed a week before his departure date.[54] Completely missing out on the warfront left him depressed and bitter for a time, despite receiving the Distinguished Service Medal for his work at home.[55] In World War II, rivals who had combat service in the Great War (led by Gen. Bernard Montgomery) sought to denigrate Eisenhower for his previous lack of combat duty, despite his stateside experience establishing a camp for thousands of troops and developing a full combat training schedule.[56] Between the Wars (1918–1939) In service of generals Eisenhower (far right) with friends William Stuhler, Major Brett, and Paul V. Robinson in 1919, four years after graduating from the United States Military Academy at West Point After the war, Eisenhower reverted to his regular rank of captain and a few days later was promoted to major, a rank he held for 16 years.[57] The major was assigned in 1919 to a transcontinental Army convoy to test vehicles and dramatize the need for improved roads. Indeed, the convoy averaged only 5 miles per hour (8.0 km/h) from Washington, D.C. to San Francisco; later the improvement of highways became a signature issue for Eisenhower as president.[58] He assumed duties again at Camp Meade, Maryland, commanding a battalion of tanks, where he remained until 1922. His schooling continued, focused on the nature of the next war and the role of the tank. His new expertise in tank warfare was strengthened by a close collaboration with George S. Patton, Sereno E. Brett, and other senior tank leaders. Their leading-edge ideas of speed-oriented offensive tank warfare were strongly discouraged by superiors, who considered the new approach too radical and preferred to continue using tanks in a strictly supportive role for the infantry. Eisenhower was even threatened with court-martial for continued publication of these proposed methods of tank deployment, and he relented.[59][60] From 1920, Eisenhower served under a succession of talented generals – Fox Conner, John J. Pershing, Douglas MacArthur and George Marshall. He first became executive officer to General Conner in the Panama Canal Zone, where, joined by Mamie, he served until 1924. Under Conner's tutelage, he studied military history and theory (including Carl von Clausewitz's On War), and later cited Conner's enormous influence on his military thinking, saying in 1962 that "Fox Conner was the ablest man I ever knew." Conner's comment on Eisenhower was, "[He] is one of the most capable, efficient and loyal officers I have ever met."[61] On Conner's recommendation, in 1925–1926 he attended the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where he graduated first in a class of 245 officers.[62][63] During the late 1920s and early 1930s, Eisenhower's career stalled somewhat, as military priorities diminished; many of his friends resigned for high-paying business jobs. He was assigned to the American Battle Monuments Commission directed by General Pershing, and with the help of his brother Milton Eisenhower, then a journalist at the Agriculture Department, he produced a guide to American battlefields in Europe.[64] He then was assigned to the Army War College and graduated in 1928. After a one-year assignment in France, Eisenhower served as executive officer to General George V. Moseley, Assistant Secretary of War, from 1929 to February 1933.[65] Major Eisenhower graduated from the Army Industrial College in 1933 and later served on the faculty (it was later expanded to become the Industrial College of the Armed Services and is now known as the Dwight D. Eisenhower School for National Security and Resource Strategy).[66][67] His primary duty was planning for the next war, which proved most difficult in the midst of the Great Depression.[68] He then was posted as chief military aide to General Douglas MacArthur, Army Chief of Staff. In 1932, he participated in the clearing of the Bonus March encampment in Washington, D.C. Although he was against the actions taken against the veterans and strongly advised MacArthur against taking a public role in it, he later wrote the Army's official incident report, endorsing MacArthur's conduct.[69][70] Philippine tenure (1935–1939) In 1935, he accompanied MacArthur to the Philippines, where he served as assistant military adviser to the Philippine government in developing their army. MacArthur allowed Eisenhower to handpick an officer whom he thought would contribute to the mission. Hence he chose James Ord, a classmate of his at West Point. Having been brought up in Mexico, which inculcated into him the Spanish culture which influenced both Mexico and the Philippines, Ord was deemed the right pick for the job. Eisenhower had strong philosophical disagreements with MacArthur regarding the role of the Philippine Army and the leadership qualities that an American army officer should exhibit and develop in his subordinates. The antipathy between Eisenhower and MacArthur lasted the rest of their lives.[71] Historians have concluded that this assignment provided valuable preparation for handling the challenging personalities of Winston Churchill, George S. Patton, George Marshall, and Bernard Montgomery during World War II. Eisenhower later emphasized that too much had been made of the disagreements with MacArthur and that a positive relationship endured.[72] While in Manila, Mamie suffered a life-threatening stomach ailment but recovered fully. Eisenhower was promoted to the rank of permanent lieutenant colonel in 1936. He also learned to fly with the Philippine Army Air Corps at the Zablan Airfield in Camp Murphy under Capt. Jesus Villamor, making a solo flight over the Philippines in 1937, and obtained his private pilot's license in 1939 at Fort Lewis.[73][74][75] Also around this time, he was offered a post by the Philippine Commonwealth Government, namely by then Philippine President Manuel L. Quezon on recommendations by MacArthur, to become the chief of police of a new capital being planned, now named Quezon City, but he declined the offer.[76] World War II (1939–1945) Eisenhower returned to the United States in December 1939 and was assigned as commanding officer of the 1st Battalion, 15th Infantry Regiment at Fort Lewis, Washington, later becoming the regimental executive officer. In March 1941 he was promoted to colonel and assigned as chief of staff of the newly activated IX Corps under Major General Kenyon Joyce. In June 1941, he was appointed chief of staff to General Walter Krueger, Commander of the Third Army, at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, Texas. After successfully participating in the Louisiana Maneuvers, he was promoted to brigadier general on October 3, 1941.[77][78] After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Eisenhower was assigned to the General Staff in Washington, where he served until June 1942 with responsibility for creating the major war plans to defeat Japan and Germany. He was appointed Deputy Chief in charge of Pacific Defenses under the Chief of War Plans Division (WPD), General Leonard T. Gerow, and then succeeded Gerow as Chief of the War Plans Division. Next, he was appointed Assistant Chief of Staff in charge of the new Operations Division (which replaced WPD) under Chief of Staff General George C. Marshall, who spotted talent and promoted accordingly.[79] At the end of May 1942, Eisenhower accompanied Lt. Gen. Henry H. Arnold, commanding general of the Army Air Forces, to London to assess the effectiveness of the theater commander in England, Maj. Gen. James E. Chaney.[80] He returned to Washington on June 3 with a pessimistic assessment, stating he had an "uneasy feeling" about Chaney and his staff. On June 23, 1942, he returned to London as Commanding General, European Theater of Operations (ETOUSA), based in London and with a house on Coombe, Kingston upon Thames,[81] and took over command of ETOUSA from Chaney.[82] He was promoted to lieutenant general on July 7. Operations Torch and Avalanche Eisenhower as a major general, 1942 In November 1942, Eisenhower was also appointed Supreme Commander Allied Expeditionary Force of the North African Theater of Operations (NATOUSA) through the new operational Headquarters Allied (Expeditionary) Force Headquarters (A(E)FHQ). The word "expeditionary" was dropped soon after his appointment for security reasons.[failed verification] The campaign in North Africa was designated Operation Torch and was planned in the underground headquarters within the Rock of Gibraltar. Eisenhower was the first non-British person to command Gibraltar in 200 years.[83] French cooperation was deemed necessary to the campaign and Eisenhower encountered a "preposterous situation"[according to whom?] with the multiple rival factions in France. His primary objective was to move forces successfully into Tunisia and intending to facilitate that objective, he gave his support to François Darlan as High Commissioner in North Africa, despite Darlan's previous high offices in Vichy France and his continued role as commander-in-chief of the French armed forces. The Allied leaders were "thunderstruck"[according to whom?] by this from a political standpoint, though none had offered Eisenhower guidance with the problem in planning the operation. Eisenhower was severely criticized[by whom?] for the move. Darlan was assassinated on December 24 by Fernand Bonnier de La Chapelle, a French antifascist monarchist.[84] Eisenhower later appointed as High Commissioner General Henri Giraud, who had been installed by the Allies as Darlan's commander-in-chief.[85] Operation Torch also served as a valuable training ground for Eisenhower's combat command skills; during the initial phase of Generalfeldmarschall Erwin Rommel's move into the Kasserine Pass, Eisenhower created some confusion in the ranks by interference with the execution of battle plans by his subordinates. He also was initially indecisive in his removal of Lloyd Fredendall, commanding II Corps. He became more adroit in such matters in later campaigns.[86] In February 1943, his authority was extended as commander of AFHQ across the Mediterranean basin to include the British Eighth Army, commanded by General Sir Bernard Montgomery. The Eighth Army had advanced across the Western Desert from the east and was ready for the start of the Tunisia Campaign. After the capitulation of Axis forces in North Africa, Eisenhower oversaw the invasion of Sicily. Once Mussolini, the Italian leader, had fallen in Italy, the Allies switched their attention to the mainland with Operation Avalanche. But while Eisenhower argued with President Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Churchill, who both insisted on unconditional surrender in exchange for helping the Italians, the Germans pursued an aggressive buildup of forces in the country. The Germans made the already tough battle more difficult by adding 19 divisions and initially outnumbering the Allied forces 2 to 1.[87] Supreme Allied commander and Operation Overlord Duration: 1 minute and 48 seconds.1:48 General Eisenhower reads his order of the day for June 5, 1944, the day before D-Day. In December 1943, President Roosevelt decided that Eisenhower – not Marshall – would be Supreme Allied Commander in Europe. The following month, he resumed command of ETOUSA and the following month was officially designated as the Supreme Allied Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF), serving in a dual role until the end of hostilities in Europe in May 1945.[88] He was charged in these positions with planning and carrying out the Allied assault on the coast of Normandy in June 1944 under the code name Operation Overlord, the liberation of Western Europe and the invasion of Germany.[89] Eisenhower speaks with men of the 502nd Parachute Infantry Regiment (PIR), part of the 101st "Screaming Eagles" Airborne Division, on June 5, 1944, the day before the D-Day invasion. The officer Eisenhower is speaking to is First Lieutenant Wallace Strobel. Eisenhower, as well as the officers and troops under him, had learned valuable lessons in their previous operations, and their skills had all strengthened in preparation for the next most difficult campaign against the Germans—a beach landing assault. His first struggles, however, were with Allied leaders and officers on matters vital to the success of the Normandy invasion; he argued with Roosevelt over an essential agreement with De Gaulle to use French resistance forces in covert operations against the Germans in advance of Operation Overlord.[90] Admiral Ernest J. King fought with Eisenhower over King's refusal to provide additional landing craft from the Pacific.[91] Eisenhower also insisted that the British give him exclusive command over all strategic air forces to facilitate Overlord, to the point of threatening to resign unless Churchill relented, which he did.[92] Eisenhower then designed a bombing plan in France in advance of Overlord and argued with Churchill over the latter's concern with civilian casualties; de Gaulle interjected that the casualties were justified, and Eisenhower prevailed.[93] He also had to skillfully manage to retain the services of the often unruly George S. Patton, by severely reprimanding him when Patton earlier had slapped a subordinate, and then when Patton gave a speech in which he made improper comments about postwar policy.[94] The D-Day Normandy landings on June 6, 1944, were costly but successful. Two months later (August 15), the invasion of Southern France took place, and control of forces in the southern invasion passed from the AFHQ to the SHAEF. Many thought that victory in Europe would come by summer's end, but the Germans did not capitulate for almost a year. From then until the end of the war in Europe on May 8, 1945, Eisenhower, through SHAEF, commanded all Allied forces, and through his command of ETOUSA had administrative command of all US forces on the Western Front north of the Alps. He was ever mindful of the inevitable loss of life and suffering that would be experienced by the troops under his command and their families. This prompted him to make a point of visiting every division involved in the invasion.[95] Eisenhower's sense of responsibility was underscored by his draft of a statement to be issued if the invasion failed. It has been called one of the great speeches of history: Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based on the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt, it is mine alone.[96] Liberation of France and victory in Europe Eisenhower with Allied commanders following the signing of the German Instrument of Surrender at Reims Every ground commander seeks the battle of annihilation; so far as conditions permit, he tries to duplicate in modern war the classic example of Cannae. — Eisenhower[97] Once the coastal assault had succeeded, Eisenhower insisted on retaining personal control over the land battle strategy and was immersed in the command and supply of multiple assaults through France on Germany. Field Marshal Montgomery insisted priority be given to his 21st Army Group's attack being made in the north, while Generals Bradley (12th US Army Group) and Devers (Sixth US Army Group) insisted they be given priority in the center and south of the front (respectively). Eisenhower worked tirelessly to address the demands of the rival commanders to optimize Allied forces, often by giving them tactical latitude; many historians conclude this delayed the Allied victory in Europe. However, due to Eisenhower's persistence, the pivotal supply port at Antwerp was successfully, albeit belatedly, opened in late 1944.[98] In recognition of his senior position in the Allied command, on December 20, 1944, he was promoted to General of the Army, equivalent to the rank of Field Marshal in most European armies. In this and the previous high commands he held, Eisenhower showed his great talents for leadership and diplomacy. Although he had never seen action himself, he won the respect of front-line commanders. He interacted adeptly with allies such as Winston Churchill, Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery and General Charles de Gaulle. He had serious disagreements with Churchill and Montgomery over questions of strategy, but these rarely upset his relationships with them. He dealt with Soviet Marshal Zhukov, his Russian counterpart, and they became good friends.[99] In December 1944, the Germans launched a surprise counteroffensive, the Battle of the Bulge, which the Allies turned back in early 1945 after Eisenhower repositioned his armies and improved weather allowed the Army Air Force to engage.[100] German defenses continued to deteriorate on both the Eastern Front with the Red Army and the Western Front with the Western Allies. The British wanted to capture Berlin, but Eisenhower decided it would be a military mistake for him to attack Berlin and said orders to that effect would have to be explicit. The British backed down but then wanted Eisenhower to move into Czechoslovakia for political reasons. Washington refused to support Churchill's plan to use Eisenhower's army for political maneuvers against Moscow. The actual division of Germany followed the lines that Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin had previously agreed upon. The Soviet Red Army captured Berlin in a very bloody large-scale battle, and the Germans finally surrendered on May 7, 1945.[101] In 1945, Eisenhower anticipated that someday an attempt would be made to recharacterize Nazi crimes as propaganda (Holocaust denial) and took steps against it by demanding extensive photo and film documentation of Nazi death camps.[102] After World War II (1945–1953) Military Governor of the American-occupied zone of Germany General Eisenhower served as military governor of the American zone (highlighted) in Allied-occupied Germany from May through November 1945. Following the German unconditional surrender, Eisenhower was appointed military governor of the American-occupied zone of Germany, located primarily in Southern Germany, and headquartered in Frankfurt am Main. Upon discovery of the Nazi concentration camps, he ordered camera crews to document evidence for use in the Nuremberg Trials. He reclassified German prisoners of war (POWs) in US custody as Disarmed Enemy Forces (DEFs), who were no longer subject to the Geneva Convention. Eisenhower followed the orders laid down by the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) in directive JCS 1067 but softened them by bringing in 400,000 tons of food for civilians and allowing more fraternization.[103][104][105] In response to the devastation in Germany, including food shortages and an influx of refugees, he arranged distribution of American food and medical equipment.[106] His actions reflected the new American attitudes of the German people as Nazi victims not villains, while aggressively purging the ex-Nazis.[107][108] Army Chief of Staff In November 1945, Eisenhower returned to Washington to replace Marshall as Chief of Staff of the Army. His main role was the rapid demobilization of millions of soldiers, which was delayed by lack of shipping. Eisenhower was convinced in 1946 that the Soviet Union did not want war and that friendly relations could be maintained; he strongly supported the new United Nations and favored its involvement in the control of atomic bombs. However, in formulating policies regarding the atomic bomb and relations with the Soviets, Truman was guided by the State Department and ignored Eisenhower and the Pentagon. Indeed, Eisenhower had opposed the use of the atomic bomb against the Japanese, writing, "First, the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon."[109] Initially, Eisenhower hoped for cooperation with the Soviets.[110] He even visited Warsaw in 1945. Invited by Bolesław Bierut and decorated with the highest military decoration, he was shocked by the scale of destruction in the city.[111] However, by mid-1947, as east–west tensions over economic recovery in Germany and the Greek Civil War escalated, Eisenhower agreed with a containment policy to stop Soviet expansion.[110] 1948 presidential election In June 1943, a visiting politician had suggested to Eisenhower that he might become president after the war. Believing that a general should not participate in politics, Merlo J. Pusey wrote that "figuratively speaking, [Eisenhower] kicked his political-minded visitor out of his office". As others asked him about his political future, Eisenhower told one that he could not imagine wanting to be considered for any political job "from dogcatcher to Grand High Supreme King of the Universe", and another that he could not serve as Army Chief of Staff if others believed he had political ambitions. In 1945, Truman told Eisenhower during the Potsdam Conference that if desired, the president would help the general win the 1948 election,[112] and in 1947 he offered to run as Eisenhower's running mate on the Democratic ticket if MacArthur won the Republican nomination.[113] As the election approached, other prominent citizens and politicians from both parties urged Eisenhower to run. In January 1948, after learning of plans in New Hampshire to elect delegates supporting him for the forthcoming Republican National Convention, Eisenhower stated through the Army that he was "not available for and could not accept nomination to high political office"; "life-long professional soldiers", he wrote, "in the absence of some obvious and overriding reason, [should] abstain from seeking high political office".[112] Eisenhower maintained no political party affiliation during this time. Many believed he was forgoing his only opportunity to be president as Republican Thomas E. Dewey was considered the probable winner and would presumably serve two terms, meaning that Eisenhower, at age 66 in 1956, would be too old to run.[114] President at Columbia University and NATO Supreme Commander Eisenhower lighting the Columbia University Yule Log, 1949 Eisenhower posing in front of Alma Mater at Columbia in 1953 As president of Columbia, Eisenhower presents an honorary degree to Jawaharlal Nehru. In 1948, Eisenhower became President of Columbia University, an Ivy League university in New York City, where he was inducted into Phi Beta Kappa.[115] The choice was subsequently characterized as not having been a good fit for either party.[116] During that year, Eisenhower's memoir, Crusade in Europe, was published.[117] It was a major financial success.[118] Eisenhower sought the advice of Augusta National's Roberts about the tax implications of this,[118] and in due course Eisenhower's profit on the book was substantially aided by what author David Pietrusza calls "a ruling without precedent" by the Department of the Treasury. It held that Eisenhower was not a professional writer, but rather, marketing the lifetime asset of his experiences, and thus he had to pay only capital gains tax on his $635,000 advance instead of the much higher personal tax rate. This ruling saved Eisenhower about $400,000.[119] Eisenhower's stint as the president of Columbia was punctuated by his activity within the Council on Foreign Relations, a study group he led concerning the political and military implications of the Marshall Plan and The American Assembly, Eisenhower's "vision of a great cultural center where business, professional and governmental leaders could meet from time to time to discuss and reach conclusions concerning problems of a social and political nature".[120] His biographer Blanche Wiesen Cook suggested that this period served his "the political education", since he had to prioritize wide-ranging educational, administrative, and financial demands for the university.[121] Through his involvement in the Council on Foreign Relations, he also gained exposure to economic analysis, which would become the bedrock of his understanding in economic policy. "Whatever General Eisenhower knows about economics, he has learned at the study group meetings," one Aid to Europe member claimed.[122] Eisenhower accepted the presidency of the university to expand his ability to promote "the American form of democracy" through education.[123] He was clear on this point to the trustees on the search committee. He informed them that his main purpose was "to promote the basic concepts of education in a democracy".[123] As a result, he was "almost incessantly" devoted to the idea of the American Assembly, a concept he developed into an institution by the end of 1950.[120] Within months of becoming university president, Eisenhower was requested to advise Secretary of Defense James Forrestal on the unification of the armed services.[124] About six months after his appointment, he became the informal Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Washington.[125] Two months later he fell ill with what was diagnosed as acute gastroenteritis, and he spent over a month in recovery at the Augusta National Golf Club.[126] He returned to his post in New York in mid-May, and in July 1949 took a two-month vacation out-of-state.[127] Because the American Assembly had begun to take shape, he traveled around the country during summer and fall 1950, building financial support for it, including from Columbia Associates, a recently created alumni and benefactor organization for which he had helped recruit members.[128] Eisenhower was unknowingly building resentment and a reputation among the Columbia University faculty and staff as an absentee president who was using the university for his own interests. As a career military man, he naturally had little in common with the academics.[129] The contacts gained through university and American Assembly fundraising activities would later become important supporters in Eisenhower's bid for the Republican party nomination and the presidency. Meanwhile, Columbia University's liberal faculty members became disenchanted with the university president's ties to oilmen and businessmen.[citation needed] He did have some successes at Columbia. Puzzled as to why no American university had undertaken the "continuous study of the causes, conduct and consequences of war",[130] Eisenhower undertook the creation of the Institute of War and Peace Studies, a research facility to "study war as a tragic social phenomenon".[131] Eisenhower was able to use his network of wealthy friends and acquaintances to secure initial funding for it.[132] Under its founding director, international relations scholar William T. R. Fox, the institute began in 1951 and became a pioneer in international security studies, one that would be emulated by other institutes in the United States and Britain later in the decade.[130] The Institute of War and Peace Studies thus become one of the projects which Eisenhower considered his "unique contribution" to Columbia.[131] As the president of Columbia, Eisenhower gave voice to his opinions about the supremacy and difficulties of American democracy. His tenure marked his transformation from military to civilian leadership. His biographer Travis Beal Jacobs also suggested that the alienation of the Columbia faculty contributed to sharp intellectual criticism of him for many years.[133] The trustees of Columbia University declined to accept Eisenhower's offer to resign in December 1950, when he took an extended leave from the university to become the Supreme Commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and he was given operational command of NATO forces in Europe.[134] Eisenhower retired from active service as an army general on June 3, 1952,[135] and he resumed his presidency of Columbia. Meanwhile, Eisenhower had become the Republican Party nominee for president of the United States, a contest that he won on November 4. Eisenhower tendered his resignation as university president on November 15, 1952, effective January 19, 1953, the day before his inauguration.[136] At home, Eisenhower was more effective in making the case for NATO in Congress than the Truman administration had been. By the middle of 1951, with American and European support, NATO was a genuine military power. Nevertheless, Eisenhower thought that NATO would become a truly European alliance, with the American and Canadian commitments ending after about ten years.[137] Presidential campaign of 1952 Main article: 1952 United States presidential election See also: Draft Eisenhower movement Eisenhower button from the 1952 campaign President Truman sensed a broad-based desire for an Eisenhower candidacy for president, and he again pressed him to run for the office as a Democrat in 1951. But Eisenhower voiced his disagreements with the Democrats and declared himself to be a Republican.[138] A "Draft Eisenhower" movement in the Republican Party persuaded him to declare his candidacy in the 1952 presidential election to counter the candidacy of non-interventionist Senator Robert A. Taft. The effort was a long struggle; Eisenhower had to be convinced that political circumstances had created a genuine duty to offer himself as a candidate and that there was a mandate from the public for him to be their president. Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. and others succeeded in convincing him, and he resigned his command at NATO in June 1952 to campaign full-time.[139] Duration: 1 minute and 2 seconds.1:02 "I Like Ike" televised campaign ad, 1952 Eisenhower defeated Taft for the nomination, having won critical delegate votes from Texas. His campaign was noted for the simple slogan "I Like Ike". It was essential to his success that Eisenhower express opposition to Roosevelt's policy at the Yalta Conference and to Truman's policies in Korea and China—matters in which he had once participated.[140][141] In defeating Taft for the nomination, it became necessary for Eisenhower to appease the right-wing Old Guard of the Republican Party; his selection of Richard Nixon as the vice-president on the ticket was designed in part for that purpose. Nixon also provided a strong anti-communist reputation, as well as youth to counter Eisenhower's more advanced age.[142] 1952 electoral vote results Eisenhower insisted on campaigning in the South in the general election, against the advice of his campaign team, refusing to surrender the region to the Democrats. The campaign strategy was dubbed "K1C2" and was intended to focus on attacking the Truman administration on three failures: the Korean War, Communism, and corruption.[143] Two controversies tested him and his staff, but they did not damage the campaign. One involved a report that Nixon had improperly received funds from a secret trust. Nixon spoke out adroitly to avoid potential damage, but the matter permanently alienated the two candidates. The second issue centered on Eisenhower's relented decision to confront the controversial methods of Joseph McCarthy on his home turf in a Wisconsin appearance.[144] Eisenhower condemned "wickedness in government", an allusion to gay government employees who were conflated with communism during McCarthyism.[145] Eisenhower defeated Democratic candidate Adlai Stevenson II in a landslide, with an electoral margin of 442 to 89, marking the first Republican return to the White House in 20 years.[141] He also brought a Republican majority in the House, by eight votes, and in the Senate, evenly divided with Vice President Nixon providing Republicans the majority.[146] Eisenhower was the last president born in the 19th century, and he was the oldest president-elect at age 62 since James Buchanan in 1856.[147] He was the third commanding general of the Army to serve as president, after George Washington and Ulysses S. Grant, and the last not to have held political office prior to becoming president until Donald Trump entered office in January 2017.[148] Election of 1956 Main article: 1956 United States presidential election 1956 electoral vote results In the United States presidential election of 1956, Eisenhower, the popular incumbent, was re-elected. The election was a re-match of 1952, as his opponent in 1956 was Stevenson, a former Illinois governor, whom Eisenhower had defeated four years earlier. Compared to the 1952 election, Eisenhower gained Kentucky, Louisiana, and West Virginia from Stevenson, while losing Missouri. His voters were less likely to bring up his leadership record. Instead what stood out this time "was the response to personal qualities— to his sincerity, his integrity and sense of duty, his virtue as a family man, his religious devotion, and his sheer likeableness."[149] Presidency (1953–1961) Main article: Presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower For a chronological guide, see Timeline of the Dwight D. Eisenhower presidency. Truman and Eisenhower had minimal discussions about the transition of administrations due to a complete estrangement between them as a result of campaigning.[150] Eisenhower selected Joseph M. Dodge as his budget director, then asked Herbert Brownell Jr. and Lucius D. Clay to make recommendations for his cabinet appointments. He accepted their recommendations without exception; they included John Foster Dulles and George M. Humphrey with whom he developed his closest relationships, as well as Oveta Culp Hobby. His cabinet consisted of several corporate executives and one labor leader, and one journalist dubbed it "eight millionaires and a plumber".[151] The cabinet was known for its lack of personal friends, office seekers, or experienced government administrators. He also upgraded the role of the National Security Council in planning all phases of the Cold War.[152] Before his inauguration, Eisenhower led a meeting of advisors at Pearl Harbor where they set goals for his first term: balance the budget, end the Korean War, defend vital interests at lower cost through nuclear deterrent, and end price and wage controls.[153] He also conducted the first pre-inaugural cabinet meeting in history in late 1952; he used this meeting to articulate his anti-communist Russia policy. His inaugural address was exclusively devoted to foreign policy and included this same philosophy as well as a commitment to foreign trade and the United Nations.[154] February 1959 White House portrait Eisenhower made greater use of press conferences than any previous president, holding almost 200 over his two terms. He saw the benefit of maintaining a good relationship with the press, and he saw value in them as a means of direct communication with the American people.[155] Throughout his presidency, Eisenhower adhered to a political philosophy of dynamic conservatism.[156] He described himself as a "progressive conservative"[157] and used terms such as "progressive moderate" and "dynamic conservatism" to describe his approach.[158] He continued all the major New Deal programs still in operation, especially Social Security. He expanded its programs and rolled them into the new Cabinet-level agency of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, while extending benefits to an additional ten million workers. He implemented racial integration in the Armed Services in two years, which had not been completed under Truman.[159] In a private letter, Eisenhower wrote: Should any party attempt to abolish social security and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group of course, that believes you can do these things [...] Their number is negligible and they are stupid.[160] When the 1954 Congressional elections approached, it became evident that the Republicans were in danger of losing their thin majority in both houses. Eisenhower was among those who blamed the Old Guard for the losses, and he took up the charge to stop suspected efforts by the right wing to take control of the GOP. He then articulated his position as a moderate, progressive Republican: "I have just one purpose ... and that is to build up a strong progressive Republican Party in this country. If the right wing wants a fight, they are going to get it ... before I end up, either this Republican Party will reflect progressivism or I won't be with them anymore."[161] Eisenhower initially planned on serving only one term, but he remained flexible in case leading Republicans wanted him to run again. He was recovering from a heart attack late in September 1955 when he met with his closest advisors to evaluate the GOP's potential candidates; the group concluded that a second term was well advised, and he announced that he would run again in February 1956.[162][163] Eisenhower was publicly noncommittal about having Nixon as the Vice President on his ticket; the question was an especially important one in light of his heart condition. He personally favored Robert B. Anderson, a Democrat who rejected his offer, so Eisenhower resolved to leave the matter in the hands of the party, which chose Nixon nearly unanimously.[164] In 1956, Eisenhower faced Adlai Stevenson again and won by an even larger landslide, with 457 of 531 electoral votes and 57.6 percent of the popular vote. His campaigning was curtailed out of health considerations.[165] Eisenhower made full use of his valet, chauffeur, and secretarial support; he rarely drove or even dialed a phone number. He was an avid fisherman, golfer, painter, and bridge player.[166] On August 26, 1959, he was aboard the maiden flight of Air Force One, which replaced the Columbine as the presidential aircraft.[167] Interstate Highway System Main article: Interstate Highway System Remarks in Cadillac Square, Detroit Duration: 1 minute and 19 seconds.1:19 President Eisenhower delivered remarks about the need for a new highway program at Cadillac Square in Detroit on October 29, 1954 Text of speech excerpt Problems playing this file? See media help. Eisenhower championed and signed the bill that authorized the Interstate Highway System in 1956.[168] He justified the project through the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 as essential to American security during the Cold War. Eisenhower's goal to create improved highways was influenced by his involvement in the Army's 1919 Transcontinental Motor Convoy. He was assigned as an observer for the mission, which involved sending a convoy of Army vehicles coast to coast.[169][170] His subsequent experience with the German autobahn convinced him of the benefits of an Interstate Highway System. The system could also be used as a runway for airplanes, which would be beneficial to war efforts. Franklin D. Roosevelt put this system into place with the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1944. He thought that an interstate highway system would be beneficial for military operations and would support continued economic growth.[171] The legislation initially stalled in Congress over the issuance of bonds to finance the project, but the legislative effort was renewed and Eisenhower signed the law in June 1956.[172] Foreign policy Eisenhower with Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser during Nasser's visit to United Nations in New York, September 1960. Eisenhower with Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Eisenhower visits the Republic of China and its President Chiang Kai-shek in Taipei. This section is an excerpt from Foreign policy of the Dwight D. Eisenhower administration.[edit] The United States foreign policy of the Dwight D. Eisenhower administration, from 1953 to 1961, focused on the Cold War with the Soviet Union and its satellites. The United States built up a stockpile of nuclear weapons and nuclear delivery systems to deter military threats and save money while cutting back on expensive Army combat units. A major uprising broke out in Hungary in 1956; the Eisenhower administration did not become directly involved, but condemned the military invasion by the Soviet Union. Eisenhower sought to reach a nuclear test ban treaty with the Soviet Union, but following the 1960 U-2 incident the Kremlin canceled a scheduled summit in Paris. As he promised, Eisenhower quickly ended the fighting in Korea, leaving it divided North and South. The U.S. has kept major forces there ever since to deter North Korea. In 1954, he played a key role in the Senate's defeat of the Bricker Amendment, which would have limited the president's treaty making power and ability to enter into executive agreements with foreign leaders. The Eisenhower administration used propaganda and covert action extensively, and the Central Intelligence Agency supported two military coups: the 1953 Iranian coup d'état and the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état. The administration did not approve the partition of Vietnam at the 1954 Geneva Conference, and directed economic and military aid and advice to South Vietnam. Washington led the establishment of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization as an alliance of anti-Communist states in Southeast Asia. It ended two crises with China over Taiwan. In 1956, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, sparking the Suez Crisis, in which a coalition of France, Britain, and Israel took control of the canal. Concerned about the economic and political impacts of the invasion, Eisenhower had warned the three against any such action. When they invaded anyway he used heavy financial and diplomatic pressures to force a withdrawal. In the aftermath of the crisis, Eisenhower announced the Eisenhower Doctrine, under which any country in the Middle East could request American economic assistance or aid from American military forces. The Cuban Revolution broke out during Eisenhower's second term, resulting in the replacement of pro-U.S. military dictator Fulgencio Batista with Fidel Castro. In response to the revolution, the Eisenhower administration broke ties with Cuba and Eisenhower approved a CIA operation to carry out a campaign of terrorist attacks and sabotage, kill civilians, and cause economic damage. The CIA also trained and commanded pilots to bomb civilian airfields. The CIA began preparations for an invasion of Cuba by Cuban expatriates, ultimately resulting in the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion after Eisenhower left office. Space Race Further information: Space Race In the 1970s the reverse of the Eisenhower dollar celebrated America's Moon landings, which began 11 years after NASA was created during Eisenhower's presidency Eisenhower and the CIA had known since at least January 1957, nine months before Sputnik, that Russia had the capability to launch a small payload into orbit and was likely to do so within a year.[173] Eisenhower's support of the nation's fledgling space program was officially modest until the Soviet launch of Sputnik in 1957, gaining the Cold War enemy enormous prestige. He then launched a national campaign that funded not just space exploration but a major strengthening of science and higher education. The Eisenhower administration determined to adopt a non-aggressive policy that would allow "space-crafts of any state to overfly all states, a region free of military posturing and launch Earth satellites to explore space".[174] His Open Skies Policy attempted to legitimize illegal Lockheed U-2 flyovers and Project Genetrix while paving the way for spy satellite technology to orbit over sovereign territory,[175] but Nikolai Bulganin and Nikita Khrushchev declined Eisenhower's proposal at the Geneva conference in July 1955.[176] In response to Sputnik being launched in October 1957, Eisenhower created NASA as a civilian space agency in October 1958, signed a landmark science education law, and improved relations with American scientists.[177] Fear spread through the United States that the Soviet Union would invade and spread communism, so Eisenhower wanted to not only create a surveillance satellite to detect any threats but ballistic missiles that would protect the United States. In strategic terms, it was Eisenhower who devised the American basic strategy of nuclear deterrence based upon the triad of strategic bombers, land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs).[178] NASA planners projected that human spaceflight would pull the United States ahead in the Space Race; however, in 1960, an Ad Hoc Panel on Man-in-Space concluded that "man-in-space can not be justified" and was too costly.[179] Eisenhower later resented the space program and its gargantuan price tag—he was quoted as saying, "Anyone who would spend $40 billion in a race to the moon for national prestige is nuts."[180] Korean War, Free China and Red China In late 1952, Eisenhower went to Korea and discovered a military and political stalemate. Once in office, when the Chinese People's Volunteer Army began a buildup in the Kaesong sanctuary, he considered using nuclear weapons if an armistice was not reached. Whether China was informed of the potential for nuclear force is unknown.[181] His earlier military reputation in Europe was effective with the Chinese communists.[182] The National Security Council, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Strategic Air Command (SAC) devised detailed plans for nuclear war against Red China.[183] With the death of Stalin in March 1953, Russian support for a Chinese communist hard-line weakened and China decided to compromise on the prisoner issue.[184] Eisenhower in Korea with General Chung Il-kwon, and Baik Seon-yup, 1952 In July 1953, an armistice took effect with Korea divided along approximately the same boundary as in 1950. The armistice and boundary remain in effect today. The armistice, which concluded despite opposition from Secretary Dulles, South Korean President Syngman Rhee, and also within Eisenhower's party, has been described by biographer Stephen E. Ambrose as the greatest achievement of the administration. Eisenhower had the insight to realize that unlimited war in the nuclear age was unthinkable, and limited war unwinnable.[184] A point of emphasis in Eisenhower's campaign had been his endorsement of a policy of liberation from communism as opposed to a policy of containment. This remained his preference despite the armistice with Korea.[185] Throughout his terms Eisenhower took a hard-line attitude toward China, as demanded by conservative Republicans, with the goal of driving a wedge between China and the Soviet Union.[186] Eisenhower continued Truman's policy of recognizing the Republic of China (Taiwan) as the legitimate government of China, not the Peking (Beijing) regime. There were localized flare-ups when the People's Liberation Army b

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ In this installment of the "Beyond War" series, the focus shifts to the intricate concept of "the enemy" and its pivotal role in the perpetuation of conflict. Delving into the multifaceted nature of this phenomenon, the episode navigates through the societal constructs and implications associated with identifying adversaries. Beginning with a critical examination of the overarching notion of "the enemy," the narrative explores its manipulation and exploitation within different spheres of society. Shedding light on the significance of this concept, the episode underscores its instrumental role in shaping perceptions and driving actions. Central to the discourse is the portrayal of the Cold War era, particularly the portrayal of the U.S.S.R. as the primary antagonist by American authorities. However, the narrative takes a nuanced approach by presenting insights from individual Soviet citizens, drawing from interviews conducted in both Austin and the Soviet Union itself. Through their voices, the episode offers a compelling glimpse into the diverse perspectives and experiences within the Soviet bloc. Furthermore, the episode ventures into the realm of American military interventions, particularly the prevalence of "low intensity" wars in Third World countries. Through meticulous analysis, it probes into the underlying motivations behind this fixation, unraveling the complex web of geopolitical interests and power dynamics driving such engagements. With a blend of archival footage and incisive commentary, "Beyond War. Part III: The Enemy" serves as a thought-provoking exploration of the constructs and consequences surrounding the concept of "the enemy," challenging viewers to contemplate the complexities of conflict and its enduring impact on global affairs. War is an intense armed conflict[a] between states, governments, societies, or paramilitary groups such as mercenaries, insurgents, and militias.[2] It is generally characterized by extreme violence, destruction, and mortality, using regular or irregular military forces. Warfare refers to the common activities and characteristics of types of war, or of wars in general.[3] Total war is warfare that is not restricted to purely legitimate military targets, and can result in massive civilian or other non-combatant suffering and casualties. While some war studies scholars consider war a universal and ancestral aspect of human nature,[4] others argue it is a result of specific socio-cultural, economic, or ecological circumstances.[5] Etymology Mural of War (1896), by Gari Melchers The English word war derives from the 11th-century Old English words wyrre and werre, from Old French werre (also guerre as in modern French), in turn from the Frankish *werra, ultimately deriving from the Proto-Germanic *werzō 'mixture, confusion'. The word is related to the Old Saxon werran, Old High German werran, and the modern German verwirren, meaning 'to confuse, to perplex, to bring into confusion'.[6] History Main article: Military history The percentages of men killed in war in eight tribal societies, and Europe and the U.S. in the 20th century. (Lawrence H. Keeley, archeologist) The Egyptian siege of Dapur in the 13th century BCE, from Ramesseum, Thebes. The earliest evidence of prehistoric warfare is a Mesolithic cemetery in Jebel Sahaba, which has been determined to be about 13,400 years old.[7] About forty-five percent of the skeletons there displayed signs of violent death, specifically traumatic bone lesions.[8] Since the rise of the state some 5,000 years ago,[9] military activity has occurred over much of the globe. Estimates for total deaths due to war vary wildly. For the period 3000 BCE until 1991, estimates range from 151 million to 2 billion.[10] In one estimate, primitive warfare prior to 3000 BCE has been thought to have claimed 400 million victims based on the assumption that it accounted for the 15.1% of all deaths.[11] In War Before Civilization, Lawrence H. Keeley, a professor at the University of Illinois, says approximately 90–95% of known societies throughout history engaged in at least occasional warfare,[12] and many fought constantly.[13] Keeley describes several styles of primitive combat such as small raids, large raids, and massacres. All of these forms of warfare were used by primitive societies, a finding supported by other researchers.[14] Keeley explains that early war raids were not well organized, as the participants did not have any formal training. Scarcity of resources meant defensive works were not a cost-effective way to protect the society against enemy raids.[15] William Rubinstein wrote "Pre-literate societies, even those organized in a relatively advanced way, were renowned for their studied cruelty.'"[16] The invention of gunpowder, and its eventual use in warfare, together with the acceleration of technological advances have fomented major changes to war itself. Japanese samurai attacking a Mongol ship, 13th century In Western Europe, since the late 18th century, more than 150 conflicts and about 600 battles have taken place.[17] During the 20th century, war resulted in a dramatic intensification of the pace of social changes, and was a crucial catalyst for the growth of left-wing politics.[18] Finnish soldiers during the Winter War. In 1947, in view of the rapidly increasingly destructive consequences of modern warfare, and with a particular concern for the consequences and costs of the newly developed atom bomb, Albert Einstein famously stated, "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."[19] Mao Zedong urged the socialist camp not to fear nuclear war with the United States since, even if "half of mankind died, the other half would remain while imperialism would be razed to the ground and the whole world would become socialist."[20] A distinctive feature of war since 1945 is that combat has largely been a matter of civil wars and insurgencies.[21] The major exceptions were the Korean War, the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, the Iran–Iraq War, the Gulf War, the Eritrean–Ethiopian War, and the Russo-Ukrainian War. American tanks moving in formation during the Gulf War. The Human Security Report 2005 documented a significant decline in the number and severity of armed conflicts since the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s. However, the evidence examined in the 2008 edition of the Center for International Development and Conflict Management's "Peace and Conflict" study indicated the overall decline in conflicts had stalled.[22] Types of warfare Main article: Types of war Asymmetric warfare is the methods used in conflicts between belligerents of drastically different levels of military capability or size.[23] Biological warfare, or germ warfare, is the use of biological infectious agents or toxins such as bacteria, viruses, and fungi against people, plants, or animals. This can be conducted through sophisticated technologies, like cluster munitions,[24] or with rudimentary techniques like catapulting an infected corpse behind enemy lines,[25] and can include weaponized or non-weaponized pathogens. Chemical warfare involves the use of weaponized chemicals in combat. Poison gas as a chemical weapon was principally used during World War I, and resulted in over a million estimated casualties, including more than 100,000 civilians.[26] Cold warfare is an intense international rivalry without direct military conflict, but with a sustained threat of it, including high levels of military preparations, expenditures, and development, and may involve active conflicts by indirect means, such as economic warfare, political warfare, covert operations, espionage, cyberwarfare, or proxy wars. Conventional warfare is a form of warfare between states in which nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons are not used or see limited deployment. Cyberwarfare involves the actions by a nation-state or international organization to attack and attempt to damage another nation's information systems. Insurgency is a rebellion against authority, when those taking part in the rebellion are not recognized as belligerents (lawful combatants). An insurgency can be fought via counterinsurgency, and may also be opposed by measures to protect the population, and by political and economic actions of various kinds aimed at undermining the insurgents' claims against the incumbent regime. Information warfare is the application of destructive force on a large scale against information assets and systems, against the computers and networks that support the four critical infrastructures (the power grid, communications, financial, and transportation).[27] Nuclear warfare is warfare in which nuclear weapons are the primary, or a major, method of achieving capitulation. Total war is warfare by any means possible, disregarding the laws of war, placing no limits on legitimate military targets, using weapons and tactics resulting in significant civilian casualties, or demanding a war effort requiring significant sacrifices by the friendly civilian population. Unconventional warfare, the opposite of conventional warfare, is an attempt to achieve military victory through acquiescence, capitulation, or clandestine support for one side of an existing conflict. Aims United States Army soldiers engaged in a firefight with Taliban insurgents during the War in Afghanistan, 2009 Entities contemplating going to war and entities considering whether to end a war may formulate war aims as an evaluation/propaganda tool. War aims may stand as a proxy for national-military resolve.[28] Definition Fried defines war aims as "the desired territorial, economic, military or other benefits expected following successful conclusion of a war".[29] Classification Tangible/intangible aims: Tangible war aims may involve (for example) the acquisition of territory (as in the German goal of Lebensraum in the first half of the 20th century) or the recognition of economic concessions (as in the Anglo-Dutch Wars). Intangible war aims – like the accumulation of credibility or reputation[30] – may have more tangible expression ("conquest restores prestige, annexation increases power").[31] Explicit/implicit aims: Explicit war aims may involve published policy decisions. Implicit war aims[32] can take the form of minutes of discussion, memoranda and instructions.[33] Positive/negative aims: "Positive war aims" cover tangible outcomes. "Negative war aims" forestall or prevent undesired outcomes.[34] War aims can change in the course of conflict and may eventually morph into "peace conditions"[35] – the minimal conditions under which a state may cease to wage a particular war. Effects Global deaths in conflicts since the year 1400.[36] Main article: Effects of war Military and civilian casualties in modern human history Disability-adjusted life year for war per 100,000 inhabitants in 2004[37] no data less than 100 100–200 200–600 600–1000 1000–1400 1400–1800 1800–2200 2200–2600 2600–3000 3000–8000 8000–8800 more than 8800 Throughout the course of human history, the average number of people dying from war has fluctuated relatively little, being about 1 to 10 people dying per 100,000. However, major wars over shorter periods have resulted in much higher casualty rates, with 100–200 casualties per 100,000 over a few years. While conventional wisdom holds that casualties have increased in recent times due to technological improvements in warfare, this is not generally true. For instance, the Thirty Years' War (1618–1648) had about the same number of casualties per capita as World War I, although it was higher during World War II (WWII). That said, overall the number of casualties from war has not significantly increased in recent times. Quite to the contrary, on a global scale the time since WWII has been unusually peaceful.[38] Largest wars by death toll Main articles: List of wars by death toll, Outline of war § Wars, and Casualty recording The deadliest war in history, in terms of the cumulative number of deaths since its start, is World War II, from 1939 to 1945, with 70–85 million deaths, followed by the Mongol conquests[39] at up to 60 million. As concerns a belligerent's losses in proportion to its prewar population, the most destructive war in modern history may have been the Paraguayan War (see Paraguayan War casualties). In 2013 war resulted in 31,000 deaths, down from 72,000 deaths in 1990.[40] War usually results in significant deterioration of infrastructure and the ecosystem, a decrease in social spending, famine, large-scale emigration from the war zone, and often the mistreatment of prisoners of war or civilians.[41][42][43] For instance, of the nine million people who were on the territory of the Byelorussian SSR in 1941, some 1.6 million were killed by the Germans in actions away from battlefields, including about 700,000 prisoners of war, 500,000 Jews, and 320,000 people counted as partisans (the vast majority of whom were unarmed civilians).[44] Another byproduct of some wars is the prevalence of propaganda by some or all parties in the conflict,[45] and increased revenues by weapons manufacturers.[46] Three of the ten most costly wars, in terms of loss of life, have been waged in the last century. These are the two World Wars, followed by the Second Sino-Japanese War (which is sometimes considered part of World War II, or as overlapping). Most of the others involved China or neighboring peoples. The death toll of World War II, being over 60 million, surpasses all other war-death-tolls.[47] Deaths (millions) Date War 70–85 1939–1945 World War II (see World War II casualties) 60 13th century Mongol Conquests (see Mongol invasions and Tatar invasions)[48][49][50] 40 1850–1864 Taiping Rebellion (see Dungan Revolt)[51] 36 755–763 An Lushan Rebellion (death toll uncertain)[52] 25 1616–1662 Qing dynasty conquest of Ming dynasty[47] 15–22 1914–1918 World War I (see World War I casualties)[53] 20 1937–1945 Second Sino-Japanese War[54] 20 1370–1405 Conquests of Tamerlane[55][56] 20.77 1862–1877 Dungan Revolt[57][58] 5–9 1917–1922 Russian Civil War and Foreign Intervention[59] On military personnel Military personnel subject to combat in war often suffer mental and physical injuries, including depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, disease, injury, and death. In every war in which American soldiers have fought in, the chances of becoming a psychiatric casualty – of being debilitated for some period of time as a consequence of the stresses of military life – were greater than the chances of being killed by enemy fire. — No More Heroes, Richard Gabriel[17] Swank and Marchand's World War II study found that after sixty days of continuous combat, 98% of all surviving military personnel will become psychiatric casualties. Psychiatric casualties manifest themselves in fatigue cases, confusional states, conversion hysteria, anxiety, obsessional and compulsive states, and character disorders.[60] One-tenth of mobilised American men were hospitalised for mental disturbances between 1942 and 1945, and after thirty-five days of uninterrupted combat, 98% of them manifested psychiatric disturbances in varying degrees. — 14–18: Understanding the Great War, Stéphane Audoin-Rouzeau, Annette Becker[17] The Apotheosis of War (1871) by Vasily Vereshchagin Additionally, it has been estimated anywhere from 18% to 54% of Vietnam war veterans suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder.[60] Based on 1860 census figures, 8% of all white American males aged 13 to 43 died in the American Civil War, including about 6% in the North and approximately 18% in the South.[61] The war remains the deadliest conflict in American history, resulting in the deaths of 620,000 military personnel. United States military casualties of war since 1775 have totaled over two million. Of the 60 million European military personnel who were mobilized in World War I, 8 million were killed, 7 million were permanently disabled, and 15 million were seriously injured.[62] The remains of dead Crow Indians killed and scalped by Sioux c. 1874 During Napoleon's retreat from Moscow, more French military personnel died of typhus than were killed by the Russians.[63] Of the 450,000 soldiers who crossed the Neman on 25 June 1812, less than 40,000 returned. More military personnel were killed from 1500 to 1914 by typhus than from military action.[64] In addition, if it were not for modern medical advances there would be thousands more dead from disease and infection. For instance, during the Seven Years' War, the Royal Navy reported it conscripted 184,899 sailors, of whom 133,708 (72%) died of disease or were 'missing'.[65] It is estimated that between 1985 and 1994, 378,000 people per year died due to war.[66] On civilians See also: Civilian casualties Les Grandes Misères de la guerre depict the destruction unleashed on civilians during the Thirty Years' War. Most wars have resulted in significant loss of life, along with destruction of infrastructure and resources (which may lead to famine, disease, and death in the civilian population). During the Thirty Years' War in Europe, the population of the Holy Roman Empire was reduced by 15 to 40 percent.[67][68] Civilians in war zones may also be subject to war atrocities such as genocide, while survivors may suffer the psychological aftereffects of witnessing the destruction of war. War also results in lower quality of life and worse health outcomes. A medium-sized conflict with about 2,500 battle deaths reduces civilian life expectancy by one year and increases infant mortality by 10% and malnutrition by 3.3%. Additionally, about 1.8% of the population loses access to drinking water.[69] Most estimates of World War II casualties indicate around 60 million people died, 40 million of whom were civilians.[70] Deaths in the Soviet Union were around 27 million.[71] Since a high proportion of those killed were young men who had not yet fathered any children, population growth in the postwar Soviet Union was much lower than it otherwise would have been.[72] Economic See also: Military Keynesianism Once a war has ended, losing nations are sometimes required to pay war reparations to the victorious nations. In certain cases, land is ceded to the victorious nations. For example, the territory of Alsace-Lorraine has been traded between France and Germany on three different occasions.[73] Typically, war becomes intertwined with the economy and many wars are partially or entirely based on economic reasons. Following World War II, consensus opinion for many years amongst economists and historians was that war can stimulate a country's economy as evidenced by the U.S's emergence from the Great Depression,[74] though modern economic analysis has thrown significant doubt on these views. In most cases, such as the wars of Louis XIV, the Franco-Prussian War, and World War I, warfare primarily results in damage to the economy of the countries involved. For example, Russia's involvement in World War I took such a toll on the Russian economy that it almost collapsed and greatly contributed to the start of the Russian Revolution of 1917.[75] World War II Ruins of Warsaw's Napoleon Square in the aftermath of World War II World War II was the most financially costly conflict in history; its belligerents cumulatively spent about a trillion U.S. dollars on the war effort (as adjusted to 1940 prices).[76][77] The Great Depression of the 1930s ended as nations increased their production of war materials.[78] By the end of the war, 70% of European industrial infrastructure was destroyed.[79] Property damage in the Soviet Union inflicted by the Axis invasion was estimated at a value of 679 billion rubles. The combined damage consisted of complete or partial destruction of 1,710 cities and towns, 70,000 villages/hamlets, 2,508 church buildings, 31,850 industrial establishments, 40,000 mi (64,374 km) of railroad, 4100 railroad stations, 40,000 hospitals, 84,000 schools, and 43,000 public libraries.[80] Theories of motivation See also: International relations theory The Ottoman campaign for territorial expansion in Europe in 1566 There are many theories about the motivations for war, but no consensus about which are most common.[81] Military theorist Carl von Clausewitz said, "Every age has its own kind of war, its own limiting conditions, and its own peculiar preconceptions."[82] Psychoanalytic Dutch psychoanalyst Joost Meerloo held that, "War is often...a mass discharge of accumulated internal rage (where)...the inner fears of mankind are discharged in mass destruction."[83] Other psychoanalysts such as E.F.M. Durban and John Bowlby have argued human beings are inherently violent.[84] This aggressiveness is fueled by displacement and projection where a person transfers his or her grievances into bias and hatred against other races, religions, nations or ideologies. By this theory, the nation state preserves order in the local society while creating an outlet for aggression through warfare. The Italian psychoanalyst Franco Fornari, a follower of Melanie Klein, thought war was the paranoid or projective "elaboration" of mourning.[85] Fornari thought war and violence develop out of our "love need": our wish to preserve and defend the sacred object to which we are attached, namely our early mother and our fusion with her. For the adult, nations are the sacred objects that generate warfare. Fornari focused upon sacrifice as the essence of war: the astonishing willingness of human beings to die for their country, to give over their bodies to their nation. Despite Fornari's theory that man's altruistic desire for self-sacrifice for a noble cause is a contributing factor towards war, few wars have originated from a desire for war among the general populace.[86] Far more often the general population has been reluctantly drawn into war by its rulers. One psychological theory that looks at the leaders is advanced by Maurice Walsh.[87] He argues the general populace is more neutral towards war and wars occur when leaders with a psychologically abnormal disregard for human life are placed into power. War is caused by leaders who seek war such as Napoleon and Hitler. Such leaders most often come to power in times of crisis when the populace opts for a decisive leader, who then leads the nation to war. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ... the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country. — Hermann Göring at the Nuremberg trials, 18 April 1946[88] Evolutionary See also: Prehistoric warfare Women and priests retrieve the dead bodies of Swabian soldiers just outside the city gates of Constance after the battle of Schwaderloh. (Luzerner Schilling) Several theories concern the evolutionary origins of warfare. There are two main schools: One sees organized warfare as emerging in or after the Mesolithic as a result of complex social organization and greater population density and competition over resources; the other sees human warfare as a more ancient practice derived from common animal tendencies, such as territoriality and sexual competition.[89] The latter school argues that since warlike behavior patterns are found in many primate species such as chimpanzees,[90] as well as in many ant species,[91] group conflict may be a general feature of animal social behavior. Some proponents of the idea argue that war, while innate, has been intensified greatly by developments of technology and social organization such as weaponry and states.[92] Psychologist and linguist Steven Pinker argued that war-related behaviors may have been naturally selected in the ancestral environment due to the benefits of victory.[b] He also argued that in order to have credible deterrence against other groups (as well as on an individual level), it was important to have a reputation for retaliation, causing humans to develop instincts for revenge as well as for protecting a group's (or an individual's) reputation ("honor").[b] Increasing population and constant warfare among the Maya city-states over resources may have contributed to the eventual collapse of the Maya civilization by 900 CE. Crofoot and Wrangham have argued that warfare, if defined as group interactions in which "coalitions attempt to aggressively dominate or kill members of other groups", is a characteristic of most human societies. Those in which it has been lacking "tend to be societies that were politically dominated by their neighbors".[94] Ashley Montagu strongly denied universalistic instinctual arguments, arguing that social factors and childhood socialization are important in determining the nature and presence of warfare. Thus, he argues, warfare is not a universal human occurrence and appears to have been a historical invention, associated with certain types of human societies.[95] Montagu's argument is supported by ethnographic research conducted in societies where the concept of aggression seems to be entirely absent, e.g. the Chewong and Semai of the Malay peninsula.[96] Bobbi S. Low has observed correlation between warfare and education, noting societies where warfare is commonplace encourage their children to be more aggressive.[97] Economic Kuwaiti oil wells on fire during the Gulf War, 1 March 1991 See also: Resource war War can be seen as a growth of economic competition in a competitive international system. In this view wars begin as a pursuit of markets for natural resources and for wealth. War has also been linked to economic development by economic historians and development economists studying state-building and fiscal capacity.[98] While this theory has been applied to many conflicts, such counter arguments become less valid as the increasing mobility of capital and information level the distributions of wealth worldwide, or when considering that it is relative, not absolute, wealth differences that may fuel wars. There are those on the extreme right of the political spectrum who provide support, fascists in particular, by asserting a natural right of a strong nation to whatever the weak cannot hold by force.[99][100] Some centrist, capitalist, world leaders, including Presidents of the United States and U.S. Generals, expressed support for an economic view of war. Marxist Main article: Marxist explanations of warfare The Marxist theory of war is quasi-economic in that it states all modern wars are caused by competition for resources and markets between great (imperialist) powers, claiming these wars are a natural result of capitalism. Marxist economists Karl Kautsky, Rosa Luxemburg, Rudolf Hilferding and Vladimir Lenin theorized that imperialism was the result of capitalist countries needing new markets. Expansion of the means of production is only possible if there is a corresponding growth in consumer demand. Since the workers in a capitalist economy would be unable to fill the demand, producers must expand into non-capitalist markets to find consumers for their goods, hence driving imperialism.[101] Demographic Demographic theories can be grouped into two classes, Malthusian and youth bulge theories: Malthusian A U.S. Marine Corps helicopter on patrol in Somalia as part of the Unified Task Force, 1992 Malthusian theories see expanding population and scarce resources as a source of violent conflict. Pope Urban II in 1095, on the eve of the First Crusade, advocating Crusade as a solution to European overpopulation, said: For this land which you now inhabit, shut in on all sides by the sea and the mountain peaks, is too narrow for your large population; it scarcely furnishes food enough for its cultivators. Hence it is that you murder and devour one another, that you wage wars, and that many among you perish in civil strife. Let hatred, therefore, depart from among you; let your quarrels end. Enter upon the road to the Holy Sepulchre; wrest that land from a wicked race, and subject it to yourselves.[102] This is one of the earliest expressions of what has come to be called the Malthusian theory of war, in which wars are caused by expanding populations and limited resources. Thomas Malthus (1766–1834) wrote that populations always increase until they are limited by war, disease, or famine.[103] The violent herder–farmer conflicts in Nigeria, Mali, Sudan and other countries in the Sahel region have been exacerbated by land degradation and population growth.[104][105][106] Youth bulge Median age by country. War reduces life expectancy. A youth bulge is evident for Africa, and to a lesser extent in some countries in West Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia and Central America. According to Heinsohn, who proposed youth bulge theory in its most generalized form, a youth bulge occurs when 30 to 40 percent of the males of a nation belong to the "fighting age" cohorts from 15 to 29 years of age. It will follow periods with total fertility rates as high as 4–8 children per woman with a 15–29-year delay.[107][108] Heinsohn saw both past "Christianist" European colonialism and imperialism, as well as today's Islamist civil unrest and terrorism as results of high birth rates producing youth bulges.[109] Among prominent historical events that have been attributed to youth bulges are the role played by the historically large youth cohorts in the rebellion and revolution waves of early modern Europe, including the French Revolution of 1789,[110] and the effect of economic depression upon the largest German youth cohorts ever in explaining the rise of Nazism in Germany in the 1930s.[111] The 1994 Rwandan genocide has also been analyzed as following a massive youth bulge.[112] Youth bulge theory has been subjected to statistical analysis by the World Bank,[113] Population Action International,[114] and the Berlin Institute for Population and Development.[115] Youth bulge theories have been criticized as leading to racial, gender and age discrimination.[116] Cultural Geoffrey Parker argues that what distinguishes the "Western way of war" based in Western Europe chiefly allows historians to explain its extraordinary success in conquering most of the world after 1500: The Western way of war rests upon five principal foundations: technology, discipline, a highly aggressive military tradition, a remarkable capacity to innovate and to respond rapidly to the innovation of others and – from about 1500 onward – a unique system of war finance. The combination of all five provided a formula for military success....The outcome of wars has been determined less by technology, then by better war plans, the achievement of surprise, greater economic strength, and above all superior discipline.[117] Parker argues that Western armies were stronger because they emphasized discipline, that is, "the ability of a formation to stand fast in the face of the enemy, where they're attacking or being attacked, without giving way to the natural impulse of fear and panic." Discipline came from drills and marching in formation, target practice, and creating small "artificial kinship groups: such as the company and the platoon, to enhance psychological cohesion and combat efficiency.[118] Rationalist U.S. Marines directing a concentration of fire at their opponents during the Vietnam War, 8 May 1968 Rationalism is an international relations theory or framework. Rationalism (and Neorealism (international relations)) operate under the assumption that states or international actors are rational, seek the best possible outcomes for themselves, and desire to avoid the costs of war.[119] Under one game theory approach, rationalist theories posit all actors can bargain, would be better off if war did not occur, and likewise seek to understand why war nonetheless reoccurs. Under another rationalist game theory without bargaining, the peace war game, optimal strategies can still be found that depend upon number of iterations played. In "Rationalist Explanations for War", James Fearon examined three rationalist explanations for why some countries engage in war: Issue indivisibilities Incentives to misrepresent or information asymmetry Commitment problems[119] "Issue indivisibility" occurs when the two parties cannot avoid war by bargaining, because the thing over which they are fighting cannot be shared between them, but only owned entirely by one side or the other. "Information asymmetry with incentives to misrepresent" occurs when two countries have secrets about their individual capabilities, and do not agree on either: who would win a war between them, or the magnitude of state's victory or loss. For instance, Geoffrey Blainey argues that war is a result of miscalculation of strength. He cites historical examples of war and demonstrates, "war is usually the outcome of a diplomatic crisis which cannot be solved because both sides have conflicting estimates of their bargaining power."[120] Thirdly, bargaining may fail due to the states' inability to make credible commitments.[121] Within the rationalist tradition, some theorists have suggested that individuals engaged in war suffer a normal level of cognitive bias,[122] but are still "as rational as you and me".[123] According to philosopher Iain King, "Most instigators of conflict overrate their chances of success, while most participants underrate their chances of injury...."[124] King asserts that "Most catastrophic military decisions are rooted in groupthink" which is faulty, but still rational.[125] The rationalist theory focused around bargaining, which is currently under debate. The Iraq War proved to be an anomaly that undercuts the validity of applying rationalist theory to some wars.[126] Political science The statistical analysis of war was pioneered by Lewis Fry Richardson following World War I. More recent databases of wars and armed conflict have been assembled by the Correlates of War Project, Peter Brecke and the Uppsala Conflict Data Program.[127] The following subsections consider causes of war from system, societal, and individual levels of analysis. This kind of division was first proposed by Kenneth Waltz in Man, the State, and War and has been often used by political scientists since then.[128]: 143  System-level There are several different international relations theory schools. Supporters of realism in international relations argue that the motivation of states is the quest for security, and conflicts can arise from the inability to distinguish defense from offense, which is called the security dilemma.[128]: 145  Within the realist school as represented by scholars such as Henry Kissinger and Hans Morgenthau, and the neorealist school represented by scholars such as Kenneth Waltz and John Mearsheimer, two main sub-theories are: Balance of power theory: States have the goal of preventing a single state from becoming a hegemon, and war is the result of the would-be hegemon's persistent attempts at power acquisition. In this view, an international system with more equal distribution of power is more stable, and "movements toward unipolarity are destabilizing."[128]: 147  However, evidence has shown power polarity is not actually a major factor in the occurrence of wars.[128]: 147–48  Power transition theory: Hegemons impose stabilizing conditions on the world order, but they eventually decline, and war occurs when a declining hegemon is challenged by another rising power or aims to pre-emptively suppress them.[128]: 148  On this view, unlike for balance-of-power theory, wars become more probable when power is more equally distributed. This "power preponderance" hypothesis has empirical support.[128]: 148  The two theories are not mutually exclusive and may be used to explain disparate events according to the circumstance.[128]: 148  Liberalism as it relates to international relations emphasizes factors such as trade, and its role in disincentivizing conflict which will damage economic relations. Realists[who?] respond that military force may sometimes be at least as effective as trade at achieving economic benefits, especially historically if not as much today.[128]: 149  Furthermore, trade relations which result in a high level of dependency may escalate tensions and lead to conflict.[128]: 150  Empirical data on the relationship of trade to peace are mixed, and moreover, some evidence suggests countries at war do not necessarily trade less with each other.[128]: 150  Societal-level Diversionary theory, also known as the "scapegoat hypothesis", suggests the politically powerful may use war to as a diversion or to rally domestic popular support.[128]: 152  This is supported by literature showing out-group hostility enhances in-group bonding, and a significant domestic "rally effect" has been demonstrated when conflicts begin.[128]: 152–13  However, studies examining the increased use of force as a function of need for internal political support are more mixed.[128]: 152–53  U.S. war-time presidential popularity surveys taken during the presidencies of several recent U.S. leaders have supported diversionary theory.[129] Individual-level These theories suggest differences in people's personalities, decision-making, emotions, belief systems, and biases are important in determining whether conflicts get out of hand.[128]: 157  For instance, it has been proposed that conflict is modulated by bounded rationality and various cognitive biases,[128]: 157  such as prospect theory.[130] Ethics Morning after the Battle of Waterloo, by John Heaviside Clark, 1816 The morality of war has been the subject of debate for thousands of years.[131] The two principal aspects of ethics in war, according to the just war theory, are jus ad bellum and jus in bello.[132] Jus ad bellum (right to war), dictates which unfriendly acts and circumstances justify a proper authority in declaring war on another nation. There are six main criteria for the declaration of a just war: first, any just war must be declared by a lawful authority; second, it must be a just and righteous cause, with sufficient gravity to merit large-scale violence; third, the just belligerent must have rightful intentions – namely, that they seek to advance good and curtail evil; fourth, a just belligerent must have a reasonable chance of success; fifth, the war must be a last resort; and sixth, the ends being sought must be proportional to means being used.[133][134] In besieged Leningrad. "Hitler ordered that Moscow and Leningrad were to be razed to the ground; their inhabitants were to be annihilated or driven out by starvation. These intentions were part of the 'General Plan East'." – The Oxford Companion to World War II.[135] Jus in bello (right in war), is the set of ethical rules when conducting war. The two main principles are proportionality and discrimination. Proportionality regards how much force is necessary and morally appropriate to the ends being sought and the injustice suffered.[136] The principle of discrimination determines who are the legitimate targets in a war, and specifically makes a separation between combatants, who it is permissible to kill, and non-combatants, who it is not.[136] Failure to follow these rules can result in the loss of legitimacy for the just-war-belligerent.[137] The just war theory was foundational in the creation of the United Nations and in international law's regulations on legitimate war.[131] Lewis Coser, an American conflict theorist and sociologist, argued conflict provides a function and a process whereby a succession of new equilibriums are created. Thus, the struggle of opposing forces, rather than being disruptive, may be a means of balancing and maintaining a social structure or society.[138] Limiting and stopping Anti-war rally in Washington, D.C., 15 March 2003 Main article: Anti-war movement Religious groups have long formally opposed or sought to limit war as in the Second Vatican Council document Gaudiem et Spes: "Any act of war aimed indiscriminately at the destruction of entire cities of extensive areas along with their population is a crime against God and man himself. It merits unequivocal and unhesitating condemnation."[139] Anti-war movements have existed for every major war in the 20th century, including, most prominently, World War I, World War II, and the Vietnam War. In the 21st century, worldwide anti-war movements occurred in response to the United States invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. Protests opposing the War in Afghanistan occurred in Europe, Asia, and the United States. Pauses During a war, brief pauses of violence may be called for, and further agreed to – ceasefire, temporary cessation, humanitarian pauses and corridors, days of tranquility, de-confliction arrangements.[140] There are a number of disadvantages, obstacles and hesitations against implementing such pauses such as a humanitarian corridor.[141][142] Pauses in conflict can also be ill-advised, for reasons such as "delay of defeat" and the "weakening of credibility".[143] Natural causes for a pause may include events such as the 2019 coronavirus pandemic.[144][145] See also Outline of war Grey-zone (international relations) Notes The term "armed conflict" is used instead of, or in addition to, the term "war" with the former being more general in scope. The International Committee of the Red Cross differentiates between international and non-international armed conflict in their definition, "International armed conflicts exist whenever there is resort to armed force between two or more States.... Non-international armed conflicts are protracted armed confrontations occurring between governmental armed forces and the forces of one or more armed groups, or between such groups arising on the territory of a State [party to the Geneva Conventions]. The armed confrontation must reach a minimum level of intensity and the parties involved in the conflict must show a minimum of organisation."[1] The argument is made from pages 314 to 332 of The Blank Slate.[93] Relevant quotes include on p332 "The first step in understanding violence is to set aside our abhorrence of it long enough to examine why it can sometimes pay off in evolutionary terms.", "Natural selection is powered by competition, which means that the products of natural selection – survival machines, in Richard Dawkins metaphor – should, by default, do whatever helps them survive and reproduce.". On p323 "If an obstacle stands in the way of something an organism needs, it should neutralize the obstacle by disabling or eliminating it.", "Another human obstacle consists of men monopolozing women who could otherwise be taken as wives.", "The competition can be violent". On p324 "So people have invented, and perhaps evolved, an alternate defense: the advertised deterrence policy known as lex talionis, the law of retaliation, familiar from the biblical injunction "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." If you can credibly say to potential adversaries, "We won't attack first, but if we are attacked, we will survive and strike back," you removee Hobbes's first two incentives for quarrel, gain and mistrust.". On p326 "Also necessary for vengeance to work as a deterrent is that the willingness to pursue it be made public, because the whole point of deterrence is to give would-be attackers second thoughts beforehand. And this brings us to Hobbes's final reason for quarrel. Thirdly, glory – though a more accurate word would be "honor"." References "How is the Term "Armed Conflict" Defined in International Humanitarian Law?" (PDF). International Committee of the Red Cross. March 2008. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 November 2018. Retrieved 7 December 2020. "Definition of WAR". Merriam-Webster. 16 January 2024. Retrieved 19 January 2024. "Warfare". Cambridge Dictionary. Archived from the original on 24 February 2021. Retrieved 1 August 2016. Šmihula, Daniel (2013): The Use of Force in International Relations, p. 67, ISBN 978-80-224-1341-1. James, Paul; Friedman, Jonathan (2006). Globalization and Violence, Vol. 3: Globalizing War and Intervention. London: Sage Publications. Archived from the original on 11 January 2020. Retrieved 3 December 2017. "war". Online Etymology Dictionary. 2010. Archived from the original on 11 January 2012. Retrieved 24 April 2011. Charles, Krista (27 May 2021). "Earliest known war was a repeated conflict in Sudan 13,400 years ago". New Scientist. Retrieved 5 May 2023. Crevecoeur, Isabelle; Dias-Meirinho, Marie-Hélène; Zazzo, Antoine; Antoine, Daniel; Bon, François (27 May 2021). "New insights on interpersonal violence in the Late Pleistocene based on the Nile valley cemetery of Jebel Sahaba". Scientific Reports. 11 (1): 9991. Bibcode:2021NatSR..11.9991C. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-89386-y. ISSN 2045-2322. PMC 8159958. PMID 34045477. Diamond, Jared, Guns, Germs and Steel Eckhardt, William (1991). "War-related deaths since 3000 BC". Bulletin of Peace Proposals. 22 (4): 437–443. doi:10.1177/096701069102200410. S2CID 144946896., https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=27e7fdb7d9b671cdcf999f3aab15cca8be25b163 Matthew White, 'Primitive War' Archived 14 April 2013 at the Wayback Machine "Review: War Before Civilization". Brneurosci.org. 4 September 2006. Archived from the original on 21 November 2010. Retrieved 24 January 2011. Spengler (4 July 2006). "The fraud of primitive authenticity". Asia Times Online. Archived from the original on 6 July 2006. Retrieved 8 June 2009. Martin, Debra L.; Harrod, Ryan P.; Pérez, Ventura R., eds. (2012). The Bioarchaeology of Violence. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. Archived from the original on 4 November 2013. Retrieved 10 January 2013. Keeley, Lawrence H: War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage. p. 55. W. D. Rubinstein (2004). Genocide: A History. Pearson Longman. p. 22. ISBN 978-0-582-50601-5. Archived from the original on 8 August 2013. Retrieved 31 May 2012. World War One – A New Kind of War | Part II Archived 27 February 2018 at the Wayback Machine, From 14–18 Understanding the Great War, by Stéphane Audoin-Rouzeau, Annette Becker Kolko 1994, p. xvii–xviii: "War in this century became an essential precondition for the emergence of a numerically powerful Left, moving it from the margins to the very center of European politics during 1917–18 and of all world affairs after 1941". "Albert Einstein: Man of Imagination". 1947. Archived from the original on 4 June 2010. Retrieved 3 February 2010. Nuclear Age Peace Foundation paper "Instant Wisdom: Beyond the Little Red Book". Time. 20 September 1976. Archived from the original on 29 September 2013. Retrieved 14 April 2013. Robert J. Bunker and Pamela Ligouri Bunker, "The modern state in epochal transition: The significance of irregular warfare, state deconstruction, and the rise of new warfighting entities beyond neo-medievalism." Small Wars & Insurgencies 27.2 (2016): 325–344. Hewitt, Joseph, J. Wilkenfield and T. Gurr Peace and Conflict 2008, Paradigm Publishers, 2007 "Asymmetrical warfare | Britannica". www.britannica.com. Retrieved 5 May 2023. Guillemin, Jeanne (July 2006). "Scientists and the history of biological weapons: A brief historical overview of the development of biological weapons in the twentieth century". EMBO Reports. 7 (S1): S45-9. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400689. ISSN 1469-221X. PMC 1490304. PMID 16819450. Wheelis, Mark (2002). "Biological Warfare at the 1346 Siege of Caffa - Volume 8, Number 9—September 2002 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC". Emerging Infectious Diseases. 8 (9): 971–975. doi:10.3201/eid0809.010536. PMC 2732530. PMID 12194776. D. Hank Ellison (2007). Handbook of Chemical and Biological Warfare Agents (2nd ed.). CRC Press. pp. 567–570. ISBN 978-0-8493-1434-6. Lewis, Brian C. "Information Warfare". Federation of American Scientist. Archived from the original on 17 June 1997. Retrieved 27 February 2017. Sullivan, Patricia (2012). "War Aims and War Outcomes". Who Wins?: Predicting Strategic Success and Failure in Armed Conflict. Oxford University Press, US. p. 17. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199878338.003.0003. ISBN 978-0199878338. Archived from the original on 13 September 2015. Retrieved 25 August 2015. "A state with greater military capacity than its adversary is more likely to prevail in wars with 'total' war aims – the overthrow of a foreign government or annexation of territory – than in wars with more limited objectives." Fried, Marvin Benjamin (1 July 2014). Austro-Hungarian War Aims in the Balkans During World War I. Palgrave Macmillan (published 2014). p. 4. ISBN 978-1137359018. Archived from the original on 17 October 2015. Retrieved 24 August 2015. "War aims are the desired territorial, economic, military or other benefits expected following successful conclusion of a war." Welch distinguishes: "tangible goods such as arms, wealth, and – provided they are strategically or economically valuable – territory and resources" from "intangible goods such as credibility and reputation" – Welch, David A. (1995). Justice and the Genesis of War. Cambridge Studies in International Relations. Cambridge University Press. p. 17. ISBN 978-0521558686. Archived from the original on 18 September 2015. Retrieved 24 August 2015. Fried, Marvin Benjamin (1 July 2014). Austro-Hungarian War Aims in the Balkans During World War I. Palgrave Macmillan (published 2014). p. 4. ISBN 978-1137359018. Archived from the original on 17 October 2015. Retrieved 24 August 2015. "Intangibles, such as prestige or power, can also represent war aims, though often (albeit not always) their achievement is framed within a more tangible context (e.g. conquest restores prestige, annexation increases power, etc.)." Compare:Katwala, Sunder (13 February 2005). "Churchill by Paul Addison". Books. The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Limited. Archived from the original on 28 September 2016. Retrieved 24 August 2015. "[Churchill] took office and declared he had 'not become the King's First Minister to oversee the liquidation of the British empire'. [...] His view was that an Anglo-American English-speaking alliance would seek to preserve the empire, though ending it was among Roosevelt's implicit war aims." Compare Fried, Marvin Benjamin (1 July 2014). Austro-Hungarian War Aims in the Balkans During World War I. Palgrave Macmillan (published 2014). p. 4. ISBN 978-1137359018. Archived from the original on 17 October 2015. Retrieved 24 August 2015. "At times, war aims were explicitly stated internally or externally in a policy decision, while at other times [...] the war aims were merely discussed but not published, remaining instead in the form of memoranda or instructions." Fried, Marvin Benjamin (1 July 2015). "'A Life and Death Question': Austro-Hungarian War Aims in the First World War". In Afflerbach, Holger (ed.). The Purpose of the First World War: War Aims and Military Strategies. Schriften des Historischen Kollegs. Vol. 91. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH (published 2015). p. 118. ISBN 978-3110443486. Archived from the original on 16 October 2015. Retrieved 24 August 2015. "[T]he [Austrian] Foreign Ministry [...] and the Military High Command [...] were in agreement that political and military hegemony over Serbia and the Western Balkans was a vital war aim. The Hungarian Prime Minister István Count Tisza, by contrast, was more preoccupied with so-called 'negative war aims', notably warding off hostile Romanian, Italian, and even Bulgarian intervention." Haase, Hugo (1932). "The Debate in the Reichstag on Internal Political Conditions, April 5–6, 1916". In Lutz, Ralph Haswell (ed.). Fall of the German Empire, 1914–1918. Hoover War Library publications. Stanford University Press. p. 233. ISBN 978-0804723800. Archived from the original on 25 October 2015. Retrieved 25 August 2015. "Gentlemen, when it comes time to formulate peace conditions, it is time to think of another thing than war aims." Roser, Max (15 November 2017). "War and Peace". Our World in Data. Archived from the original on 16 November 2017. Retrieved 15 November 2017. "Mortality and Burden of Disease Estimates for WHO Member States in 2004". World Health Organization. Archived from the original on 28 August 2021. Retrieved 5 October 2020. "War and Peace". Our World in Data. Archived from the original on 16 November 2017. Retrieved 16 November 2017. *The Cambridge History of China: Alien regimes and border states, 907–1368, 1994, p. 622, cited by White *Matthew White (2011). The Great Big Book of Horrible Things: The Definitive Chronicle of History's 100 Worst Atrocities. Murray, Christopher JL; Vos, Theo; Lopez, Alan D (17 December 2014). "Global, regional, and national age-sex specific all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 240 causes of death, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013". Lancet. 385 (9963): 117–71. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61682-2. PMC 4340604. PMID 25530442. Tanton, John (2002). The Social Contract. p. 42. Moore, John (1992). The pursuit of happiness. p. 304. Baxter, Richard (2013). Humanizing the Laws of War. p. 344. Timothy Snyder, Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin, Basic Books, 2010, p. 250. Dying and Death: Inter-disciplinary Perspectives. p. 153, Asa Kasher (2007) Chew, Emry (2012). Arming the Periphery. p. 49. McFarlane, Alan: The Savage Wars of Peace: England, Japan and the Malthusian Trap, Blackwell 2003, ISBN 978-0-631-18117-0 – cited by White Archived 20 December 2017 at the Wayback Machine Ping-ti Ho, "An Estimate of the Total Population of Sung-Chin China", in Études Song, Series 1, No 1, (1970) pp. 33–53. "Mongol Conquests". Users.erols.com. Archived from the original on 20 December 2017. Retrieved 24 January 2011. "The world's worst massacres Whole Earth Review". 1987. Archived from the original on 17 May 2003. Retrieved 24 January 2011. "Taiping Rebellion – Britannica Concise". Britannica. Archived from the original on 15 December 2007. Retrieved 24 January 2011. "Selected Death Tolls for Wars, Massacres and Atrocities Before the 20th Century". Users.erols.com. Archived from the original on 20 December 2017. Retrieved 24 January 2011. "World War I - Killed, wounded, and missing | Britannica". Britannica.com. Retrieved 5 December 2021. "Nuclear Power: The End of the War Against Japan". BBC News. Archived from the original on 28 November 2015. Retrieved 24 January 2011. "Timur Lenk (1369–1405)". Users.erols.com. Archived from the original on 20 December 2017. Retrieved 24 January 2011. Matthew White's website Archived 20 December 2017 at the Wayback Machine (a compilation of scholarly death toll estimates) 曹树基. 《中国人口史》 (in Chinese). Vol. 5《清时期》. p. 635. [full citation needed] 路伟东. "同治光绪年间陕西人口的损失" (in Chinese).[full citation needed] "Russian Civil War". Spartacus-Educational.com. Archived from the original on 5 December 2010. Retrieved 26 February 2019. Lt. Col. Dave Grossman (1996). On Killing – The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War & Society. Little, Brown & Co. Maris Vinovskis (1990). Toward a Social History of the American Civil War: Exploratory Essays. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-39559-5. Archived from the original on 26 May 2013. Retrieved 31 May 2012. Kitchen, Martin (2000), The Treaty of Versailles and its Consequences Archived 12 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine, New York: Longman The Historical Impact of Epidemic Typhus. Joseph M. Conlon. War and Pestilence. Time. A. S. Turberville (2006). Johnson's England: An Account of the Life & Manners of His Age. p. 53. ISBN 1-4067-2726-1 Obermeyer Z, Murray CJ, Gakidou E (June 2008). "Fifty years of violent war deaths from Vietnam to Bosnia: analysis of data from the world health survey programme". BMJ. 336 (7659): 1482–86. doi:10.1136/bmj.a137. PMC 2440905. PMID 18566045. The Thirty Years War (1618–48) Archived 20 December 2017 at the Wayback Machine, Alan McFarlane, The Savage Wars of Peace: England, Japan and the Malthusian Trap (2003) History of Europe – Demographics Archived 23 July 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Encyclopædia Britannica. Davenport, Christian; Mokleiv Nygård, Håvard; Fjelde, Hanne; Armstrong, David (2019). "The Consequences of Contention: Understanding the Aftereffects of Political Conflict and Violence". Annual Review of Political Science. 22: 361–377. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-050317-064057. "World War II Fatalities". Archived from the original on 22 April 2007. Retrieved 20 April 2007. "Leaders mourn Soviet wartime dead". BBC News. 9 May 2005. Archived from the original on 22 December 2019. Retrieved 6 January 2010. Hosking, Geoffrey A. (2006). Rulers And Victims: The Russians in the Soviet Union. Harvard University Press. pp. 242–. ISBN 978-0-674-02178-5. Archived from the original on 5 September 2015. Retrieved 31 May 2012. "Alsace-Lorraine". Encyclopædia Britannica (Online ed.). Archived from the original on 20 March 2022. Retrieved 21 March 2022. Higgs, Robert (March 1992). "Wartime Prosperity? A Reassessment of the U.S. Economy in the 1940s" (PDF). The Journal of Economic History. 52 (1): 41–60. doi:10.1017/S0022050700010251. S2CID 154484756. Retrieved 29 October 2022. Gatrell, Peter (2014). Russia's First World War : A Social and Economic History. Hoboken, New Jersey: Routledge. p. 270. ISBN 978-1317881391. Mayer, E. (2000). "World War II course lecture notes". Emayzine.com. Victorville, California: Victor Valley College. Archived from the original on 1 March 2009. Retrieved 4 July 2014. Coleman, P. (1999) "Cost of the War", World War II Resource Guide (Gardena, California: The American War Library) "Great Depression and World War II, 1929–1945". Library of Congress. Archived from the original on 12 October 2007. Retrieved 4 July 2014. Marc Pilisuk; Jennifer Achord Rountree (2008). Who Benefits from Global Violence and War: Uncovering a Destructive System. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 136–. ISBN 978-0-275-99435-8. Archived from the original on 26 May 2013. Retrieved 31 May 2012. The New York Times, 9 February 1946, Volume 95, Number 32158. Levy, Jack S. (1989). Tetlock, Philip E.; Husbands, Jo L.; Jervis, Robert; Stern, Paul C.; Tilly, Charles (eds.). "The Causes of War: A Review of Theories and Evidence" (PDF). Behavior, Society and Nuclear War. I: 295. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 September 2013. Retrieved 4 May 2012. Clausewitz, Carl Von (1976), On War (Princeton University Press) p. 593 | A. M. Meerloo, M.D. The Rape of the Mind (2009) p. 134, Progressive Press, ISBN 978-1-61577-376-3 Durbin, E.F.L. and John Bowlby. Personal Aggressiveness and War 1939. (Fornari 1975) Blanning, T.C.W. "The Origin of Great Wars." The Origins of the French Revolutionary Wars. p. 5 Walsh, Maurice N. War and the Human Race. 1971. "In an interview with Gilbert in Göring's jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946)". 18 April 2017. Retrieved 5 August 2015. Peter Meyer. Social Evolution in Franz M. Wuketits and Christoph Antweiler (eds.) Handbook of Evolution The Evolution of Human Societies and Cultures Wiley-VCH Verlag O'Connell, Sanjida (7 January 2004). "Apes of war...is it in our genes?". The Daily Telegraph. London. Archived from the original on 4 September 2018. Retrieved 6 February 2010. Analysis of chimpanzee war behavior Anderson, Kenneth (1996). Warrior Ants: The Enduring Threat of the Small War and the Land-mine. SSRN 935783. Scholarly comparisons between human and ant wars Johan M.G. van der Dennen. 1995. The Origin of War: Evolution of a Male-Coalitional Reproductive Strategy. Origin Press, Groningen, 1995 chapters 1 & 2 Pinker, Steven (2002). The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. London: The Penguin Group. pp. 314–332. ISBN 0-713-99256-5. Mind the Gap: Tracing the Origins of Human Universals By Peter M. Kappeler, Joan B. Silk, 2009, Chapter 8, "Intergroup Aggression in Primates and Humans; The Case for a Unified Theory", Margaret C. Crofoot and Richard W. Wrangham Montagu, Ashley (1976), The Nature of Human Aggression (Oxford University Press) Howell, Signe and Roy Willis, eds. (1989) Societies at Peace: Anthropological Perspectives. London: Routledge "An Evolutionary Perspective on War" Archived 16 October 2015 at the Wayback Machine, Bobbi S. Low, published in Behavior, Culture, and Conflict in World Politics, The University of Michigan Press, p. 22 Johnson, Noel D.; Koyama, Mark (April 2017). "States and economic growth: Capacity and constraints". Explorations in Economic History. 64: 1–20. doi:10.1016/j.eeh.2016.11.002. Roger Griffin and Matthew Feldman, eds., Fascism: Fascism and Culture, New York: Routledge, 2004. Hawkins, Mike. Social Darwinism in European and American Thought, 1860–1945: Nature as Model and Nature as Threat, Cambridge University Press, 1997. O'Callaghan, Einde (25 October 2007). "The Marxist Theory of Imperialism and its Critics". Marxists Internet Archive. Archived from the original on 8 July 2017. Retrieved 24 April 2011. Safire, William (2004). Lend me your ears: great speeches in history. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 94. ISBN 978-0-393-05931-1. Waugh, David (2000). Geography: an integrated approach. Nelson Thornes. p. 378. ISBN 978-0-17-444706-1. "In Mali, waning fortunes of Fulani herders play into Islamist hands". Reuters. 20 November 2016. Archived from the original on 30 March 2019. Retrieved 31 March 2019. "How Climate Change Is Spurring Land Conflict in Nigeria". Time. 28 June 2018. Archived from the original on 4 March 2021. Retrieved 31 March 2019. "The Deadliest Conflict You've Never Heard of". Foreign Policy. 23 January 2019. Archived from the original on 18 February 2019. Retrieved 31 March 2019. Helgerson, John L. (2002): "The National Security Implications of Global Demographic Trends"[1] Archived 10 October 2017 at the Wayback Machine Heinsohn, G. (2006): "Demography and War" (online) Archived 12 May 2016 at the Wayback Machine Heinsohn, G. (2005): "Population, Conquest and Terror in the 21st Century" (online) Archived 13 May 2016 at the Wayback Machine Jack A. Goldstone (1993). Revolution and Rebellion in the Early Modern World. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-08267-0. Archived from the original on 26 May 2013. Retrieved 31 May 2012. Moller, Herbert (1968): 'Youth as a Force in the Modern World', Comparative Studies in Society and History 10: 238–60; 240–44 Diessenbacher, Hartmut (1994): Kriege der Zukunft: Die Bevölkerungsexplosion gefährdet den Frieden. Muenchen: Hanser 1998; see also (criticizing youth bulge theory) Marc Sommers (2006): "Fearing Africa's Young Men: The Case of Rwanda." The World Bank: Social Development Papers – Conflict Prevention and Reconstruction, Paper No.

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Richard Nixon's tenure as the 37th president of the United States began with his first inauguration on January 20, 1969, and ended when he resigned on August 9, 1974, in the face of almost certain impeachment and removal from office, the only U.S. president ever to do so. He was succeeded by Gerald Ford, whom he had appointed vice president after Spiro Agnew became embroiled in a separate corruption scandal and was forced to resign. Nixon, a prominent member of the Republican Party from California who previously served as vice president under Dwight D. Eisenhower, took office following the 1968 presidential election, in which he defeated Hubert Humphrey, the then-incumbent vice president. Although he had built his reputation as a very active Republican campaigner, Nixon downplayed partisanship in his 1972 landslide reelection. Nixon's primary focus while in office was on foreign affairs. He focused on détente with the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union, easing Cold War tensions with both countries. As part of this policy, Nixon signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and SALT I, two landmark arms control treaties with the Soviet Union. Nixon promulgated the Nixon Doctrine, which called for indirect assistance by the United States rather than direct U.S. commitments as seen in the ongoing Vietnam War. After extensive negotiations with North Vietnam, Nixon withdrew the last U.S. soldiers from South Vietnam in 1973, ending the military draft that same year. To prevent the possibility of further U.S. intervention in Vietnam, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution over Nixon's veto. In domestic affairs, Nixon advocated a policy of "New Federalism," in which federal powers and responsibilities would be shifted to the states. However, he faced a Democratic Congress that did not share his goals and, in some cases, enacted legislation over his veto. Nixon's proposed reform of federal welfare programs did not pass Congress, but Congress did adopt one aspect of his proposal in the form of Supplemental Security Income, which provides aid to low-income individuals who are aged or disabled. The Nixon administration adopted a "low profile" on school desegregation, but the administration enforced court desegregation orders and implemented the first affirmative action plan in the United States. Nixon also presided over the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and the passage of major environmental laws like the Clean Water Act, although that law was vetoed by Nixon and passed by override. Economically, the Nixon years saw the start of a period of "stagflation" that would continue into the 1970s. Nixon was far ahead in the polls in the 1972 presidential election, but during the campaign, Nixon operatives conducted several illegal operations designed to undermine the opposition. They were exposed when the break-in of the Democratic National Committee Headquarters ended in the arrest of five burglars and gave rise to a congressional investigation. Nixon denied any involvement in the break in, but, after a tape emerged revealing that Nixon had known about the White House connection to the Watergate burglaries shortly after they occurred, the House of Representatives initiated impeachment proceedings. Facing removal by Congress, Nixon resigned from office. Though some scholars believe that Nixon "has been excessively maligned for his faults and inadequately recognised for his virtues",[2] Nixon is generally ranked as a below average president in surveys of historians and political scientists.[3][4][5] 1968 election Main articles: Richard Nixon 1968 presidential campaign and 1968 United States presidential election Further information: 1968 United States elections, 1968 Republican Party presidential primaries, and 1968 Republican National Convention Republican nomination Richard Nixon had served as vice president from 1953 to 1961, and had been defeated in the 1960 presidential election by John F. Kennedy. In the years after his defeat, Nixon established himself as an important party leader who appealed to both moderates and conservatives.[6] Nixon entered the race for the 1968 Republican presidential nomination confident that, with the Democrats torn apart over the war in Vietnam, a Republican had a good chance of winning the presidency in November, although he expected the election to be as close as in 1960.[7] One year prior to the 1968 Republican National Convention the early favorite for the party's presidential nomination was Michigan governor George Romney, but Romney's campaign foundered on the issue of the Vietnam War.[8] Nixon established himself as the clear front-runner after a series of early primary victories. His chief rivals for the nomination were Governor Ronald Reagan of California, who commanded the loyalty of many conservatives, and Governor Nelson Rockefeller of New York, who had a strong following among party moderates.[9] At the August Republican National Convention in Miami Beach, Florida, Reagan and Rockefeller discussed joining forces in a stop-Nixon movement, but the coalition never materialized and Nixon secured the nomination on the first ballot.[10] He selected Governor Spiro Agnew of Maryland as his running mate, a choice which Nixon believed would unite the party by appealing to both Northern moderates and Southerners disaffected with the Democrats.[11] The choice of Agnew was poorly received by many; a Washington Post editorial described Agnew as "the most eccentric political appointment since the Roman Emperor Caligula named his horse a consul.[12] In his acceptance speech, Nixon articulated a message of hope, stating, "We extend the hand of friendship to all people... And we work toward the goal of an open world, open sky, open cities, open hearts, open minds."[13] General election Main article: 1968 United States presidential election 1968 electoral vote results; Nixon won the presidency with 301 electoral college votes in a three-way race against Democrat nominee Hubert Humphrey and American Independent Party candidate George Wallace. At the start of 1967, most Democrats expected that President Lyndon B. Johnson would be re-nominated. Those expectations were shattered by Senator Eugene McCarthy of Minnesota, who centered his campaign on opposition to Johnson's policies on the Vietnam War.[14] McCarthy narrowly lost to Johnson in the first Democratic Party primary on March 12 in New Hampshire, and the closeness of the results startled the party establishment and spurred Senator Robert F. Kennedy of New York to enter the race. Two weeks later, Johnson told a stunned nation that he would not seek a second term. In the weeks that followed, much of the momentum that had been moving the McCarthy campaign forward shifted toward Kennedy.[15] Vice President Hubert Humphrey declared his own candidacy, drawing support from many of Johnson's supporters. Kennedy was assassinated by Sirhan Sirhan in June 1968, leaving Humphrey and McCarthy as the two remaining major candidates in the race.[16] Humphrey won the presidential nomination at the August Democratic National Convention in Chicago, and Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine was selected as his running mate. Outside the convention hall, thousands of young antiwar activists who had gathered to protest the Vietnam War clashed violently with police. The mayhem, which had been broadcast to the world in television, crippled the Humphrey campaign. Post-convention Labor Day surveys had Humphrey trailing Nixon by more than 20 percentage points.[17] In addition to Nixon and Humphrey, the race was joined by former Democratic Governor George Wallace of Alabama, a vocal segregationist who ran on the American Independent Party ticket. Wallace held little hope of winning the election outright, but he hoped to deny either major party candidate a majority of the electoral vote, thus sending the election to the House of Representatives, where segregationist congressmen could extract concessions for their support.[18] The assassinations of Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr., combined with disaffection towards the Vietnam War, the disturbances at the Democratic National Convention, and a series of city riots in various cities, made 1968 the most tumultuous year of the decade.[19] Throughout the year, Nixon portrayed himself as a figure of stability during a period of national unrest and upheaval.[20] He appealed to what he later called the "silent majority" of socially conservative Americans who disliked the 1960s counterculture and the anti-war demonstrators.[21] Nixon waged a prominent television advertising campaign, meeting with supporters in front of cameras.[22] He promised "peace with honor" in the Vietnam War but did not release specifics of how he would accomplish this goal, resulting in media intimations that he must have a "secret plan".[23] Humphrey's polling position improved in the final weeks of the campaign as he distanced himself from Johnson's Vietnam policies.[24] Johnson sought to conclude a peace agreement with North Vietnam in the week before the election; controversy remains over whether the Nixon campaign interfered with any ongoing negotiations between the Johnson administration and the South Vietnamese by engaging Anna Chennault, a prominent Chinese-American fundraiser for the Republican party.[25] Whether or not Nixon had any involvement, the peace talks collapsed shortly before the election, blunting Humphrey's momentum.[24] On election day, Nixon defeated Humphrey by about 500,000 votes, 43.4% to 42.7%; Wallace received 13.5% of the vote. Nixon secured 301 electoral votes to Humphrey's 191 and 46 for Wallace.[17][26] Nixon gained the support of many white ethnic and Southern white voters who traditionally had supported the Democratic Party, but he lost ground among African American voters.[27] In his victory speech, Nixon pledged that his administration would try to bring the divided nation together.[28] Despite Nixon's victory, Republicans failed to win control of either the House or the Senate in the concurrent congressional elections.[27] Administration See also: Presidential transition of Richard Nixon Cabinet President Nixon and his cabinet at the White House in June 1972 The Nixon cabinet Office Name Term President Richard Nixon 1969–1974 Vice President Spiro Agnew 1969–1973 none 1973 Gerald Ford 1973–1974 Secretary of State William P. Rogers 1969–1973 Henry Kissinger 1973–1974 Secretary of the Treasury David M. Kennedy 1969–1971 John Connally 1971–1972 George Shultz 1972–1974 William E. Simon 1974 Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird 1969–1973 Elliot Richardson 1973 James R. Schlesinger 1973–1974 Attorney General John N. Mitchell 1969–1972 Richard Kleindienst 1972–1973 Elliot Richardson 1973 William B. Saxbe 1974 Postmaster General Winton M. Blount 1969–1971 Secretary of the Interior Wally Hickel 1969–1970 Rogers Morton 1971–1974 Secretary of Agriculture Clifford M. Hardin 1969–1971 Earl Butz 1971–1974 Secretary of Commerce Maurice Stans 1969–1972 Peter G. Peterson 1972–1973 Frederick B. Dent 1973–1974 Secretary of Labor George Shultz 1969–1970 James Day Hodgson 1970–1973 Peter J. Brennan 1973–1974 Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Robert Finch 1969–1970 Elliot Richardson 1970–1973 Caspar Weinberger 1973–1974 Secretary of Housing and Urban Development George W. Romney 1969–1973 James T. Lynn 1973–1974 Secretary of Transportation John Volpe 1969–1973 Claude Brinegar 1973–1974 Director of the Bureau of the Budget Robert P. Mayo 1969–1970 Director of the Office of Management and Budget George Shultz 1970–1972 Caspar Weinberger 1972–1973 Roy Ash 1973–1974 Ambassador to the United Nations Charles Yost 1969–1971 George H. W. Bush 1971–1973 John A. Scali 1973–1974 Counselor to the President Arthur F. Burns 1969 Daniel Patrick Moynihan 1969–1970 Bryce Harlow 1969–1970 Robert Finch 1970–1972 Donald Rumsfeld 1970–1971 Anne Armstrong 1973–1974 Dean Burch 1974 Kenneth Rush 1974 For the major decisions of his presidency, Nixon relied on the Executive Office of the President rather than his Cabinet. Chief of Staff H. R. Haldeman and adviser John Ehrlichman emerged as his two most influential staffers regarding domestic affairs, and much of Nixon's interaction with other staff members was conducted through Haldeman.[29] Early in Nixon's tenure, conservative economist Arthur F. Burns and liberal former Johnson administration official Daniel Patrick Moynihan served as important advisers, but both had left the White House by the end of 1970.[30] Conservative attorney Charles Colson also emerged as an important adviser after he joined the administration in late 1969.[31] Unlike many of his fellow Cabinet members, Attorney General John N. Mitchell held sway within the White House, and Mitchell led the search for Supreme Court nominees.[32] In foreign affairs, Nixon enhanced the importance of the National Security Council, which was led by National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger.[29] Nixon's first Secretary of State, William P. Rogers, was largely sidelined during his tenure, and in 1973, Kissinger succeeded Rogers as Secretary of State while continuing to serve as National Security Advisor. Nixon presided over the reorganization of the Bureau of the Budget into the more powerful Office of Management and Budget, further concentrating executive power in the White House.[29] He also created the Domestic Council, an organization charged with coordinating and formulating domestic policy.[33] Nixon attempted to centralize control over the intelligence agencies, but he was generally unsuccessful, in part due to pushback from FBI director J. Edgar Hoover.[34] Despite his centralization of power in the White House, Nixon allowed his cabinet officials great leeway in setting domestic policy in subjects he was not strongly interested in, such as environmental policy.[35] In a 1970 memo to top aides, he stated that in domestic areas other than crime, school integration, and economic issues, "I am only interested when we make a major breakthrough or have a major failure. Otherwise don't bother me."[36] Nixon recruited former campaign rival George Romney to serve as the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, but Romney and Secretary of Transportation John Volpe quickly fell out of favor as Nixon attempted to cut the budgets of their respective departments.[37] Nixon did not appoint any female or African American cabinet officials, although Nixon did offer a cabinet position to civil rights leader Whitney Young.[38] Nixon's initial cabinet also contained an unusually small number of Ivy League graduates, with the notable exceptions of George P. Shultz and Elliot Richardson, who each held three different cabinet positions during Nixon's presidency.[39] Nixon attempted to recruit a prominent Democrat like Humphrey or Sargent Shriver into his administration, but was unsuccessful until early 1971, when former Governor John Connally of Texas became Secretary of the Treasury.[38] Connally would become one of the most powerful members of the cabinet and coordinated the administration's economic policies.[40] In 1973, as the Watergate scandal came to light, Nixon accepted the resignations of Haldeman, Erlichman, and Mitchell's successor as Attorney General, Richard Kleindienst.[41] Haldeman was succeeded by Alexander Haig, who became the dominant figure in the White House during the last months of Nixon's presidency.[42] Vice presidency As the Watergate scandal heated up in mid-1973, Vice President Spiro Agnew became a target in an unrelated investigation of corruption in Baltimore County, Maryland of public officials and architects, engineering, and paving contractors. He was accused of accepting kickbacks in exchange for contracts while serving as Baltimore County Executive, then when he was Governor of Maryland and Vice President.[43] On October 10, 1973, Agnew pleaded no contest to tax evasion and became the second Vice President after John C. Calhoun to resign from office.[43] Nixon used his authority under the 25th Amendment to nominate Gerald Ford for vice president. The well-respected Ford was confirmed by Congress and took office on December 6, 1973.[44][45] This represented the first time that an intra-term vacancy in the office of vice president was filled. The Speaker of the House, Carl Albert from Oklahoma, was next in line to the presidency during the 57-day vacancy. Judicial appointments Further information: Richard Nixon Supreme Court candidates, List of federal judges appointed by Richard Nixon, and Richard Nixon judicial appointment controversies Nixon nominated Warren E. Burger as the 15th Chief Justice of the United States in May 1969; Burger was confirmed to the position by the U.S. Senate by a 74–3 vote on June 9, 1969. Nixon made four successful appointments to the Supreme Court while in office, shifting the Court in a more conservative direction following the era of the liberal Warren Court.[46] Nixon took office with one pending vacancy, as the Senate had rejected President Johnson's nomination of Associate Justice Abe Fortas to succeed retiring Chief Justice Earl Warren. Months after taking office, Nixon nominated federal appellate judge Warren E. Burger to succeed Warren, and the U.S. Senate quickly confirmed him. Another vacancy arose in 1969 after Fortas resigned from Court, partially due to pressure from Attorney General Mitchell and other Republicans who criticized him for accepting compensation from financier Louis Wolfson.[47] To replace Fortas, Nixon successively nominated two Southern federal appellate judges, Clement Haynsworth and G. Harrold Carswell, but both were rejected by the Senate. Nixon then nominated federal appellate judge Harry Blackmun, who was confirmed by the Senate in 1970.[48] The retirements of Hugo Black and John Marshall Harlan II created two Supreme Court vacancies in late 1971. One of Nixon's nominees, corporate attorney Lewis F. Powell Jr., was easily confirmed. Nixon's other 1971 Supreme Court nominee, Assistant Attorney General William Rehnquist, faced significant resistance from liberal Senators, but he was ultimately confirmed.[48] Burger, Powell, and Rehnquist all compiled a conservative voting record on the Court, while Blackmun moved to the left during his tenure. Rehnquist would later succeed Burger as chief justice in 1986.[46] Nixon appointed a total of 231 federal judges, surpassing the previous record of 193 set by Franklin D. Roosevelt. In addition to his four Supreme Court appointments, Nixon appointed 46 judges to the United States Courts of Appeals, and 181 judges to the United States district courts. Domestic affairs Economy Further information: Nixon Shock and 1970s energy crisis Federal finances and GDP during Nixon's presidency[49] Fiscal Year Receipts Outlays Surplus/ Deficit GDP Debt as a % of GDP[50] 1969 186.9 183.6 3.2 980.3 28.4 1970 192.8 195.6 −2.8 1,046.7 27.1 1971 187.1 210.2 −23.0 1,116.6 27.1 1972 207.3 230.7 −23.4 1,216.3 26.5 1973 230.8 245.7 −14.9 1,352.7 25.2 1974 263.2 269.4 −6.1 1,482.9 23.2 1975 279.1 332.3 −53.2 1,606.9 24.6 Ref. [51] [52] [53] When Nixon took office in January 1969, the inflation rate had reached 4.7%, the highest rate since the Korean War. Johnson's Great Society programs and the Vietnam War effort had resulted in large budget deficits. There was little unemployment,[54] but interest rates were at their highest in a century.[55] Nixon's major economic goal was to reduce inflation; the most obvious means of doing so was to end the war.[55] As the war continued, the administration adopted a policy of restricting the growth of the money supply to address the inflation problem. In February 1970, as a part of the effort to keep federal spending down, Nixon delayed pay raises to federal employees by six months. When the nation's postal workers went on strike, he used the army to keep the postal system going. In the end, the government met the postal workers' wage demands, undoing some of the desired budget-balancing.[56] In December 1969, Nixon somewhat reluctantly signed the Tax Reform Act of 1969 despite its inflationary provisions; the act established the alternative minimum tax, which applied to wealthy individuals who used deductions to limit their tax liabilities.[57] In 1970, Congress granted the president the power to impose wage and price controls, though the Democratic congressional leadership, knowing Nixon had opposed such controls through his career, did not expect Nixon to actually use the authority.[58] With inflation unresolved by August 1971, and an election year looming, Nixon convened a summit of his economic advisers at Camp David. He then announced temporary wage and price controls, allowed the dollar to float against other currencies, and ended the convertibility of the dollar into gold.[59] Nixon's monetary policies effectively took the United States off the gold standard and brought an end to the Bretton Woods system, a post-war international fixed exchange-rate system. Nixon believed that this system negatively affected the U.S. balance of trade; the U.S. had experienced its first negative balance of trade of the 20th century in 1971.[60] Bowles points out, "by identifying himself with a policy whose purpose was inflation's defeat, Nixon made it difficult for Democratic opponents ... to criticize him. His opponents could offer no alternative policy that was either plausible or believable since the one they favored was one they had designed but which the president had appropriated for himself."[58] Nixon's policies dampened inflation in 1972, but their aftereffects contributed to inflation during his second term and into the Ford administration.[59] As Nixon began his second term, the economy was plagued by a stock market crash, a surge in inflation, and the 1973 oil crisis.[61] With the legislation authorizing price controls set to expire on April 30, the Senate Democratic Caucus recommended a 90-day freeze on all profits, interest rates, and prices.[62] Nixon re-imposed price controls in June 1973, echoing his 1971 plan, as food prices rose; this time, he focused on agricultural exports and limited the freeze to 60 days.[62] The price controls became unpopular with the public and business people, who saw powerful labor unions as preferable to the price board bureaucracy.[62] Business owners, however, now saw the controls as permanent rather than temporary, and voluntary compliance among small businesses decreased.[62] The controls and the accompanying food shortages—as meat disappeared from grocery stores and farmers drowned chickens rather than sell them at a loss—only fueled more inflation.[62] Despite their failure to rein in inflation, controls were slowly ended, and on April 30, 1974, their statutory authorization lapsed.[62] Between Nixon's accession to office and his resignation in August 1974, unemployment rates had risen from 3.5% to 5.6%, and the rate of inflation had grown from 4.7% to 8.7%.[61] Observers coined a new term for the undesirable combination of unemployment and inflation: "stagflation," a phenomenon that would worsen after Nixon left office.[63] Social programs Further information: Liberalism in the United States Welfare President Nixon and his cabinet in the White House in March 1971 One of Nixon's major promises in the 1968 campaign was to address what he described as the "welfare mess." The number of individuals enrolled in the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program had risen from 3 million in 1960 to 8.4 million in 1970, contributing to a drop in poverty. However, many Americans, particularly conservatives, believed that welfare programs discouraged individuals from finding employment; conservatives also derided "welfare queens" who they alleged collected excessive amounts of welfare benefits.[64] On taking office, Nixon established the Council of Urban Affairs, under the leadership of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, to develop a welfare reform proposal. Moynihan's proposed plan centered on replacing welfare programs with a negative income tax, which would provide a guaranteed minimum income to all Americans. Nixon became closely involved in the proposal and, despite opposition from Arthur Burns and other conservatives, adopted Moynihan's plan as the central legislative proposal of his first year in office. In an August 1969 televised address, Nixon proposed the Family Assistance Plan (FAP), which would establish a national income floor of $1600 per year for a family of four.[65] Public response to the FAP was highly favorable, but it faced strong opposition in Congress, partly due to the lack of congressional involvement in the drafting of the proposal. Many conservatives opposed the establishment of the national income floor, while many liberals believed that the floor was too low. Though the FAP passed the House, the bill died in the Senate Finance Committee in May 1970.[66] Though Nixon's overall proposal failed, Congress did adopt one aspect of the FAP, as it voted to establish the Supplemental Security Income program, which provides aid to low-income individuals who are aged or disabled.[67] Determined to dismantle much of Johnson's Great Society and its accompanying federal bureaucracy, Nixon defunded or abolished several programs, including the Office of Economic Opportunity, the Job Corps, and the Model Cities Program.[68] Nixon advocated a "New Federalism", which would devolve power to state and local elected officials, but Congress was hostile to these ideas and enacted only a few of them.[69] During Nixon's tenure, spending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid all increased dramatically.[67] Total spending on social insurance programs grew from $27.3 billion in 1969 to $67.4 billion in 1975, while the poverty rate dropped from 12.8 percent in 1968 to 11.1 percent in 1973.[70] Healthcare In August 1970, Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy introduced legislation to establish a single-payer universal health care system financed by taxes and with no cost sharing.[71] In February 1971, Nixon proposed a more limited package of health care reform, consisting of an employee mandate to offer private health insurance if employees volunteered to pay 25 percent of premiums, the federalization of Medicaid for poor families with dependent minor children, and support for health maintenance organizations (HMOs).[72] This market-based system would, Nixon argued, "build on the strengths of the private system."[73] Both the House and Senate held hearings on national health insurance in 1971, but no legislation emerged from either committee.[74] In October 1972, Nixon signed the Social Security Amendments of 1972, extending Medicare to those under 65 who had been severely disabled for over two years or had end stage renal disease and gradually raising the Medicare Part A payroll tax.[75] In December 1973, he signed the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973, establishing a trial federal program to promote and encourage the development of HMOs.[76] There was a renewed push for health insurance reform in 1974. In January, representatives Martha Griffiths and James C. Corman introduced the Health Security Act, a universal national health insurance program providing comprehensive benefits without any cost sharing backed by the AFL–CIO and UAW.[74] The following month Nixon proposed the Comprehensive Health Insurance Act, consisting of an employer mandate to offer private health insurance if employees volunteered to pay 25 percent of premiums, replacement of Medicaid by state-run health insurance plans available to all with income-based premiums and cost sharing, and replacement of Medicare with a new federal program that eliminated the limit on hospital days, added income-based out-of-pocket limits, and added outpatient prescription drug coverage.[74][77] In April, Kennedy and House Ways and Means committee chairman Wilbur Mills introduced the National Health Insurance Act, a bill to provide near-universal national health insurance with benefits identical to the expanded Nixon plan—but with mandatory participation by employers and employees through payroll taxes and with lower cost sharing.[74] Both plans were criticized by labor, consumer, and senior citizens organizations, and neither gained traction.[78] In mid-1974, shortly after Nixon's resignation, Mills tried to advance a compromise based on Nixon's plan, but gave up when unable to get more than a 13–12 majority of his committee to support his compromise.[74][79] Environmental policy Further information: Environmental policy of the United States § Nixon and the Environmental Decade (1970–1980) Environmentalism had emerged as a major movement during the 1960s, especially after the 1962 publication of Silent Spring.[80] Between 1960 and 1969, membership in the twelve largest environmental groups had grown from 124,000 to 819,000, and polling showed that millions of voters shared many of the goals of environmentalists.[81] Nixon was largely uninterested in environmental policy, but he did not oppose the goals of the environmental movement. In 1970, he signed the National Environmental Policy Act and established the Environmental Protection Agency, which was charged with coordinating and enforcing federal environmental policy. During his presidency, Nixon also signed the Clean Air Act of 1970, and the Clean Water Act. He signed the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the primary law for protecting imperiled species from extinction as a "consequence of economic growth and development untempered by adequate concern and conservation".[81][82] Nixon also pursued environmental diplomacy,[83] and Nixon administration official Russell E. Train opened a dialog on global environmental issues with Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin.[84][85] Political scientists Byron Daines and Glenn Sussman rate Nixon as the only Republican president since World War II to have a positive impact on the environment, asserting that "Nixon did not have to be personally committed to the environment to become one of the most successful presidents in promoting environmental priorities."[86] While applauding Nixon's progressive policy agenda, environmentalists found much to criticize in his record.[54] The administration strongly supported continued funding of the "noise-polluting" Supersonic transport (SST), which Congress dropped funding for in 1971. Additionally, he vetoed the Clean Water Act of 1972, and after Congress overrode the veto, Nixon impounded the funds Congress had authorized to implement it. While not opposed to the goals of the legislation, Nixon objected to the amount of money to be spent on reaching them, which he deemed excessive.[87] Faced as he was with a generally liberal Democratic Congress, Nixon used his veto power on multiple occasions during his presidency.[88][89][90] Congress's response came in the form of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which established a new budget process, and included a procedure providing congressional control over the impoundment of funds by the president. Nixon, mired in Watergate, signed the legislation in July 1974.[91] Desegregation and civil rights The Nixon years witnessed the first large-scale efforts to desegregate the nation's public schools.[92] Seeking to avoid alienating Southern whites, whom Nixon hoped would form part of a durable Republican coalition, the president adopted a "low profile" on school desegregation. He pursued this policy by allowing the courts to receive the criticism for desegregation orders, which Nixon's Justice Department would then enforce.[93] By September 1970, less than ten percent of black children were attending segregated schools.[94] After the Supreme Court handed down its decision in the 1971 case of Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, cross-district school busing it emerged as a major issue in both the North and the South. Swann permitted lower federal courts to mandate busing in order to remedy racial imbalance in schools. Though he enforced the court orders, Nixon believed that "forced integration of housing or education" was just as improper as legal segregation, and he took a strong public stance against its continuation. The issue of cross-district busing faded from the fore of national politics after the Supreme Court placed limits on the use of cross-district busing with its decision in the 1974 case of Milliken v. Bradley.[95] Nixon established the Office of Minority Business Enterprise to promote the establishment of minority-owned businesses.[96] The administration also worked to increase the number of racial minorities hired across the nation in various construction trades, implementing the first affirmative action plan in the United States. The Philadelphia Plan required government contractors in Philadelphia to hire a minimum number of minority workers.[97] In 1970, Nixon extended the Philadelphia Plan to encompass all federal contracts worth more than $50,000, and in 1971 he expanded the plan to encompass women and racial minorities.[98] Nixon and Attorney General Mitchell also helped enact an extension of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that expanded federal supervision of voting rights to all jurisdictions in which less than 50 percent of the minority population was registered to vote.[99] Dean J. Kotlowski states that: recent scholars have concluded that the president was neither a segregationist nor a conservative on the race question. These writers have shown that Nixon desegregated more schools than previous presidents, approved a strengthened Voting Rights Act, developed policies to aid minority businesses, and supported affirmative action.[100] Protests and crime Main article: Opposition to United States involvement in the Vietnam War Over the course of the Vietnam War, a large segment of the American population came to be opposed to U.S. involvement in South Vietnam. Public opinion steadily turned against the war following 1967, and by 1970 only a third of Americans believed that the U.S. had not made a mistake by sending troops to fight in Vietnam.[101] Anti-war activists organized massive protests like the Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam, which attracted over 600,000 protesters in various cities.[102] Opinions concerning the war grew more polarized after the Selective Service System instituted a draft lottery in December 1969. Some 30,000 young men fled to Canada to evade the draft between 1970 and 1973.[103] A wave of protests swept the country in reaction to the invasion of Cambodia.[104] In what is known as the Kent State shootings, a protest at Kent State University ended in the deaths of four students after the Ohio Army National Guard opened fire on an unarmed crowd.[105] The shootings increased tensions on other college campuses, and more than 75 colleges and universities were forced to shut down until the start of the next academic year.[104] As the U.S. continually drew down the number of troops in Vietnam, the number of protests declined, especially after 1970.[106] The Nixon administration vigorously prosecuted anti-war protesters like the "Chicago Seven," and ordered the FBI, CIA, NSA, and other intelligence agencies to monitor radical groups. Nixon also introduced anti-crime measures like the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and the District of Columbia Crime Control Bill, which included no-knock warrants and other provisions that concerned many civil libertarians.[106] In response to growing drug-related crime, Nixon became the first president to emphasize drug control, and he presided over the establishment of the Drug Enforcement Administration.[107] Space program Further information: Space policy of the United States Nixon visits the Apollo 11 astronauts in quarantine aboard the USS Hornet in July 1969 After a nearly decade-long national effort, the United States won the race to land astronauts on the moon on July 20, 1969, with the flight of Apollo 11. Nixon spoke with Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin during their moonwalk, calling the conversation "the most historic phone call ever made from the White House".[108] Nixon, however, was unwilling to keep funding for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) at the high level seen through the 1960s, and rejected NASA Administrator Thomas O. Paine's ambitious plans for the establishment of a permanent base on the moon by the end of the 1970s and the launch of a crewed expedition to Mars in the 1980s.[109] On May 24, 1972, Nixon approved a five-year cooperative program between NASA and the Soviet space program, culminating in the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project, a joint mission of an American Apollo and a Soviet Soyuz spacecraft in 1975.[110] Other issues Medical research initiatives Nixon submitted two significant medical research initiatives to Congress in February 1971.[111] The first, popularly referred to as the War on Cancer, resulted in passage that December of the National Cancer Act, which injected nearly $1.6 billion (equivalent to $9 billion in 2016) in federal funding to cancer research over a three-year period. It also provided for establishment of medical centers dedicated to clinical research and cancer treatment, 15 of them initially, whose work is coordinated by the National Cancer Institute.[112][113] The second initiative, focused on Sickle-cell disease (SCD), resulted in passage of the National Sickle Cell Anemia Control Act in May 1972. Long ignored, the lifting of SCD from obscurity to high visibility reflected the changing dynamics of electoral politics and race relations in America during the early 1970s. Under this legislation, the National Institutes of Health established several sickle cell research and treatment centers and the Health Services Administration established sickle cell screening and education clinics around the country.[114][115] Governmental reorganization Nixon proposed reducing the number of government departments to eight. Under his plan, the existing departments of State, Justice, Treasury, and Defense would be retained, while the remaining departments would be folded into the new departments of Economic Affairs, Natural Resources, Human Resources, and Community Development. Although Nixon did not succeed in this major reorganization,[116] he was able to convince Congress to eliminate one cabinet-level department, the United States Post Office Department. In July 1971, after passage of the Postal Reorganization Act, the Post Office Department was transformed into the United States Postal Service, an independent entity within the executive branch of the federal government.[117] Federal regulations Nixon supported passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, which established the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).[118] Other significant regulatory legislation enacted during Nixon's presidency included the Noise Control Act and the Consumer Product Safety Act.[54] Constitutional amendments When Congress extended the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in 1970 it included a provision lowering the age qualification to vote in all elections—federal, state, and local—to 18. Later that year, in Oregon v. Mitchell (1970), the Supreme Court held that Congress had the authority to lower the voting age qualification in federal elections, but not the authority to do so in state and local elections.[119] Nixon sent a letter to Congress supporting a constitutional amendment to lower the voting age, and Congress quickly moved forward with a proposed constitutional amendment guaranteeing the 18 year-old vote.[120] Sent to the states for ratification on March 23, 1971, the proposal became the Twenty-sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution on July 1, 1971, after being ratified by the requisite number of states (38).[121] Nixon also endorsed the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which passed both houses of Congress in 1972 and was submitted to the state legislatures for ratification.[122] The amendment failed to be ratified by 38 states within the period set by Congress for ratification. Nixon had campaigned as an ERA supporter in 1968, though feminists criticized him for doing little to help the ERA or their cause after his election. Nevertheless, he appointed more women to administration positions than Lyndon Johnson had.[123] Foreign affairs Main article: Foreign policy of the Richard Nixon administration Nixon Doctrine Main article: Nixon Doctrine A color-coded map of the world in 1970, showing the divide of countries of the world in the Cold War Green — Non-self-governing possessions of U.S. allies Blue — U.S. and U.S. allies Red — Soviet Union and its communist allies Orange — Communist countries not aligned with the Soviet Union Pink — Non Communist allies of Soviet Union Light Blue — Non-NATO members of EFTA and OECD Gray — Unknown or non aligned Upon taking office, Nixon pronounced the "Nixon Doctrine," a general statement of foreign policy under which the United States would not "undertake all the defense of the free nations." While existing commitments would be upheld, potential new commitments would be sharply scrutinized. Rather than becoming directly involved in conflicts, the United States would provide military and economic aid to nations that were subject to insurgency or aggression, or that were otherwise vital to U.S. strategic interests.[124] As part of the Nixon Doctrine, the U.S. greatly increased arms sales to the Middle East, especially Israel, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.[125] Another major beneficiary of aid was Pakistan, which the U.S. backed during the Bangladesh Liberation War.[126] Vietnam War Further information: United States in the Vietnam War § Vietnamization, 1969–73 Nixon delivers an address to the nation about the bombings in Cambodia, known as Operation Freedom Deal, on April 30, 1970 Nixon and Pat Nixon with Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos and his wife Imelda in Manila in July 1969 At the time Nixon took office, there were over 500,000 American soldiers in Southeast Asia. Over 30,000 U.S. military personnel serving in the Vietnam War had been killed since 1961, with approximately half of those deaths occurring in 1968.[127] The war was broadly unpopular in the United States with widespread and sometimes violent protests taking place on a regular basis. The Johnson administration agreed to suspend bombing in exchange for negotiations without preconditions, but this agreement never fully took force. According to Walter Isaacson, soon after taking office, Nixon concluded that the Vietnam War could not be won and he was determined to end the war quickly.[128] Conversely, Black argues that Nixon sincerely believed he could intimidate North Vietnam through the Madman theory.[129] Regardless of his opinion of the war, Nixon wanted to end the American role in it without the appearance of an American defeat, which he feared would badly damage his presidency and precipitate a return to isolationism.[130] He sought some arrangement which would permit American forces to withdraw, while leaving South Vietnam secure against attack.[131] In mid-1969, Nixon began efforts to negotiate peace with the North Vietnamese, but negotiators were unable to reach an agreement.[132] With the failure of the peace talks, Nixon implemented a strategy of "Vietnamization," which consisted of increased U.S. aid and Vietnamese troops taking on a greater combat role in the war. To great public approval, he began phased troop withdrawals by the end of 1969, sapping the strength of the domestic anti-war movement.[133] Despite the failure of Operation Lam Son 719, which was designed to be the first major test of the South Vietnamese Army since the implementation of Vietnamization, the drawdown of American soldiers in Vietnam continued throughout Nixon's tenure.[134] In early 1970, Nixon sent U.S. and South Vietnamese soldiers into Cambodia to attack North Vietnamese bases, expanding the ground war out of Vietnam for the first time.[133] He had previously approved a secret B-52 carpet bombing campaign of North Vietnamese positions in Cambodia in March 1969 (code-named Operation Menu), without the consent of Cambodian leader Norodom Sihanouk.[135][136] Even within the administration, many disapproved of the incursions into Cambodia, and anti-war protesters were irate.[105] The bombing of Cambodia continued into the 1970s in support of the Cambodian government of Lon Nol, which was then battling a Khmer Rouge insurgency in the Cambodian Civil War, as part of Operation Freedom Deal.[137] In 1971, Nixon ordered incursions into Laos to attack North Vietnamese bases, provoking further domestic unrest.[138] That same year, excerpts from the "Pentagon Papers" were published by The New York Times and The Washington Post. When news of the leak first appeared, Nixon was inclined to do nothing, but Kissinger persuaded him to try to prevent their publication. The Supreme Court ruled for the newspapers in the 1971 case of New York Times Co. v. United States, thereby allowing for the publication of the excerpts.[139] By mid-1971, disillusionment with the war had reached a new high, as 71 percent of Americans believed that sending soldiers to Vietnam had been a mistake.[140] By the end of 1971, 156,000 U.S. soldiers remained in Vietnam; 276 American soldiers serving in Vietnam were killed in the last six months of that year.[141] North Vietnam launched the Easter Offensive in March 1972, overwhelming the South Vietnamese army.[142] In reaction to the Easter Offensive, Nixon ordered a massive bombing campaign in North Vietnam known as Operation Linebacker.[143] As U.S. troop withdrawals continued, conscription was reduced and in 1973 ended; the armed forces became all-volunteer.[144] In the aftermath of the Easter Offensive, peace talks between the United States and North Vietnam resumed, and by October 1972 a framework for a settlement had been reached. Objections from South Vietnamese President Nguyễn Văn Thiệu derailed this agreement, and the peace talks broke down. In December 1972, Nixon ordered another massive bombing campaign, Operation Linebacker II; domestic criticism of the operation convinced Nixon of the necessity to quickly reach a final agreement with North Vietnam.[145] After years of fighting, the Paris Peace Accords were signed at the beginning of 1973. The agreement implemented a cease fire and allowed for the withdrawal of remaining American troops; however, it did not require the 160,000 North Vietnam Army regulars located in the South to withdraw.[146] By March 1973, U.S. military forces had been withdrawn from Vietnam.[147] Once American combat support ended, there was a brief truce, but fighting quickly broke out again, as both South Vietnam and North Vietnam violated the truce.[148][149] Congress effectively ended any possibility of another American military intervention by passing the War Powers Resolution over Nixon's veto.[150] China and the Soviet Union Nixon took office in the midst of the Cold War, a sustained period of geopolitical tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union. The United States and Soviet Union had been the clear leaders of their respective blocs of allies during the 1950s, but the world became increasingly multipolar during the 1960s. U.S. allies in Western Europe and East Asia had recovered economically, and while they remained allied with United States, they set their own foreign policies. The fracture in the so-called "Second World" of Communist states was more serious, as the split between the Soviet Union and China escalated into a border conflict in 1969. The United States and the Soviet Union continued to compete for worldwide influence, but tensions had eased considerably since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. In this shifting international context, Nixon and Kissinger sought to realign U.S. foreign policy and establish peaceful coexistence with both the Soviet Union and China.[151] Nixon's goal of closer relations with China and the Soviet Union was closely linked to ending the Vietnam War,[152][153][154] since he hoped that rapprochement with the two leading Communist powers would pressure North Vietnam into accepting a favorable settlement.[155] China Further information: 1972 visit by Richard Nixon to China President Nixon shakes hands with Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai upon arriving in Beijing for his historic visit to mainland China in February 1972 Chinese Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong meets with Nixon on February 21, 1972 Since the end of the Chinese Civil War, the United States had refused to formally recognize the People's Republic of China (PRC) as the legitimate government of China, though the PRC controlled Mainland China. The U.S. had instead supported the Republic of China (ROC), which controlled Taiwan.[156] By the time Nixon took office, many leading foreign policy figures in the United States had come to believe the U.S. should end its policy of isolating the PRC.[157] The vast Chinese markets presented an economic opportunity for the increasingly-weak U.S. economy, and the Sino-Soviet split offered an opportunity to play the two Communist powers against each other. Chinese leaders, meanwhile, were receptive to closer relations with the U.S. for several reasons, including hostility to the Soviet Union, a desire for increased trade, and hopes of winning international recognition.[156] Both sides faced domestic pressures against closer relations. A conservative faction of Republicans led by Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan strongly opposed a rapprochement with China, while Lin Biao led a similar faction in the PRC. For the first two years of his presidency, Nixon and China each made subtle moves designed to lower tensions, including the removal of travel restrictions. The expansion of the Vietnam War into Laos and Cambodia hindered, but did not derail, the move towards normalization of relations.[158] Due to a misunderstanding at the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships, the Chinese table tennis team invited the U.S. table tennis team to tour China, creating an opening for further engagement between the U.S. and China.[159] In the aftermath of the visit, Nixon lifted the trade embargo on China. At a July 1971 meeting with Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, Henry Kissinger promised not to support independence for Taiwan, while Zhou invited Nixon to China for further talks.[158] After the meeting, China and the United States astounded the world by simultaneously announcing that Nixon would visit China in February 1972.[160] In the aftermath of the announcement, the United Nations passed Resolution 2758, which recognized the PRC as the legitimate government of China and expelled representatives from the ROC.[161] In February 1972, Nixon traveled to China; Kissinger briefed Nixon for over 40 hours in preparation.[162] Upon touching down in the Chinese capital of Beijing, Nixon made a point of shaking Zhou's hand, something which then-Secretary of State John Foster Dulles had refused to do in 1954 when the two met in Geneva.[163] The visit was carefully choreographed by both governments, and major events were broadcast live during prime time to reach the widest possible television audience in the U.S.[164] When not in meetings, Nixon toured architectural wonders such as the Forbidden City, Ming Tombs, and the Great Wall, giving many Americans received their first glimpse into Chinese life.[163] Nixon and Kissinger discussed a range of issues with Zhou and Mao Zedong, the Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party.[165] China provided assurances that it would not intervene in the Vietnam War, while the United States promised to prevent Japan from acquiring nuclear weapons. Nixon recognized Taiwan as part of China, while the Chinese agreed to pursue a peaceful settlement in the dispute with the Republic of China. The United States and China increased trade relations and established unofficial embassies in each other's respective capitals. Though some conservatives criticized his visit, Nixon's opening of relations with China was widely popular in the United States.[166] The visit also aided Nixon's negotiations with the Soviet Union, which feared the possibility of a Sino-American alliance.[167] Soviet Union Further information: Moscow Summit (1972) Nixon in Kyiv in 1972 Nixon meets with Leonid Brezhnev during the Soviet leader's trip to the U.S. in June 1973 Nixon made détente, the easing of tensions with the Soviet Union, one of his top foreign policy priorities. Through détente, he hoped to "minimize confrontation in marginal areas and provide, at least, alternative possibilities in the major ones." West Germany had also pursued closer relations with the Soviet Union in a policy known as "Ostpolitik," and Nixon hoped to re-establish American dominance in NATO by taking the lead in negotiations with the Soviet Union. Nixon also believed that expanding trade with the Soviet Union would help the U.S. economy and could allow both countries to devote fewer resources to defense spending. The Soviets were motivated by a struggling economy and their ongoing split with China.[168] Upon taking office, Nixon took several steps to signal to the Soviets his desire for negotiation. In his first press conference, he noted that the United States would accept nuclear parity, rather than superiority, with the Soviet Union. Kissinger conducted extensive backchannel talks with Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin over arms control negotiations and potential Soviet assistance in negotiations with North Vietnam. Seeking a bargaining chip in negotiations, Nixon funded development of MIRVs, which were not easily countered by existing anti-ballistic missile (ABM) systems. Arms control negotiations would thus center over ABM systems, MIRVs, and the various components of each respective country's nuclear arsenal. After over a year of negotiations, both sides agreed to the outlines of two treaties; one treaty would focus on ABM systems, while the other would focus on limiting nuclear arsenals.[169] In May 1972, Nixon met with Leonid Brezhnev and other leading Soviet officials at the 1972 Moscow Summit. The two sides reached the Strategic Arms Limitation Agreement (SALT I), which set upper limits on the number of offensive missiles and ballistic missile submarines that each county could maintain. A separate agreement, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, stipulated that each country could only field two anti-ballistic missile systems. The United States also agreed to the creation of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.[170] An October 1972 trade agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union vastly increased trade between the two countries, though Congress did not approve of Nixon's proposal to extend most favored nation status to the Soviet Union.[171] Nixon would embark on a second trip to the Soviet Union in 1974, meeting with Brezhnev in Yalta. They discussed a proposed mutual defense pact and other issues, but there were no significant breakthroughs in the negotiations.[172] During Nixon's final year in office, Congress undercut Nixon's détente policies by passing the Jackson–Vanik amendment.[173] Senator Henry M. Jackson, an opponent of détente, introduced the Jackson–Vanik amendment in response to a Soviet tax that curbed the flow of Jewish emigrants, many of whom sought to immigrate to Israel. Angered by the amendment, the Soviets canceled the 1972 trade agreement and reduced the number of Jews who were permitted to emigrate.[174] Though détente was unpopular with many on the left due to humanitarian concerns, and with many on the right due to concerns about being overly accommodating to the Soviets, Nixon's policies helped significantly diminish Cold War tensions even after he left office.[175] India Main article: India–United States relations Nixon at the arrival ceremony for Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on the South Lawn of the White House in 1971 Relations with India hit an all-time low under the Nixon administration in the early 1970s. Nixon shifted away from the neutral stance which his predecessors had taken towards India-Pakistan hostilities. He established a very close relationship with Pakistan, aiding it militarily and economically, as India, now under the leadership of Indira Gandhi, was leaning towards Soviet Union. He considered Pakistan as a very important ally to counter Soviet influence in the Indian subcontinent and establish ties with China, with whom Pakistan was very close.[176] The frosty personal relationship between Nixon and Indira further contributed to the poor relationship between the two nations.[177] During the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War, the U.S. openly supported Pakistan and deployed its aircraft carrier USS Enterprise towards the Bay of Bengal, which was seen as a show of force by the U.S. in support of the West Pakistani forces. Later in 1974, India conducted its first nuclear test, Smiling Buddha, which was opposed by the US, however it also concluded that the test did not violate any agreement and proceeded with a June 1974 shipment of enriched uranium for the Tarapur reactor.[178][179] Princeton University professor Gary Bass contends that Nixon's actions and the U.S. administration's policy toward South Asia under Nixon was influenced by his hatred of, and sexual repulsion toward, Indians.[180] Latin America Nixon and Mexican president Gustavo Díaz Ordaz riding a presidential motorcade in San Diego in September 1970 Cuba Nixon had been a firm supporter of Kennedy in the 1961 Bay of Pigs Invasion and 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis; on taking office he stepped up covert operations against Cuba and Cuban president Fidel Castro. He maintained close relations with the Cuban-American exile community through his friend, Bebe Rebozo, who often suggested ways of irritating Castro. These activities concerned the Soviets and Cubans, who feared Nixon might attack Cuba in violation of the understanding between Kennedy and Khrushchev which had ended the missile crisis. In August 1970, the Soviets asked Nixon to reaffirm the agreement. Despite his hard line against Castro, Nixon agreed. The process, which began in secret but quickly leaked, had not been completed when the U.S. deduced that the Soviets were expanding their base at the Cuban port of Cienfuegos in October 1970. A minor confrontation ensued, which was concluded with an understanding that the Soviets would not use Cienfuegos for submarines bearing ballistic missiles. The final round of diplomatic notes, reaffirming the 1962 accord, were exchanged in November.[181] Chile Further information: United States intervention in Chile Like his predecessors, Nixon was determined to prevent the rise of another Soviet-aligned state in Latin America, and his administration was greatly distressed by the victory of Marxist candidate Salvador Allende in the 1970 Chilean presidential election.[130] Nixon pursued a vigorous campaign of covert resistance to Allende, intended to first prevent Allende from taking office, called Track I, and then when that failed, to provide a "military solution", called Track II.[182] As part of Track II, CIA operatives approached senior Chilean military leaders, using false flag operatives, and encouraged a coup d'état, providing both finances and weapons.[183] These efforts failed, and Allende took office in November 1970.[184] The Nixon administration drastically cut economic aid to Chile and convinced World Bank leaders to block aid to Chile.[185] Extensive covert efforts continued as the U.S. funded black propaganda, organized strikes against Allende, and provided funding for Allende opponents. When the Chilean newspaper El Mercurio requested significant funds for covert support in September 1971, Nixon personally authorized the funds in "a rare example of presidential micromanagement of a covert operation."[186]: 93  In September 1973, General Augusto Pinochet assumed power in a violent coup d'état.[187] During the coup, the deposed president died under disputed circumstances, and there were allegations of American involvement.[188] According to diplomatic historian George Herring, "no evidence has ever been produced to prove conclusively that the United States instigated or actively participated in the coup." Herring also notes, however, that whether or not it took part in the coup, the U.S. created the atmosphere in which the coup took place.[189] Middle East See also: Arab–Israeli conflict Richard and Pat Nixon with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir in 1973 Nixon meets with President Anwar Sadat of Egypt in June 1974 Early in his first term, Nixon pressured Israel over its nuclear program, and his administration developed a peace plan in which Israel would withdraw from the territories it conquered in the Six-Day War. After the Soviet Union upped arms shipments to Egypt in mid-1970, Nixon moved closer to Israel, authorizing the shipment of F-4 fighter aircraft.[190] In October 1973, after Israel declined Egyptian President Anwar Sadat's offer of negotiations over the lands it had won control of in the Six-Day War, Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack against Israel. After Egypt and Syria experienced early successes in what became known as the Yom Kippur War, the United States began to supply massive amounts of military aid to Israel, as Nixon overrode Kissinger's early reluctance to provide strong support to Israel. After Israel turned the tide in the war and advanced into Egypt and Syria, Kissinger and Brezhnev organized a cease fire. Cutting out the Soviet Union from further involvement, Kissinger helped arrange agreements between Israel and the Arab states.[191] Though it had been established in 1960, OPEC did not gain effective control over oil prices until 1970, when Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi forced oil companies in Libya to agree to a price increase; other countries followed suit. U.S. leaders did not attempt to block these price increases, as they believed that higher prices would help increase domestic production of oil. This increased production failed to materialize, and by 1973 the U.S. consumed over one and a half times the oil that it produced domestically.[192] In 1973, in response to the U.S. support of Israel in the Yom Kippur War, OPEC countries cut oil production, raised prices, and initiated an embargo targeted against the United States and other countries that had supported Israel.[193] The embargo caused gasoline shortages and rationing in the United States in late 1973, but was eventually ended by the oil-producing nations as the Yom Kippur War peace took hold.[194] Europe Just weeks after his 1969 inauguration, Nixon made an eight-day trip to Europe. He met with British Prime Minister Harold Wilson in London and French President Charles de Gaulle in Paris. He also made groundbreaking trips to several Eastern European nations, including Romania, Yugoslavia, and Poland. However, the NATO allies of the United States generally did not play a large role in Nixon's foreign policy, as he focused on the Vietnam War and détente. In 1971, the United States, Britain, France, and the Soviet Union reached the Four Power Agreement, in which the Soviet Union guaranteed access to West Berlin so long as it was not incorporated into West Germany.[195] List of international trips Nixon made fifteen international trips to 30 different countries during his presidency.[196] Countries visited by President Richard Nixon, 1969–1974 Dates Country Locations Details 1 February 23–24, 1969 Belgium Brussels Attended the 23rd meeting of North Atlantic Council. Met with King Baudouin I. February 24–26, 1969 United Kingdom London Informal visit. Delivered several public addresses. February 26–27, 1969 West Germany West Berlin Bonn Delivered several public addresses. Addressed the Bundestag. February 27–28, 1969 Italy Rome Met with President Giuseppe Saragat and Prime Minister Mariano Rumor and other officials. February 28 – March 2, 1969 France Paris Met with President Charles de Gaulle. March 2, 1969 Vatican City Apostolic Palace Audience with Pope Paul VI. 2 July 26–27, 1969 Philippines Manila State visit. Met with President Ferdinand Marcos

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ United States Army Counterintelligence (ACI) is the component of United States Army Military Intelligence which conducts counterintelligence activities to detect, identify, assess, counter, exploit and/or neutralize adversarial, foreign intelligence services, international terrorist organizations, and insider threats to the United States Army and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD).[1] Overview ACI is one of only three DoD Counterintelligence (CI) entities designated by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, as a "Military Department CI Organization" or "MDCO."[2] The other two DoD MDCO's are the Department of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI) and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS). As an MDCO, Special Agents of ACI are recognized federal law enforcement officers tasked with conducting criminal CI investigations in conjunction with other CI activities. Other CI entities within the DoD not recognized as MDCOs, such as Marine Corps Counterintelligence and the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) have no direct criminal investigative mission and therefore are designated only as "intelligence" or "security" organizations; although they may assist in such investigations in a non-law enforcement capacity as authorized by Executive Order 12333 and applicable regulations. ACI Special Agents are U.S. Army personnel, either military or civilian, who are trained and appointed to conduct CI investigations and operations for the U.S. Army and DoD. As federal law enforcement officers who are issued badge and credentials, they have apprehension authority and jurisdiction in the investigation of national security crimes committed by Army personnel including treason, spying, espionage, sedition, subversion, sabotage or assassination directed by foreign governments/actors, and support to international terrorism. They do not have jurisdiction over general criminal matters, which are investigated by the United States Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID).[3][4] In other branches of the U.S. military, both general criminal and counterintelligence investigations are performed by the same entity, as seen with AFOSI and NCIS who are also identified as "Defense Criminal Investigative Organizations."[5] The Army continues to keep these investigative activities separate via ACI and CID, although parallel and joint investigations happen periodically between these two U.S. Army agencies. Most operational ACI Special Agents today work under the auspices of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM) with the US Army Counterintelligence Command (USACIC) responsible for CI activities and operating field offices within the continental United States. Outside the continental U.S., the 500th Military Intelligence Brigade provides the same type of support in Hawaii and Japan, the 501st Military Intelligence Brigade supports South Korea, and the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade does so in Europe. The 470th Military Intelligence Brigade covers South America, the 513th Military Intelligence Brigade covers the greater Middle East, and the 650th Military Intelligence Group[6] covers NATO missions in applicable countries. Other U.S. Army elements also have CI agents assigned to provide direct support such as those found within the various elements of Special Operations. History Prior to World War I, the U.S. military had no standing counterintelligence services, requiring the use of other elements to conduct counterintelligence activities, such as the Culper Spy Ring during the American Revolution, and by Allan Pinkerton and his private detectives during the U.S. Civil War.[7] ACI was formed as a standing CI service in 1917 during World War I, as the Corps of Intelligence Police under the newly created Military Intelligence Division commanded by Colonel Ralph Van Deman. Later, it was renamed and reformed as the Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) during World War II and the Cold War. In the early 1970's, following the disbanding of the CIC, ACI was completely restructured as a result of intelligence reform. ACI agents were placed under the control of different military intelligence organizations that followed into the present day under INSCOM. Special Agent duties ACI Special Agent duties include the investigation of national security crimes using special investigative procedures, conducting counterintelligence operations, processing intelligence evidence, conducting both surveillance and counter-surveillance activities, protecting sensitive technologies, preparing and distributing reports, conducting source/informant operations, debriefing personnel for counterintelligence collections, and supporting counter-terrorism operations. Senior ACI Special Agents provide guidance to junior Special Agents and supervise their training; conduct liaison and operational coordination with foreign and U.S. law enforcement, security, and intelligence agencies; plan and conduct counterintelligence operations/activities related to national security; conduct high-profile counterintelligence collection activities and source operations ranging from overt to clandestine collection; supervise/manage surveillance operations; provide support for counterintelligence analytical products, to include preparing counterintelligence reports, estimates, and vulnerability assessments; and with additional training, may conduct technical surveillance countermeasures (TSCM), credibility assessment examinations, or exploit cyber threats. Some ACI Special Agents are also cross-sworn and assigned to various federal task forces, such as the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force in regions of the U.S. where the U.S. Army or DoD has significant assets to protect against terrorist threats. Senior ACI Special Agents are also often assigned to U.S. Army Special Forces groups to assist with liaison, source operations, and intelligence investigations (typically in support of force protection); while also working closely with other intelligence collectors. These "Special Operations Forces (SOF)" CI Agents are granted the Enlisted Special Qualification Identifier (SQI) "S" or Officer Skill Code "K9" after successfully graduating from Airborne School, and after they have spent 12–24 months with a SOF unit; which may also require Agents complete additional unit level training and/or: Ranger School, SERE School, or applicable JSOU courses. While conducting operations in tactical environments, Army CI/HUMINT personnel often work in small teams called HUMINT Exploitation Teams (HET). HET's are designed to not only collect and report HUMINT information but to also exploit that intelligence information by acting on it. HET's also conduct Counterintelligence activities designed to deny, detect and deceive the enemy's ability to target friendly forces. Like their CID counterparts, ACI special agents are covered by the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA), and may apply for LEOSA credentials to carry a personal concealed firearm in any jurisdiction in the United States or United States Territories, regardless of state or local laws, with certain exceptions.[8] Functions of Counterintelligence Military and Civilian US Army Counterintelligence (CI) Special Agents receive their badge and credentials after graduation from the US Army CI Special Agent course in Fort Huachuca, Arizona. At his time, Army CI Special Agents are authorized, but not required, to attend the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center's (FLETC) Criminal Investigator Training Program (CITP) to function in most duty positions, with the exception of those agents assigned to FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTF). Unlike the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) and Office of Special Investigations (OSI), the Army separates their criminal investigators into two separate components known as United States Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) and Army Counterintelligence. Army CID is responsible for investigating the more traditional range of criminal activity that most people would associate with the job of a Special Agent. On the other hand, Army CI is responsible for criminal investigations related to National Security Crimes like espionage, terrorism, sabotage, subversion, sedition, and treason. The United States Coast Guard made the same decision when they established the Coast Guard Counterintelligence Service (CGCIS). The civilian counterparts for Army CID are classified as 1811's,[9] however the civilian counterparts for Army CI are classified as 0132's[10] who are predominately employed under the Military Intelligence Civilian Excepted Career Program (MICECP).[11] Investigations Investigation of National Security Crimes. Investigating the defection of Military personnel and DA Civilians overseas. Security Violations. Investigations involving AWOL/deserters and suicides involving someone with access to classified material. Operations CI Special Operations/National Foreign Counterintelligence Program. Offensive Counterintelligence Programs. CI Support to Force Protection. Collection Intelligence collection related to foreign intelligence service activities. Intelligence collection related to national security crimes. Write intelligence information reports. Intelligence debriefings. Analysis and Production CI analysis focusing on foreign intelligence and insider threat. CI threat and vulnerability assessments. CI studies of foreign intelligence services and insider threat. Functional Services CI Polygraph Program. Technical Surveillance Countermeasures (TSCM). Special Agent occupational codes Counterintelligence Special Agent Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) codes include: MOS Code Personnel Type Duty Title 35L Enlisted (E1 – E7) Counterintelligence Special Agent 35Y Senior Enlisted (E8 – E9) Chief Counterintelligence Sergeant 351L Warrant Officer (W1 – W5) Counterintelligence Technician 35A2E Commissioned Officer (O1 – O6) Counterintelligence Officer 0132 Civilian Intelligence Specialist (Special Agent & Supervisory Positions) The Army is planning to re-designate civilian agents from 0132[10] to a new 1800 series federal job code. The date for this change has not yet been determined. Selection and initial training Department of the Army Pamphlet 611-21 requires applicants for Counterintelligence be able to: Obtain a Top Secret security clearance with Sensitive Compartmented Information eligibility. A physical profile (PULHES) of 222221 or better. Be a minimum age of 21 after training for accreditation as a Special Agent. Be a minimum rank of E5/Sergeant after training for accreditation as a Special Agent. Possess an occupational specialty with a physical demands rating of medium. Have normal color vision. Have a minimum score of 101 in aptitude area ST on ASVAB tests administered on or after July 1, 2004.[12] Be a high school graduate or equivalent. Possess good voice quality and be able to speak English without an objectionable accent or impediment. Never been a member of the U.S. Peace Corps. No adverse information in military personnel, Provost Marshal, intelligence, or medical records which would prevent receiving a security clearance under AR 380-67 including no record of conviction by court-martial, or by a civilian court for any offense other than minor traffic violations. Must be interviewed per DA Pam 600-8, procedure 3-33 by a qualified Counterintelligence Special Agent. Must be a U.S. citizen. Must receive a command level recommendation for initial appointment. Must not have immediate family members or immediate family members of the Soldier's spouse who reside in a country within whose boundaries physical or mental coercion is known to be common practice. Have neither commercial nor vested interest in a country within whose boundaries physical or mental coercion is known to be a common practice against persons acting in the interest of the U.S. Must receive a waiver for any immediate family members who are not U.S. citizens. This occupation has recently been made an entry level Army position,[12] though many applicants are still drawn from the existing ranks. Becoming a credentialed Counterintelligence Special Agent requires successful completion of the Counterintelligence Special Agent Course (CISAC) at either Fort Huachuca, Arizona, or Camp Williams, Utah. Newly trained special agents are placed on a probationary status for the first year after graduation for active duty agents, and for the first two years after graduation for reserve/national guard agents. This allows for the removal of the Counterintelligence Special Agent MOS if the probationary Agent is deemed unfit for duty as a Special Agent.[1] Additional and advanced training Joint Counterintelligence Training Academy (JCITA): at Quantico, VA has numerous classified specialty and advanced counterintelligence courses for Special Agents of U.S. Army Counterintelligence, NCIS, OSI, and other agencies.[13] Defense Cyber Investigations Training Academy (DCITA): as with numerous other law enforcement and intelligence agencies, DCITA also trains U.S. Army Counterintelligence Special Agents to be cyber criminal investigators and computer forensic specialists to support various counterintelligence investigations, operations, and collections. Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC): As of 2017, U.S. Army Counterintelligence is an official partner organization with FLETC and began regularly sending agents through the Criminal Investigator Training Program (CITP), the same course attended by numerous other U.S. Federal Law Enforcement Agencies. Joint Special Operations University (JSOU): As with other special operations support occupations, Counterintelligence Special Agents assigned to special operations units have the opportunity to attend several courses through JSOU located near US SOCOM Headquarters at MacDill Air Force Base. Uniform and firearms ACI Active duty Special Agents within the United States are authorized to wear civilian business attire and may carry firearms in the performance of their investigative duties. In tactical and combat environments, they are authorized to wear the Army Combat Uniform, tactical civilian attire, or attire that supports the operational security of their mission. When agents wear the Army Combat Uniform they are authorized to replace rank insignia with Department of the Army Civilian "U.S." insignia. Given the broad range of CI activities, specific assignments will dictate what clothing is appropriate, which may be civilian attire local to the area of operation. Although agents may be issued other weapons on special assignments, they are generally assigned a standard Sig Sauer M18 compact pistol. For combat environments, special agents are also typically issued the M4 carbine. Notable U.S. Army Counterintelligence Special Agents Noel Behn[14] Philip J. Corso Luis Elizondo Jim Gilmore[15] Mike Gravel Clinton J. Hill Henry Kissinger[16] Arthur Komori Ann M. McDonough Edward T. McHale Ib Melchior[17] Nathan Safferstein Richard M. Sakakida J. D. Salinger William L. Uanna Isadore Zack[18] Nikko Ortiz In films and television The 1988 movie Hotel Terminus, is a documentary which chronicles the life of former German SS Officer Klaus Barbie, and partially depicts his time working for CIC after World War II. In the popular 1986-87 comic book series Watchmen and its later film adaptation, a character named Forbes is an Agent of U.S. Army Intelligence. In the 1981 George Lucas and Steven Spielberg movie Raiders of the Lost Ark starring Harrison Ford, Indiana Jones and his friend Marcus are briefed and sent on a mission by two CIP Special Agents to locate and recover the lost Ark of the Covenant before the Nazis can find it. In the 1975 movie The Imposter, an ex-Army intelligence agent is hired to impersonate a rich builder who has been marked for assassination. From 1973 to 1979, the television show MASH featured a recurring character named Colonel Samuel Flagg, who was likely a current or former CIC Agent. The 1972 TV movie Fireball Forward featured Ben Gazzara as a general placed in command of a "bad luck" division. He quickly determines there is a spy in the unit, giving the Germans the division plans just before each battle, resulting in defeat after defeat. The general contacts CIC major L.Q. Jones, who assigns CIC undercover agent Morgan Paull. The agent eventually finds the spy. This movie was a pilot for a series that was never made. In a 1965 episode of the television show The Lucy Show, starring Lucille Ball, titled, Lucy and the Undercover Agent, Lucy becomes convinced a mysterious person at a restaurant is an enemy spy when, in fact, he is an Army CI Agent who thinks Lucy is a spy. See also Other Military Department Counterintelligence Organizations Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI or OSI) Additional Defense Criminal Investigative Organizations United States Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) Additional Department of Defense Counterintelligence Entities (Non-Law Enforcement) Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) Marine Corps Counterintelligence Non-DoD Federal Counterintelligence Investigative Organizations Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) Coast Guard Counterintelligence Service (CGCIS) Additional Information Federal law enforcement in the United States U.S. Army Special Forces List of United States Army MOS Historical U.S. Army Counterintelligence Corps Historical U.S. Army Corps of Intelligence Police References United States Army Regulation 381-20, The Army Counterintelligence Program, May 25, 2010 DOD INSTRUCTION O-5240.10, COUNTERINTELLIGENCE (CI) IN THE DOD COMPONENTS, April 27, 2020 United States Army Techniques Publication 2-22.2-1, Counterintelligence Investigations, Counterintelligence Investigative Jurisdiction United States Army Regulation 195-2, Criminal Investigation Activities, June 9, 2014 DOD INSTRUCTION 5505.16, INVESTIGATIONS BY DOD COMPONENTS, June 23, 2017 https://irp.fas.org/doddir/army/fm34-37_97/9-chap.htm Stockham, Braden (2017). The Expanded Application of Forensic Science and Law Enforcement Methodologies in Army Counterintelligence. Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Center. https://leosaonline.com/LEOSAUniversalApplicationv7.pdf[bare URL PDF] https://www.specialagents.org/ https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/classification-qualifications/classifying-general-schedule-positions/standards/0100/gs0132.pdf[bare URL PDF] "US Army Counterintelligence". "Counterintelligence Agent". "Joint Military Intelligence Training Center (JMITC)". "Noel Behn, 70, Novelist, Producer and Screenwriter". The New York Times. July 31, 1998. Retrieved August 18, 2015. "Member Profile: Mr. Jim Gilmore". Republican National Lawyers Association. Archived from the original on March 27, 2017. Retrieved September 30, 2012. Isaacson, Walter (September 27, 2005). Kissinger: A Biography. New York: Simon and Schuster. pp. 47–49. ISBN 9780743286978. Retrieved August 18, 2015. Colker, David (March 21, 2015). "Ib Melchior dies at 97; sci-fi filmmaker reset classic tales in space". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved August 18, 2015. "Isadore Zack; intelligence work led to fight for justice". Boston Globe. May 11, 2011. Retrieved August 18, 2015.

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The premiere of "Beyond War Part I: The Nuclear Threat," the inaugural episode of a groundbreaking four-part series delving into the complexities of warfare and the urgent need for transformative action. Presented by the Beyond War organization, this episode features a compelling array of media presentations, including documentaries, interviews, and discussions. With insights from Barbara Carlson, a prominent voice on the National Board of Directors, and Texas Coordinator of the Beyond War Foundation, this installment confronts the chilling reality of nuclear warfare and advocates for a paradigm shift in global consciousness to prevent catastrophe. Deterrence theory refers to the scholarship and practice of how threats of using force by one party can convince another party to refrain from initiating some other course of action.[1] The topic gained increased prominence as a military strategy during the Cold War with regard to the use of nuclear weapons and is related to but distinct from the concept of mutual assured destruction, according to which a full-scale nuclear attack on a power with second-strike capability would devastate both parties. The central problem of deterrence revolves around how to credibly threaten military action or nuclear punishment on the adversary despite its costs to the deterrer.[2] Deterrence in an international relations context is the application of deterrence theory to avoid conflict. Deterrence is widely defined as any use of threats (implicit or explicit) or limited force intended to dissuade an actor from taking an action (i.e. maintain the status quo).[3][4] Deterrence is unlike compellence, which is the attempt to get an actor (such as a state) to take an action (i.e. alter the status quo).[5][6][4] Both are forms of coercion. Compellence has been characterized as harder to successfully implement than deterrence.[6][7] Deterrence also tends to be distinguished from defense or the use of full force in wartime.[3] Deterrence is most likely to be successful when a prospective attacker believes that the probability of success is low and the costs of attack are high.[8] Central problems of deterrence include the credible communication of threats[9][4] and assurance.[10] Deterrence does not necessarily require military superiority.[11][12] "General deterrence" is considered successful when an actor who might otherwise take an action refrains from doing so due to the consequences that the deterrer is perceived likely to take.[13] "Immediate deterrence" is considered successful when an actor seriously contemplating immediate military force or action refrains from doing so.[13] Scholars distinguish between "extended deterrence" (the protection of allies) and "direct deterrence" (protection of oneself).[12][14] Rational deterrence theory holds that an attacker will be deterred if they believe that:[15] (Probability of deterrer carrying out deterrent threat × Costs if threat carried out) > (Probability of the attacker accomplishing the action × Benefits of the action) This model is frequently simplified in game-theoretic terms as: Costs × P(Costs) > Benefits × P(Benefits) History By November 1945 general Curtis LeMay, who led American air raids on Japan during World War II, was thinking about how the next war would be fought. He said in a speech that month to the Ohio Society of New York that since "No air attack, once it is launched, can be completely stopped", his country needed an air force that could immediately retaliate: "If we are prepared it may never come. It is not immediately conceivable that any nation will dare to attack us if we are prepared".[16] Most of the innovative work on deterrence theory occurred from the late 1940s to mid-1960s.[17] Historically, scholarship on deterrence has tended to focus on nuclear deterrence.[18] Since the end of the Cold War, there has been an extension of deterrence scholarship to areas that are not specifically about nuclear weapons.[4] NATO was founded 1949 with a role including deterring aggression.[19] A distinction is sometimes made between nuclear deterrence and "conventional deterrence."[20][21][22][23] The two most prominent deterrent strategies are "denial" (denying the attacker the benefits of attack) and "punishment" (inflicting costs on the attacker).[11] Lesson of Munich, where appeasement failed, contributes to deterrence theory. In the words of scholars Frederik Logevall and Kenneth Osgood, "Munich and appeasement have become among the dirtiest words in American politics, synonymous with naivete and weakness, and signifying a craven willingness to barter away the nation's vital interests for empty promises." They claimed that the success of US foreign policy often depends upon a president withstanding "the inevitable charges of appeasement that accompany any decision to negotiate with hostile powers.[24] Concept The use of military threats as a means to deter international crises and war has been a central topic of international security research for at least 2000 years.[25] The concept of deterrence can be defined as the use of threats in limited force by one party to convince another party to refrain from initiating some course of action.[26][3] In Arms and Influence (1966), Schelling offers a broader definition of deterrence, as he defines it as "to prevent from action by fear of consequences."[6] Glenn Snyder also offers a broad definition of deterrence, as he argues that deterrence involves both the threat of sanction and the promise of reward.[27] A threat serves as a deterrent to the extent that it convinces its target not to carry out the intended action because of the costs and losses that target would incur. In international security, a policy of deterrence generally refers to threats of military retaliation directed by the leaders of one state to the leaders of another in an attempt to prevent the other state from resorting to the use of military force in pursuit of its foreign policy goals. As outlined by Huth,[26] a policy of deterrence can fit into two broad categories: preventing an armed attack against a state's own territory (known as direct deterrence) or preventing an armed attack against another state (known as extended deterrence). Situations of direct deterrence often occur if there is a territorial dispute between neighboring states in which major powers like the United States do not directly intervene. On the other hand, situations of extended deterrence often occur when a great power becomes involved. The latter case has generated most interest in academic literature. Building on the two broad categories, Huth goes on to outline that deterrence policies may be implemented in response to a pressing short-term threat (known as immediate deterrence) or as strategy to prevent a military conflict or short-term threat from arising (known as general deterrence). A successful deterrence policy must be considered in military terms but also political terms: International relations, foreign policy and diplomacy. In military terms, deterrence success refers to preventing state leaders from issuing military threats and actions that escalate peacetime diplomatic and military co-operation into a crisis or militarized confrontation that threatens armed conflict and possibly war. The prevention of crises of wars, however, is not the only aim of deterrence. In addition, defending states must be able to resist the political and the military demands of a potential attacking nation. If armed conflict is avoided at the price of diplomatic concessions to the maximum demands of the potential attacking nation under the threat of war, it cannot be claimed that deterrence has succeeded. Furthermore, as Jentleson et al.[28] argue, two key sets of factors for successful deterrence are important: a defending state strategy that balances credible coercion and deft diplomacy consistent with the three criteria of proportionality, reciprocity, and coercive credibility and minimizes international and domestic constraints and the extent of an attacking state's vulnerability as shaped by its domestic political and economic conditions. In broad terms, a state wishing to implement a strategy of deterrence is most likely to succeed if the costs of noncompliance that it can impose on and the benefits of compliance it can offer to another state are greater than the benefits of noncompliance and the costs of compliance. Deterrence theory holds that nuclear weapons are intended to deter other states from attacking with their nuclear weapons, through the promise of retaliation and possibly mutually assured destruction. Nuclear deterrence can also be applied to an attack by conventional forces. For example, the doctrine of massive retaliation threatened to launch US nuclear weapons in response to Soviet attacks. A successful nuclear deterrent requires a country to preserve its ability to retaliate by responding before its own weapons are destroyed or ensuring a second-strike capability. A nuclear deterrent is sometimes composed of a nuclear triad, as in the case of the nuclear weapons owned by the United States, Russia, the China and India. Other countries, such as the United Kingdom and France, have only sea-based and air-based nuclear weapons. Proportionality Jentleson et al. provides further detail in relation to those factors.[28] Proportionality refers to the relationship between the defending state's scope and nature of the objectives being pursued and the instruments available for use to pursue them. The more the defending state demands of another state, the higher that state's costs of compliance and the greater need for the defending state's strategy to increase the costs of noncompliance and the benefits of compliance. That is a challenge, as deterrence is by definition a strategy of limited means. George (1991) goes on to explain that deterrence sometimes goes beyond threats to the actual use of military force, but if force is actually used, it must be limited and fall short of full-scale use to succeed.[29] The main source of disproportionality is an objective that goes beyond policy change to regime change, which has been seen in Libya, Iraq, and North Korea. There, defending states have sought to change the leadership of a state and to policy changes relating primarily to their nuclear weapons programs. Reciprocity Secondly, Jentleson et al.[28] outlines that reciprocity involves an explicit understanding of linkage between the defending state's carrots and the attacking state's concessions. The balance lies in not offering too little, too late or for too much in return and not offering too much, too soon, or for too little return. Coercive credibility Finally, coercive credibility requires that in addition to calculations about costs and benefits of co-operation, the defending state convincingly conveys to the attacking state that failure to co-operate has consequences. Threats, uses of force, and other coercive instruments such as economic sanctions must be sufficiently credible to raise the attacking state's perceived costs of noncompliance. A defending state having a superior military capability or economic strength in itself is not enough to ensure credibility. Indeed, all three elements of a balanced deterrence strategy are more likely to be achieved if other major international actors like the UN or NATO are supportive, and opposition within the defending state's domestic politics is limited. The other important considerations outlined by Jentleson et al.[28] that must be taken into consideration is the domestic political and economic conditions in the attacking state affecting its vulnerability to deterrence policies and the attacking state's ability to compensate unfavourable power balances. The first factor is whether internal political support and regime security are better served by defiance, or there are domestic political gains to be made from improving relations with the defending state. The second factor is an economic calculation of the costs that military force, sanctions, and other coercive instruments can impose and the benefits that trade and other economic incentives may carry. That is partly a function of the strength and flexibility of the attacking state's domestic economy and its capacity to absorb or counter the costs being imposed. The third factor is the role of elites and other key domestic political figures within the attacking state. To the extent that such actors' interests are threatened with the defending state's demands, they act to prevent or block the defending state's demands. Rational deterrence theory One approach to theorizing about deterrence has entailed the use of rational choice and game-theoretic models of decision making (see game theory). Rational deterrence theory entails:[30] Rationality: actors are rational[12] Unitary actor assumption: actors are understood as unitary[12] Dyads: interactions tend to be between dyads (or triads) of states Strategic interactions: actors consider the choices of other actors[12] Cost-benefit calculations: outcomes reflect actors' cost-benefit calculations[12][31] Deterrence theorists have consistently argued that deterrence success is more likely if a defending state's deterrent threat is credible to an attacking state. Huth[26] outlines that a threat is considered credible if the defending state possesses both the military capabilities to inflict substantial costs on an attacking state in an armed conflict, and the attacking state believes that the defending state is resolved to use its available military forces. Huth[26] goes on to explain the four key factors for consideration under rational deterrence theory: the military balance, signaling and bargaining power, reputations for resolve, interests at stake. The American economist Thomas Schelling brought his background in game theory to the subject of studying international deterrence. Schelling's (1966) classic work on deterrence presents the concept that military strategy can no longer be defined as the science of military victory. Instead, it is argued that military strategy was now equally, if not more, the art of coercion, intimidation and deterrence.[32] Schelling says the capacity to harm another state is now used as a motivating factor for other states to avoid it and influence another state's behavior. To be coercive or deter another state, violence must be anticipated and avoidable by accommodation. It can therefore be summarized that the use of the power to hurt as bargaining power is the foundation of deterrence theory and is most successful when it is held in reserve.[32] In an article celebrating Schelling's Nobel Memorial Prize for Economics,[33] Michael Kinsley, Washington Post op‑ed columnist and one of Schelling's former students, anecdotally summarizes Schelling's reorientation of game theory thus: "[Y]ou're standing at the edge of a cliff, chained by the ankle to someone else. You'll be released, and one of you will get a large prize, as soon as the other gives in. How do you persuade the other guy to give in, when the only method at your disposal—threatening to push him off the cliff—would doom you both? Answer: You start dancing, closer and closer to the edge. That way, you don't have to convince him that you would do something totally irrational: plunge him and yourself off the cliff. You just have to convince him that you are prepared to take a higher risk than he is of accidentally falling off the cliff. If you can do that, you win." Military balance Deterrence is often directed against state leaders who have specific territorial goals that they seek to attain either by seizing disputed territory in a limited military attack or by occupying disputed territory after the decisive defeat of the adversary's armed forces. In either case, the strategic orientation of potential attacking states generally is for the short term and is driven by concerns about military cost and effectiveness. For successful deterrence, defending states need the military capacity to respond quickly and strongly to a range of contingencies. Deterrence often fails if either a defending state or an attacking state underestimates or overestimates the other's ability to undertake a particular course of action. Signaling and bargaining power The central problem for a state that seeks to communicate a credible deterrent threat by diplomatic or military actions is that all defending states have an incentive to act as if they are determined to resist an attack in the hope that the attacking state will back away from military conflict with a seemingly resolved adversary. If all defending states have such incentives, potential attacking states may discount statements made by defending states along with any movement of military forces as merely bluffs. In that regard, rational deterrence theorists have argued that costly signals are required to communicate the credibility of a defending state's resolve. Those are actions and statements that clearly increase the risk of a military conflict and also increase the costs of backing down from a deterrent threat. States that bluff are unwilling to cross a certain threshold of threat and military action for fear of committing themselves to an armed conflict. Reputations for resolve Main article: Credibility (international relations) There are three different arguments that have been developed in relation to the role of reputations in influencing deterrence outcomes. The first argument focuses on a defending state's past behavior in international disputes and crises, which creates strong beliefs in a potential attacking state about the defending state's expected behaviour in future conflicts. The credibilities of a defending state's policies are arguably linked over time, and reputations for resolve have a powerful causal impact on an attacking state's decision whether to challenge either general or immediate deterrence. The second approach argues that reputations have a limited impact on deterrence outcomes because the credibility of deterrence is heavily determined by the specific configuration of military capabilities, interests at stake, and political constraints faced by a defending state in a given situation of attempted deterrence. The argument of that school of thought is that potential attacking states are not likely to draw strong inferences about a defending states resolve from prior conflicts because potential attacking states do not believe that a defending state's past behaviour is a reliable predictor of future behavior. The third approach is a middle ground between the first two approaches and argues that potential attacking states are likely to draw reputational inferences about resolve from the past behaviour of defending states only under certain conditions. The insight is the expectation that decisionmakers use only certain types of information when drawing inferences about reputations, and an attacking state updates and revises its beliefs when a defending state's unanticipated behavior cannot be explained by case-specific variables. An example shows that the problem extends to the perception of the third parties as well as main adversaries and underlies the way in which attempts at deterrence can fail and even backfire if the assumptions about the others' perceptions are incorrect.[34] Interests at stake Although costly signaling and bargaining power are more well established arguments in rational deterrence theory, the interests of defending states are not as well known. Attacking states may look beyond the short-term bargaining tactics of a defending state and seek to determine what interests are at stake for the defending state that would justify the risks of a military conflict. The argument is that defending states that have greater interests at stake in a dispute are more resolved to use force and more willing to endure military losses to secure those interests. Even less well-established arguments are the specific interests that are more salient to state leaders such as military interests and economic interests. Furthermore, Huth[26] argues that both supporters and critics of rational deterrence theory agree that an unfavorable assessment of the domestic and international status quo by state leaders can undermine or severely test the success of deterrence. In a rational choice approach, if the expected utility of not using force is reduced by a declining status quo position, deterrence failure is more likely since the alternative option of using force becomes relatively more attractive. Tripwires International relations scholars Dan Reiter and Paul Poast have argued that so-called "tripwires" do not deter aggression.[35] Tripwires entail that small forces are deployed abroad with the assumption that an attack on them will trigger a greater deployment of forces.[35] Dan Altman has argued that tripwires do work to deter aggression, citing the Western deployment of forces to Berlin in 1948–1949 to deter Soviet aggression as a successful example.[36] A 2022 study by Brian Blankenship and Erik Lin-Greenberg found that high-resolve, low-capability signals (such as tripwires) were not viewed as more reassuring to allies than low-resolve, high-capability alternatives (such as forces stationed offshore). Their study cast doubt on the reassuring value of tripwires.[37] Nuclear deterrence theory Main articles: Nuclear strategy, Massive retaliation, Mutual assured destruction, and Flexible response In 1966, Schelling[32] is prescriptive in outlining the impact of the development of nuclear weapons in the analysis of military power and deterrence. In his analysis, before the widespread use of assured second strike capability, or immediate reprisal, in the form of SSBN submarines, Schelling argues that nuclear weapons give nations the potential to destroy their enemies but also the rest of humanity without drawing immediate reprisal because of the lack of a conceivable defense system and the speed with which nuclear weapons can be deployed. A nation's credible threat of such severe damage empowers their deterrence policies and fuels political coercion and military deadlock, which can produce proxy warfare. According to Kenneth Waltz, there are three requirements for successful nuclear deterrence:[38] Part of a state's nuclear arsenal must appear to be able to survive an attack by the adversary and be used for a retaliatory second strike The state must not respond to false alarms of a strike by the adversary The state must maintain command and control The stability–instability paradox is a key concept in rational deterrence theory. It states that when two countries each have nuclear weapons, the probability of a direct war between them greatly decreases, but the probability of minor or indirect conflicts between them increases.[39][40][41] This occurs because rational actors want to avoid nuclear wars, and thus they neither start major conflicts nor allow minor conflicts to escalate into major conflicts—thus making it safe to engage in minor conflicts. For instance, during the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union never engaged each other in warfare, but fought proxy wars in Korea, Vietnam, Angola, the Middle East, Nicaragua and Afghanistan and spent substantial amounts of money and manpower on gaining relative influence over the third world.[42] Bernard Brodie wrote in 1959 that a credible nuclear deterrent must be always ready but never used.[43][a] Scholars have debated whether having a superior nuclear arsenal provides a deterrent against other nuclear-armed states with smaller arsenals. Matthew Kroenig has argued that states with nuclear superiority are more likely to win nuclear crises,[44][45] whereas Todd Sechser, Matthew Fuhrmann and David C. Logan have challenged this assertion.[46][47][48] A 2023 study found that a state with nuclear weapons is less likely to be targeted by non-nuclear states, but that a state with nuclear weapons is not less likely to target other nuclear states in low-level conflict.[49] A 2022 study by Kyungwon Suh suggests that nuclear superiority may not reduce the likelihood that nuclear opponents will initiate nuclear crises.[50] Proponents of nuclear deterrence theory argue that newly nuclear-armed states may pose a short- or medium-term risk, but that "nuclear learning" occurs over time as states learn to live with new nuclear-armed states.[51][52] Mark S. Bell and Nicholas L. Miller have however argued that there is a weak theoretical and empirical basis for notions of "nuclear learning."[53] Stages of US policy of deterrence The US policy of deterrence during the Cold War underwent significant variations. Containment The early stages of the Cold War were generally characterized by the containment of communism, an aggressive stance on behalf of the US especially on developing nations under its sphere of influence. The period was characterized by numerous proxy wars throughout most of the globe, particularly Africa, Asia, Central America, and South America. One notable conflict was the Korean War. George F. Kennan, who is taken to be the founder of this policy in his Long Telegram, asserted that he never advocated military intervention, merely economic support, and that his ideas were misinterpreted as espoused by the general public. Détente With the US drawdown from Vietnam, the normalization of US relations with China, and the Sino-Soviet Split, the policy of containment was abandoned and a new policy of détente was established, with peaceful co-existence was sought between the United States and the Soviet Union. Although all of those factors contributed to this shift, the most important factor was probably the rough parity achieved in stockpiling nuclear weapons with the clear capability of mutual assured destruction (MAD). Therefore, the period of détente was characterized by a general reduction in the tension between the Soviet Union and the United States and a thawing of the Cold War, which lasted from the late 1960s until the start of the 1980s. The doctrine of mutual nuclear deterrence then characterized relations between the United States and the Soviet Union and relations with Russia until the onset of the New Cold War in the early 2010s. Since then, relations have been less clear. Reagan era A third shift occurred with US President Ronald Reagan's arms build-up during the 1980s. Reagan attempted to justify the policy by concerns of growing Soviet influence in Latin America and the post-1979 revolutionary government of Iran. Similar to the old policy of containment, the US funded several proxy wars, including support for Saddam Hussein of Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War, support for the mujahideen in Afghanistan, who were fighting for independence from the Soviet Union, and several anticommunist movements in Latin America such as the overthrow of the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. The funding of the Contras in Nicaragua led to the Iran-Contra Affair, while overt support led to a ruling from the International Court of Justice against the United States in Nicaragua v. United States. The final expression of the full impact of deterrence during the cold war can be seen in the agreement between Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1985. They "agreed that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. Recognizing that any conflict between the USSR and the U.S. could have catastrophic consequences, they emphasized the importance of preventing any war between them, whether nuclear or conventional. They will not seek to achieve military superiority.". While the army was dealing with the breakup of the Soviet Union and the spread of nuclear technology to other nations beyond the United States and Russia, the concept of deterrence took on a broader multinational dimension. The US policy on deterrence after the Cold War was outlined in 1995 in the document called "Essentials of Post–Cold War Deterrence".[54] It explains that while relations with Russia continue to follow the traditional characteristics of MAD, but the US policy of deterrence towards nations with minor nuclear capabilities should ensure by threats of immense retaliation (or even pre-emptive action) not to threaten the United States, its interests, or allies. The document explains that such threats must also be used to ensure that nations without nuclear technology refrain from developing nuclear weapons and that a universal ban precludes any nation from maintaining chemical or biological weapons. The current tensions with Iran and North Korea over their nuclear programs are caused partly by the continuation of the policy of deterrence. Post-Cold War period By the beginning of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, many western hawks expressed the view that deterrence worked in that war but only in one way – in favor of Russia. Former US security advisor, John Bolton, said: Deterrence is working in the Ukraine crisis, just not for the right side. The United States and its allies failed to deter Russia from invading. The purpose of deterrence strategy is to prevent the conflict entirely, and there Washington failed badly. On the other hand, Russian deterrence is enjoying spectacular success. Russia has convinced the West that even a whisper of NATO military action in Ukraine would bring disastrous consequences. Putin threatens, blusters, uses the word “nuclear,” and the West wilts.[55] When Elon Musk prevented Ukraine from carrying drone attacks on the Russian Black Sea fleet by denying to enable needed Starlink communications in Crimea,[56] Anne Applebaum argued Musk had been deterred by Russia after the country's ambassador warned him an attack on Crimea would be met with a nuclear response.[57] Later Ukrainian attacks on the same fleet using a different communications system also caused deterrence, this time to the Russian Navy.[57] Timo S. Koster who served at NATO as Director of Defence Policy & Capabilities similarly argued: A massacre is taking place in Europe and the strongest military alliance in the world is staying out of it. We are deterred and Russia is not.[58] Philip Breedlove, a retired four-star U.S. Air Force general and a former SACEUR, said that Western fears about nuclear weapons and World War III have left it "fully deterred" and Putin "completely undeterred." The West have "ceded the initiative to the enemy."[59] No attempt was made by NATO to deter Moscow with the threat of military force, wondered another expert. To the contrary, it was Russia’s deterrence that proved to be successful.[60] Cyber deterrence Main articles: Cyberwarfare and Cyberweapon Since the early 2000s, there has been an increased focus on cyber deterrence. Cyber deterrence has two meanings:[61] The use of cyber actions to deter other states The deterrence of an adversary's cyber operations Scholars have debated how cyber capabilities alter traditional understandings of deterrence, given that it may be harder to attribute responsibility for cyber attacks, the barriers to entry may be lower, the risks and costs may be lower for actors who conduct cyber attacks, it may be harder to signal and interpret intentions, the advantage of offense over defense, and weak actors and non-state actors can develop considerable cyber capabilities.[61][62][63][64] Scholars have also debated the feasibility of launching highly damaging cyber attacks and engaging in destructive cyber warfare, with most scholars expressing skepticism that cyber capabilities have enhanced the ability of states to launch highly destructive attacks.[65][66][67] The most prominent cyber attack to date is the Stuxnet attack on Iran's nuclear program.[65][66] By 2019, the only publicly acknowledged case of a cyber attack causing a power outage was the 2015 Ukraine power grid hack.[68] There are various ways to engage in cyber deterrence:[61][62][63] Denial: preventing adversaries from achieving military objectives by defending against them[64] Punishment: the imposition of costs on the adversary Norms: the establishment and maintenance of norms that establish appropriate standards of behavior[69][70] Escalation: raising the probability that costs will be imposed on the adversary[71] Entanglement and interdependence: interdependence between actors can have a deterrent effect[62][67] There is a risk of unintended escalation in cyberspace due to difficulties in discerning the intent of attackers,[72][73] and complexities in state-hacker relationships.[74] According to political scientists Joseph Brown and Tanisha Fazal, states frequently neither confirm nor deny responsibility for cyber operations so that they can avoid the escalatory risks (that come with public credit) while also signaling that they have cyber capabilities and resolve (which can be achieved if intelligence agencies and governments believe they were responsible).[71] According to Lennart Maschmeyer, cyber weapons have limited coercive effectiveness due to a trilemma "whereby speed, intensity, and control are negatively correlated. These constraints pose a trilemma for actors because a gain in one variable tends to produce losses across the other two variables."[75] Intrawar deterrence Intrawar deterrence is deterrence within a war context. It means that war has broken out but actors still seek to deter certain forms of behavior. In the words of Caitlin Talmadge, "intra-war deterrence failures... can be thought of as causing wars to get worse in some way."[76] Examples of intrawar deterrence include deterring adversaries from resorting to nuclear, chemical and biological weapons attacks or attacking civilian populations indiscriminately.[77] Broadly, it involves any prevention of escalation.[78] Criticism Deterrence failures See also: Salami slicing tactics Deterrence theory has been criticized by numerous scholars for various reasons, the most basic being skepticism that decision makers are rational. A prominent strain of criticism argues that rational deterrence theory is contradicted by frequent deterrence failures, which may be attributed to misperceptions.[79] Here it's argued that misestimations of perceived costs and benefits by analysts contribute to deterrence failures,[80] as exemplified in case of Russian invasion of Ukraine. Frozen conflicts can be seen as rewarding aggression.[81] Misprediction of behavior Scholars have also argued that leaders do not behave in ways that are consistent with the predictions of nuclear deterrence theory.[82][83][84] Scholars have also argued that rational deterrence theory does not grapple sufficiently with emotions and psychological biases that make accidents, loss of self-control, and loss of control over others likely.[85][86] Frank C. Zagare has argued that deterrence theory is logically inconsistent and empirically inaccurate. In place of classical deterrence, rational choice scholars have argued for perfect deterrence, which assumes that states may vary in their internal characteristics and especially in the credibility of their threats of retaliation.[87] Suicide attacks Advocates for nuclear disarmament, such as Global Zero, have criticized nuclear deterrence theory. Sam Nunn, William Perry, Henry Kissinger, and George Shultz have all called upon governments to embrace the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons, and created the Nuclear Security Project to advance that agenda.[88] In 2010, the four were featured in a documentary film entitled Nuclear Tipping Point where proposed steps to achieve nuclear disarmament.[89][90] Kissinger has argued, "The classical notion of deterrence was that there was some consequences before which aggressors and evildoers would recoil. In a world of suicide bombers, that calculation doesn't operate in any comparable way."[91] Shultz said, "If you think of the people who are doing suicide attacks, and people like that get a nuclear weapon, they are almost by definition not deterrable."[92] Stronger deterrent Paul Nitze argued in 1994 that nuclear weapons were obsolete in the "new world disorder" after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and he advocated reliance on precision guided munitions to secure a permanent military advantage over future adversaries.[93] Minimum deterrence As opposed to the extreme mutually assured destruction form of deterrence, the concept of minimum deterrence in which a state possesses no more nuclear weapons than is necessary to deter an adversary from attacking is presently the most common form of deterrence practiced by nuclear weapon states, such as China, India, Pakistan, Britain, and France.[94] Pursuing minimal deterrence during arms negotiations between the United States and Russia allows each state to make nuclear stockpile reductions without the state becoming vulnerable, but it has been noted that there comes a point that further reductions may be undesirable, once minimal deterrence is reached, as further reductions beyond that point increase a state's vulnerability and provide an incentive for an adversary to expand its nuclear arsenal secretly.[95] See also Balance of terror Chainstore paradox Confidence-building measures Decapitation strike International relations Launch on warning Long Peace N-deterrence Nuclear blackmail Nuclear ethics Nuclear peace Nuclear strategy Nuclear terrorism Nuclear warfare Peace through strength Prisoner's dilemma Reagan Doctrine Security dilemma Tripwire force Wargaming Notes Definition of deterrence from the Dictionary of Modern Strategy and Tactics by Michael Keane: "The prevention or inhibition of action brought about by fear of the consequences. Deterrence is a state of mind brought about by the existence of a credible threat of unacceptable counteraction. It assumes and requires rational decision makers." References Wragg, David W. (1973). A Dictionary of Aviation (first ed.). Osprey. p. 108. ISBN 9780850451634. Lindsay, Jon R.; Gartzke, Erik (2019). Introduction: Cross-Domain Deterrence, from Practice to Theory. Oxford University Press. p. 2. doi:10.1093/oso/9780190908645.003.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-090960-4. Archived from the original on 2021-08-30. Retrieved 2021-08-30. Morgan, Patrick M. (1977). Deterrence: A Conceptual Analysis. SAGE Publications. pp. 26–30. ISBN 978-0-8039-0819-2. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2021-08-30. Gartzke, Eric; Lindsay, Jon R. (2019). Cross-Domain Deterrence: Strategy in an Era of Complexity. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780190908645.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-090960-4. Archived from the original on 2021-08-30. Retrieved 2021-08-30. Art, Robert J.; Greenhill, Kelly M. (2015). The Use of Force: Military Power and International Politics. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. pp. 3–5. ISBN 978-1-4422-3306-5. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2021-08-28. Schelling, Thomas C. (1966). Arms and Influence. Yale University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctt5vm52s. ISBN 978-0-300-00221-8. JSTOR j.ctt5vm52s. Archived from the original on 2022-05-19. Retrieved 2021-08-30. Pape, Robert A. (1996). Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War (1 ed.). Cornell University Press. ISBN 978-0-8014-3134-0. JSTOR 10.7591/j.ctt1287f6v. Archived from the original on 2021-08-30. Retrieved 2021-08-30. Mearsheimer, John J. (1983). Conventional Deterrence. Cornell University Press. p. 23. ISBN 978-1-5017-1325-5. JSTOR 10.7591/j.ctt1rv61v2. Archived from the original on 2023-04-05. Retrieved 2021-09-05. Shimshoni, Jonathan (1988). Israel and Conventional Deterrence. Cornell University Press. p. 6. doi:10.7591/9781501737831. ISBN 978-1-5017-3783-1. S2CID 243305936. Archived from the original on 2021-09-06. Retrieved 2021-09-06. Glaser, Bonnie S.; Weiss, Jessica Chen; Christensen, Thomas J. (2023-11-30). "Taiwan and the True Sources of Deterrence". Foreign Affairs. ISSN 0015-7120. Archived from the original on 2023-12-01. Retrieved 2023-12-01. Heginbotham, Eric; Samuels, Richard J. (2018). "Active Denial: Redesigning Japan's Response to China's Military Challenge". International Security. 42 (4): 128–169. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00313. hdl:1721.1/118651. ISSN 0162-2889. S2CID 57570578. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2021-09-06. Huth, Paul; Russett, Bruce (1984). "What Makes Deterrence Work? Cases from 1900 to 1980". World Politics. 36 (4): 496–526. doi:10.2307/2010184. ISSN 0043-8871. JSTOR 2010184. S2CID 153596965. Archived from the original on 2021-09-11. Retrieved 2021-09-11. Fearon, James (2002). "Selection Effects and Deterrence". International Interactions. 28 (1): 5–29. doi:10.1080/03050620210390. ISSN 0305-0629. S2CID 35580738. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2021-09-06. Lee, Do Young (2021). "Strategies of Extended Deterrence: How States Provide the Security Umbrella". Security Studies. 30 (5): 761–796. doi:10.1080/09636412.2021.2010887. ISSN 0963-6412. S2CID 246241390. Glaser, Charles L. (1990). Analyzing Strategic Nuclear Policy. Princeton University Press. p. 20. ISBN 978-1-4008-6202-3. Archived from the original on 2023-04-10. Retrieved 2021-09-18. Rhodes, Richard (1995-06-11). "The General and World War III". The New Yorker. ISSN 0028-792X. Archived from the original on 2019-12-12. Retrieved 2023-11-30. Art, Robert J.; Greenhill, Kelly M. (2015). The Use of Force: Military Power and International Politics. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 3. ISBN 978-1-4422-3306-5. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2021-08-28. Shimshoni, Jonathan (1988). Israel and Conventional Deterrence. Cornell University Press. p. 1. doi:10.7591/9781501737831. ISBN 978-1-5017-3783-1. S2CID 243305936. Archived from the original on 2021-09-06. Retrieved 2021-09-06. Rynning, Sten. "Deterrence rediscovered: NATO and Russia." NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2020: Deterrence in the 21st Century—Insights from Theory and Practice (2021): 29-45. Wirtz, James (2018). "How Does Nuclear Deterrence Differ from Conventional Deterrence?" (PDF). Strategic Studies Quarterly. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-10-25. Retrieved 2021-09-05. Mueller, Karl (2021), Osinga, Frans; Sweijs, Tim (eds.), "The Continuing Relevance of Conventional Deterrence", NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2020: Deterrence in the 21st Century—Insights from Theory and Practice, Nl Arms, T.M.C. Asser Press, pp. 47–63, doi:10.1007/978-94-6265-419-8_4, ISBN 978-94-6265-419-8 Huntington, Samuel P. (1983). "Conventional Deterrence and Conventional Retaliation in Europe". International Security. 8 (3): 32–56. doi:10.2307/2538699. ISSN 0162-2889. JSTOR 2538699. S2CID 154133787. Archived from the original on 2021-09-05. Retrieved 2021-09-05. Mearsheimer, John J. (1982). "Why the Soviets Can't Win Quickly in Central Europe". International Security. 7 (1): 3–39. doi:10.2307/2538686. ISSN 0162-2889. JSTOR 2538686. S2CID 154732192. Archived from the original on 2021-09-05. Retrieved 2021-09-05. Logevall, Fredrik; Osgood, Kenneth (2010). "THE GHOST OF MUNICH: America's Appeasement Complex". World Affairs. 173 (2): 13–26. JSTOR 27870285. See, for example, Carl von Clausewitz, On War, trans. and ed. Michael Howard and Peter Paret (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1989) Huth, P. K. (1999), "Deterrence and International Conflict: Empirical Findings and Theoretical Debate", Annual Review of Political Science, 2: 25–48, doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.25 Snyder, Glenn H. (1966). Deterrence and Defense. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-1-4008-7716-4. Archived from the original on 2023-04-10. Retrieved 2021-11-20. Jentleson, B.A.; Whytock, C.A. (2005), "Who Won Libya", International Security, 30 (3): 47–86, doi:10.1162/isec.2005.30.3.47, S2CID 57572461, archived from the original on 2021-04-26, retrieved 2021-07-14 George, A (1991), "The General Theory and Logic of Coercive Diplomacy", Forceful Persuasion: Coercive Diplomacy as an Alternative to War, Washington, D.C: United States Institute of Peace Press, pp. 3–14 Achen, Christopher H.; Snidal, Duncan (1989). "Rational Deterrence Theory and Comparative Case Studies". World Politics. 41 (2): 143–169. doi:10.2307/2010405. ISSN 0043-8871. JSTOR 2010405. S2CID 153591618. Archived from the original on 2021-09-08. Retrieved 2021-09-11. Huth, Paul; Russett, Bruce (1990). "Testing Deterrence Theory: Rigor Makes a Difference". World Politics. 42 (4): 466–501. doi:10.2307/2010511. ISSN 0043-8871. JSTOR 2010511. S2CID 154490426. Archived from the original on 2021-09-11. Retrieved 2021-09-11. Since the consequence of a breakdown of the nuclear deterrence strategy is so catastrophic for human civilisation, it is reasonable to employ the strategy only if the chance of breakdown is zero. Schelling, T. C. (1966), "2", The Diplomacy of Violence, New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 1–34 "A Nobel Laureate Who's Got Game" Archived 2019-09-25 at the Wayback Machine, The Washington Post, October 12, 2005. Jervis, Robert (1982). "Deterrence and Perception". International Security. 7 (3): 3–30. doi:10.2307/2538549. JSTOR 2538549. "The Truth About Tripwires: Why Small Force Deployments Do Not Deter Aggression". Texas National Security Review. 2021-06-02. Archived from the original on 2021-06-02. Retrieved 2021-06-03. Altman, Dan (2018). "Advancing without Attacking: The Strategic Game around the Use of Force". Security Studies. 27 (1): 58–88. doi:10.1080/09636412.2017.1360074. ISSN 0963-6412. S2CID 148987375. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2021-06-03. Blankenship, Brian; Lin-Greenberg, Erik (2022). "Trivial Tripwires?: Military Capabilities and Alliance Reassurance". Security Studies. 31: 92–117. doi:10.1080/09636412.2022.2038662. ISSN 0963-6412. S2CID 247040733. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2022-02-21. Sagan, Scott; Waltz, Kenneth (1995). The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate. W.W. Norton. p. 20. ISBN 978-0-393-03810-1. Archived from the original on 2023-04-10. Retrieved 2022-02-15. Snyder, Glenn Herald (1965). The Balance of Power and the Balance of Terror. Archived from the original on 2023-04-05. Retrieved 2022-01-28. Jervis, Robert (1979). "Why Nuclear Superiority Doesn't Matter". Political Science Quarterly. 94 (4): 617–633. doi:10.2307/2149629. ISSN 0032-3195. JSTOR 2149629. Archived from the original on 2022-01-28. Retrieved 2022-01-28. Jervis, Robert (1989). The Meaning of the Nuclear Revolution: Statecraft and the Prospect of Armageddon. Cornell University Press. ISBN 978-0-8014-9565-6. Archived from the original on 2022-10-26. Retrieved 2022-01-28. Krepon, Michael. "The Stability-Instability Paradox, Misperception, and Escalation Control in South Asia (essay)" (PDF). The Henry Stimson Center. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 August 2017. Retrieved 12 August 2017. Brodie, Bernard (1959), "8", "The Anatomy of Deterrence" as found in Strategy in the Missile Age, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 264–304 Kroenig, Matthew (2018). The Logic of American Nuclear Strategy: Why Strategic Superiority Matters. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-084918-4. Archived from the original on 2023-04-10. Retrieved 2022-05-07. Kroenig, Matthew (2013). "Nuclear Superiority and the Balance of Resolve: Explaining Nuclear Crisis Outcomes". International Organization. 67 (1): 141–171. doi:10.1017/S0020818312000367. ISSN 0020-8183. JSTOR 43282155. S2CID 155075459. Archived from the original on 2022-01-26. Retrieved 2022-05-07. Sechser, Todd S.; Fuhrmann, Matthew (2013). "Crisis Bargaining and Nuclear Blackmail". International Organization. 67 (1): 173–195. doi:10.1017/S0020818312000392. ISSN 0020-8183. JSTOR 43282156. S2CID 154642193. Archived from the original on 2022-05-07. Retrieved 2022-05-07. Sechser, Todd S.; Fuhrmann, Matthew (2017). Nuclear Weapons and Coercive Diplomacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781316227305. ISBN 978-1-107-10694-9. S2CID 157599829. Archived from the original on 2022-03-20. Retrieved 2022-05-07. Logan, David C. (2022). "The Nuclear Balance Is What States Make of It". International Security. 46 (4): 172–215. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00434. ISSN 0162-2889. S2CID 248723655. "the findings reinforce a key theoretical tenet of the nuclear revolution: Once states have achieved a secure second-strike capability, nuclear superiority does not confer additional political benefits." Lee, Kyung Suk; Kim, James D.; Jin, Hwalmin; Fuhrmann, Matthew (2023). "Nuclear Weapons and Low-Level Military Conflict". International Studies Quarterly. 66 (5). doi:10.1093/isq/sqac067. Suh, Kyungwon (2022). "Nuclear balance and the initiation of nuclear crises: Does superiority matter?". Journal of Peace Research. 60 (2): 337–351. doi:10.1177/00223433211067899. S2CID 248609130. Horowitz, Michael (2009). "The Spread of Nuclear Weapons and International Conflict: Does Experience Matter?". The Journal of Conflict Resolution. 53 (2): 234–257. doi:10.1177/0022002708330388. ISSN 0022-0027. JSTOR 20684583. S2CID 55200649. Archived from the original on 2023-08-31. Retrieved 2023-08-31. Cohen, Michael D. (2017). When Proliferation Causes Peace: The Psychology of Nuclear Crises. Georgetown University Press. ISBN 978-1-62616-495-6. Archived from the original on 2023-12-01. Retrieved 2023-08-31. Bell, Mark S.; Miller, Nicholas L. (2022), Narang, Vipin; Sagan, Scott D. (eds.), "The Limits of Nuclear Learning in the New Nuclear Age", The Fragile Balance of Terror, Deterrence in the New Nuclear Age, Cornell University Press, pp. 209–229, ISBN 978-1-5017-6701-2, JSTOR 10.7591/j.ctv310vm0j.11, archived from the original on 2023-08-31, retrieved 2023-08-31 "The Nautilus Institute Nuclear Strategy Project: US FOIA Documents". Archived from the original on December 8, 2008. "How Russia Is Beating the West at Deterrence". Time. 2022-03-09. Archived from the original on 2023-06-05. Retrieved 2023-08-11. Darcy, Oliver (2023-09-12). "An explosive Elon Musk biography is just hitting shelves. But the book's acclaimed author is already walking back a major claim | CNN Business". CNN. Archived from the original on 2023-09-22. Retrieved 2023-09-15. Applebaum, Anne (2023-09-11). "What Russia Got by Scaring Elon Musk". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 2023-09-16. Retrieved 2023-09-12. Koster, Ben Hodges, Timo S. (2022-05-05). "NATO Must Re-Learn Deterrence". CEPA. Archived from the original on 2023-07-16. Retrieved 2023-08-11. Tavberidze, Vazha, (2022). "Former NATO Commander Says Western Fears Of Nuclear War Are Preventing A Proper Response To Putin," Radio Free Europe, April 07. Bar, Shmuel, (2022). "Deterrence after Ukraine—a critical analysis," Quillette, March 24. Schneider, Jacquelyn G. (2019), "Deterrence in and through Cyberspace", Cross-Domain Deterrence, Oxford University Press, pp. 95–120, doi:10.1093/oso/9780190908645.003.0005, ISBN 978-0-19-090864-5, archived from the original on 2021-11-06, retrieved 2021-11-06 Nye, Joseph S. (2017). "Deterrence and Dissuasion in Cyberspace". International Security. 41 (3): 44–71. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00266. ISSN 0162-2889. S2CID 29361290. Archived from the original on 2021-01-26. Retrieved 2021-11-06. Borghard, Erica D.; Lonergan, Shawn W. (2017). "The Logic of Coercion in Cyberspace". Security Studies. 26 (3): 452–481. doi:10.1080/09636412.2017.1306396. ISSN 0963-6412. S2CID 46356854. Borghard, Erica D.; Lonergan, Shawn W. (2021-08-03). "Deterrence by denial in cyberspace". Journal of Strategic Studies. 46 (3): 534–569. doi:10.1080/01402390.2021.1944856. ISSN 0140-2390. S2CID 238842794. Archived from the original on 2021-11-06. Retrieved 2021-11-06. Lindsay, Jon R. (2013). "Stuxnet and the Limits of Cyber Warfare". Security Studies. 22 (3): 365–404. doi:10.1080/09636412.2013.816122. ISSN 0963-6412. S2CID 154019562. Gartzke, Erik; Lindsay, Jon R. (2015). "Weaving Tangled Webs: Offense, Defense, and Deception in Cyberspace". Security Studies. 24 (2): 316–348. doi:10.1080/09636412.2015.1038188. ISSN 0963-6412. S2CID 4830861. Farrell, Henry; Glaser, Charles L. (2017). "The role of effects, saliencies and norms in US Cyberwar doctrine". Journal of Cybersecurity. doi:10.1093/cybsec/tyw015. ISSN 2057-2085. Kostyuk, Nadiya; Zhukov, Yuri M. (2019-02-01). "Invisible Digital Front: Can Cyber Attacks Shape Battlefield Events?". Journal of Conflict Resolution. 63 (2): 317–347. doi:10.1177/0022002717737138. ISSN 0022-0027. S2CID 44364372. Archived from the original on 2022-02-25. Retrieved 2021-11-15. Finnemore, Martha; Hollis, Duncan B. (2016). "Constructing Norms for Global Cybersecurity". The American Journal of International Law. 110 (3): 425–479. doi:10.1017/S0002930000016894. ISSN 0002-9300. JSTOR 10.5305/amerjintelaw.110.3.0425. S2CID 151870657. Archived from the original on 2021-11-07. Retrieved 2021-11-06. Finnemore, Martha; Hollis, Duncan B. (2016). "Constructing Norms for Global Cybersecurity". American Journal of International Law. 110 (3): 425–479. doi:10.1017/S0002930000016894. ISSN 0002-9300. S2CID 151870657. Archived from the original on 2021-11-07. Retrieved 2021-11-06. Brown, Joseph M.; Fazal, Tanisha M. (2021). "#SorryNotSorry: Why states neither confirm nor deny responsibility for cyber operations". European Journal of International Security. 6 (4): 401–417. doi:10.1017/eis.2021.18. ISSN 2057-5637. S2CID 238358851. Archived from the original on 2021-11-06. Retrieved 2021-11-06. Lin, Herbert (2012). "Escalation Dynamics and Conflict Termination in Cyberspace". Strategic Studies Quarterly. 6 (3): 46–70. ISSN 1936-1815. JSTOR 26267261. Archived from the original on 2021-11-06. Retrieved 2021-11-06. Borghard, Erica D.; Lonergan, Shawn W. (2017). "The Logic of Coercion in Cyberspace". Security Studies. 26 (3): 452–481. doi:10.1080/09636412.2017.1306396. ISSN 0963-6412. S2CID 46356854. Maurer, Tim (2018). Cyber Mercenaries: The State, Hackers, and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781316422724. ISBN 978-1-107-12760-9. Archived from the original on 2021-11-07. Retrieved 2021-11-07. Maschmeyer, Lennart (2021). "The Subversive Trilemma: Why Cyber Operations Fall Short of Expectations". International Security. 46 (2): 51–90. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00418. ISSN 0162-2889. S2CID 239770382. Talmadge, Caitlin (2019). "Emerging technology and intra-war escalation risks: Evidence from the Cold War, implications for today". Journal of Strategic Studies. 42 (6): 864–887. doi:10.1080/01402390.2019.1631811. ISSN 0140-2390. S2CID 202312573. Legro, Jeffrey (1995). Cooperation Under Fire: Anglo-German Restraint During World War II. Cornell University Press. ISBN 978-0-8014-2938-5. Archived from the original on 2023-04-05. Retrieved 2021-12-07. Carson, Austin (2018). Secret Wars. Princeton University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctv346p45. ISBN 978-0-691-18424-1. S2CID 240182441. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2021-12-07. Jervis, Robert (1976). Perception and Misperception in International Politics: New Edition. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-1-4008-8511-4. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2021-11-20. Jonas J. Driedger & Mikhail Polianskii (2023) Utility-based predictions of military escalation: Why experts forecasted Russia would not invade Ukraine, Contemporary Security Policy, 44:4, 544-560 Karsten Jung (2023) A New Concert for Europe: Security and Order After the War, The Washington Quarterly, 46:1, 25-437 Green, Brendan Rittenhouse (2020). The Revolution that Failed: Nuclear Competition, Arms Control, and the Cold War. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-48986-7. Archived from the original on 2024-02-24. Retrieved 2021-11-20. Jervis, Robert (2021), Bartel, Fritz; Monteiro, Nuno P. (eds.), "The Nuclear Age", Before and After the Fall: World Politics and the End of the Cold War, Cambridge University Press, pp. 115–131, doi:10.1017/9781108910194.008, ISBN 978-1-108-90677-7, S2CID 244858515, archived from the original on 2024-02-24, retrieved 2021-12-17 Sagan, Scott D. (1994). "The Perils of Proliferation: Organization Theory, Deterrence Theory, and the Spread of Nuclear Weapons". International Security. 18 (4): 66–107. doi:10.2307/2539178. ISSN 0162-2889. JSTOR 2539178. S2CID 153925234. Archived from the original on 2022-02-14. Retrieved 2022-02-14. "Don't Be So Confident in Nuclear Decision-Making". Lawfare. 2023-02-26. Archived from the original on 2023-07-07. Retrieved 2023-03-04. "The Psychology of Nuclear Brinkmanship". International Security. 2023. Archived from the original on 2023-03-04. Retrieved 2023-03-04. Zagare, Frank C. (2004), "Reconciling Rationality with Deterrence: A Re-examination of the Logical Foundations of Deterrence Theory", Journal of Theoretical Politics, 16 (2): 107–141, CiteSeerX 10.1.1.335.7353, doi:10.1177/0951629804041117, S2CID 13900591 "Nuclear endgame: The growing appeal of zero". The Economist. June 16, 2011. Archived from the original on December 3, 2011. Retrieved January 17, 2012. "The Growing Appeal of Zero". The Economist. June 18, 2011. p. 66. Archived from the original on December 3, 2011. Retrieved January 17, 2012. "Documentary Advances Nuclear Free Movement". NPR.org. NPR. Archived from the original on 2023-04-05. Retrieved 2010-06-10. Ben Goddard (2010-01-27). "Cold Warriors say no nukes". The Hill. Archived from the original on 2014-02-13. Retrieved 2013-11-15. Hugh Gusterson (30 March 2012). "The new abolitionists". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Archived from the original on 17 February 2014. Retrieved 15 November 2013. Nitze, Paul. "IS IT TIME TO JUNK OUR NUKES? THE NEW WORLD DISORDER MAKES THEM OBSOLETE". washingtonpost dot com. WP Company LLC. Archived from the original on July 2, 2019. Retrieved July 2, 2019. Kristensen, Hans M, Robert S Norris, and Ivan Oelrich. "From Counterforce to Minimal Deterrence: A New Nuclear Policy on the Path Toward Eliminating Nuclear Weapons Archived 2015-06-20 at the Wayback Machine." Federation of American Scientists Archived 2017-09-21 at the Wayback Machine. April 2009. Accessed July 31, 2010. Nalebuff, Barry. "Minimal Nuclear Deterrence." Journal of Conflict Resolution 32, no. 3 (September 1988): p. 424. Further reading Schultz, George P. and Goodby, James E. The War that Must Never be Fought, Hoover Press, ISBN 978-0-8179-1845-3, 2015. Freedman, Lawrence. 2004. Deterrence. New York: Polity Press. Jervis, Robert, Richard N. Lebow and Janice G. Stein. 1985. Psychology and Deterrence. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 270 pp. Morgan, Patrick. 2003. Deterrence Now. Cambridge University Press. T.V. Paul, Patrick M. Morgan, James J. Wirtz, Complex Deterrence: Strategy In the Global Age (University of Chicago Press, 2009) ISBN 978-0-226-65002-9. Waltz, Kenneth N. "Nuclear Myths and Political Realities". The American Political Science Review. Vol. 84, No. 3 (Sep, 1990), pp. 731–746. External links Wikiversity has learning resources about Survey research and design in psychology/Tutorials/Multiple linear regression/Exercises/Deterrence theory vte International relations Organizations Present BRICS Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) International Criminal Court (ICC) Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) United Nations (UN) Past League of Nations Warsaw Pact History 1648–1814 1814–1919 1919–1939 Diplomatic history of World War II Cold War International relations since 1989 Concepts Alliance Entente Coalition Military Appeasement Co-belligerence Collective security Colonialism Deterrence theory Grey-zone Hegemony Idealism International community Internationalism Liberal institutionalism Neutral country Non-belligerent Non-state actor Imperialism Peace Power Right of conquest Sovereignty Suzerainty Treaty Armistice Ceasefire War Theory Constructivism English school Feminism Liberalism Marxism Postcolonialism Realism Related fields and subfields Comparative politics Diplomacy Foreign policy analysis Geopolitics International law International political economy International political sociology Peace and conflict studies Security studies Authority control databases: National Edit this at Wikidata France BnF data Israel United States Categories: Cold War policiesCold War terminologyDeterrence theory during the Cold WarGeopolitical terminologyInternational relations theoryInternational securityMilitary strategyMilitary ethicsNuclear strategyNuclear warfarePeace and conflict studiesSubfields of political science

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ David Keith Williamson AO (born 24 February 1942) is an Australian playwright. He has also written screenplays and teleplays. Early life David Williamson was born in Melbourne, Victoria, on 24 February 1942, and was brought up in Bairnsdale. He initially studied mechanical engineering at the University of Melbourne from 1960, but left and graduated from Monash University with a Bachelor of Engineering degree in 1965. His early forays into the theatre were as an actor and writer of skits for the Engineers' Revue at Melbourne University's Union Theatre at lunchtime during the early 1960s, and as a satirical sketch writer for Monash University student reviews and the Emerald Hill Theatre Company. After a brief stint as design engineer for GM Holden, Williamson became a lecturer in mechanical engineering and thermodynamics at Swinburne University of Technology (then Swinburne Technical College) in 1966 while studying social psychology as a postgraduate part-time at the University of Melbourne. He completed a Master of Arts in Psychology in 1970, and then completed further postgraduate research in social psychology. Williamson later lectured in social psychology at Swinburne, where he remained until 1972. Career This section of a biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libelous. Find sources: "David Williamson" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (August 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Williamson first turned to writing and performing in plays in 1967 with La Mama Theatre Company and the Pram Factory, and rose to prominence in the early 1970s, with works such as Don's Party (later turned into a 1976 film), a comic drama set during the 1969 federal election; and The Removalists (1971). He also collaborated on the screenplays for Gallipoli (1981) and The Year of Living Dangerously (1982). Williamson's work as a playwright focuses on themes of politics, loyalty and family in contemporary urban Australia, particularly in two of its major cities, Melbourne and Sydney. Major stage works include The Club, The Department, Travelling North, The Perfectionist, Emerald City, Money and Friends and Brilliant Lies. Recent work has included Dead White Males, a satirical approach to postmodernism and university ethics; Up for Grabs, which starred Madonna in its London premiere; and the Jack Manning Trilogy (Face To Face, Conversation, Charitable Intent) which take as their format community conferencing, a new form of restorative justice, in which Williamson became interested in the late 1990s and early 2000s. In recent years he has alternated work between larger stages (including Soul Mates, Amigos and Influence – all premiered with the Sydney Theatre Company) and smaller ones (including the Manning trilogy, Flatfoot and Operator, which premiered at the Ensemble Theatre). In 2005, he announced his retirement from main-stage productions, although he has continued to write new plays for the mainstage, many produced with the Ensemble Theatre. He had a serious health problem, cardiac arrhythmia, which had required frequent hospitalisation. An operation resolved this issue, but then in 2009 he had a mild stroke, from which he recovered fully.[1] Williamson was instrumental in the founding of the Noosa Long Weekend Festival, a cultural festival in Noosa, Queensland, where he lives. In August 2006 Cate Molloy, former Australian Labor Party member of the Queensland Parliament for Noosa, announced that Williamson would be her campaign manager as she sought to recontest her seat as an Independent. In 2007, Lotte's Gift, a one-woman show starring Karin Schaupp, which traced a journey through Schaupp's own life as well as those of her mother and grandmother (the Lotte of the title), was produced. In 2021, his memoir, Home Truths, was published by HarperCollins. Reviewing the book for The Sydney Morning Herald, Peter Craven wrote "He comes across as a likeable, flawed fellow with no more blindness than people of lesser talent".[2] Personal life Williamson is married to Kristin Williamson (sister of independent filmmaker Chris Löfvén) who have homes in Sydney and on Queensland's Sunshine Coast. They have five adult children and 11 grandchildren.[1] His son, Rory Williamson, and his stepson, Felix Williamson, are both actors. Rory starred as Stork in the 2001 revival of The Coming of Stork at the Stables Theatre in Sydney, produced by Felix's company, the Bare Naked Theatre Company.[citation needed] Honours and awards 1971 – British George Devine Award 1972 – Australian Writers Guild Awgie Award for best stage play and best script with The Removalists 1983 – appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia[3] 1988 – Honorary Doctor of Letters, University of Sydney 1990 – Honorary Doctor of Letters, Monash University 1995 – Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Drama Award for Sanctuary [4] 1996 – chosen to deliver the inaugural Andrew Olle Media Lecture 1996 – Honorary Doctor of Letters, Swinburne University of Technology 2004 – Honorary Doctor of Letters, University of Queensland 2012 – Nominated Senior Australian of the Year Australian Film Institute Awards 1977 – AFI Award, Best Screenplay, Original or Adapted, Don's Party 1981 – AFI Award, Best Screenplay, Original or Adapted, Gallipoli 1987 – AFI Award, Best Screenplay, Adapted, Travelling North 2009 – AFI Award, Best Screenplay, Adapted, Balibo (shared with director Robert Connolly) Helpmann Awards The Helpmann Awards is an awards show, celebrating live entertainment and performing arts in Australia, presented by industry group Live Performance Australia (LPA) since 2001.[5] In 2005, Williamson received the JC Williamson Award, the LPA's highest honour, for their life's work in live performance.[6] Year Nominee / work Award Result 2005 Himself JC Williamson Award awarded Writings Plays The Indecent Exposure of Anthony East (1968) You've Got to Get on Jack (1970) The Coming of Stork (1970) The Removalists (1971) Don's Party (1971) Jugglers Three (1972) What If You Died Tomorrow? (1973) The Department (1975) A Handful of Friends (1976) The Club (1977) Travelling North (1979) Celluloid Heroes (1980) The Perfectionist (1982) Sons of Cain (1985) Emerald City (1987) Top Silk (1989) Siren (1990) Money and Friends (1991) Brilliant Lies (1993) Sanctuary (1994) Dead White Males (1995) Heretic (1996) Third World Blues (1997, adaptation of Jugglers Three) After The Ball (1997) Corporate Vibes (1999) Face to Face (2000) The Great Man (2000) Up for Grabs (2001) A Conversation (2001) Charitable Intent (2001) Soulmates (2002) Flatfoot (2003) Birthrights (2003) Amigos (2004) Operator (2005) Influence (2005) Lotte's Gift (2007) – also known as Strings Under My Fingers Scarlett O'Hara at the Crimson Parrot (2008) Let the Sunshine[7] (2009) Don Parties On (2011) At Any Cost? (2011) Nothing Personal (2011) When Dad Married Fury (2011) Managing Carmen (2012) Happiness (2013) Rupert (2013) Cruise Control (2014) Dream Home (2015) Jack of Hearts (2016) Credentials (2017) Sorting Out Rachel (2018) Nearer the Gods (2018)[8] The Big Time (2019) Family Values (2020) Crunch Time (2020) Screenplays Stork (1971) – based on his play Libido (1972) – segment "The Family Man" Petersen (1974) The Removalists (1975) – based on his play Eliza Fraser (1975) Don's Party (1976) – based on his play The Department (1980) (TV movie) – based on his play The Club (1980) – based on his play Gallipoli (1981) Duet for Four (1982) The Year of Living Dangerously (1983) Phar Lap (1983) The Last Bastion (1984) (TV series) – also produced The Perfectionist (1987) (TV movie) – based on his play Emerald City (1987) – based on his play Touch the Sun: Princess Kate (1988) (TV) A Dangerous Life (1988) (TV mini-series) The Four Minute Mile (1988) Sanctuary (1995) – based on his play Brilliant Lies (1996) – based on his play Dog's Head Bay (1999) (TV series) – 13 episodes On the Beach (2000) (TV series) Balibo (2009) Face to Face (2011) – based on his play References Michael Shmith, "Lunch with David Williamson", The Age, 7 September 2013, Life&Style, p. 3 Craven, Peter (21 October 2021). "The irresistible rise and occasional fall of David Williamson". The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 22 October 2021. "870154". Australian Honours Search Facility. Archived from the original on 19 December 2023. "1995 Human Rights Medal and Awards". Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Archived from the original on 27 September 2007. Retrieved 11 August 2007.[dead link] "Events & Programs". Live Performance Australia. Retrieved 17 August 2022. "JC Williamson Award recipients". Helpmann Awards. Live Performance Australia. Archived from the original on 21 March 2012. Retrieved 17 August 2022. "Let The Sunshine". Archived from the original on 12 January 2012. Retrieved 11 July 2009. Nearer the Gods, production details, Queensland Theatre Company External links Official website "David Williamson interviews by Martin Portus, 22 and 23 January 2018" (library record). State Library of New South Wales. Retrieved 4 June 2018. David Williamson at IMDb David Williamson playscripts, Australian Script Centre David Williamson Australian theatre credits at AusStage vte Works by David Williamson Plays The Indecent Exposure of Anthony East (1968) You've Got to Get on Jack (1970) The Coming of Stork (1970) The Removalists (1971) Don's Party (1971) Jugglers Three (1972) What If You Died Tomorrow? (1973) The Department (1975) A Handful of Friends (1976) The Club (1977) King Lear (1978) Travelling North (1979) Celluloid Heroes (1980) The Perfectionist (1982) Sons of Cain (1985) Emerald City (1987) Top Silk (1989) Siren (1990) Money and Friends (1991) Brilliant Lies (1993) Sanctuary (1994) Dead White Males (1995) Heretic (1996) Third World Blues (1997) After the Ball (1997) Corporate Vibes (1999) Face to Face (2000) The Great Man (2000) Up for Grabs (2001) A Conversation (2001) Charitable Intent (2001) Soulmates (2002) Flatfoot (2003) Birthrights (2003) Amigos (2004) Operator (2005) Influence (2005) Lotte's Gift (2007) Scarlett O'Hara at the Crimson Parrot (2008) Let the Sunshine (2009) Rhinestone Rex and Miss Monica (2010) Don Parties On (2011) At Any Cost? (2011) Nothing Personal (2011) When Dad Married Fury (2011) Managing Carmen (2012) Happiness (2013) Rupert (2013) Cruise Control (2014) Dream Home (2015) Jack of Hearts (2016) Odd Man Out (2017) Credentials (2017) Sorting Out Rachel (2018) Nearer the Gods (2018) The Big Time (2019) Family Values (2020) Crunch Time (2020) The Great Divide (2024) Screenplays Stork (1971) Libido (1973) Petersen (1974) The Removalists (1975) Eliza Fraser (1975) Don's Party (1976) The Department (1980) (TV movie) The Club (1980) Gallipoli (1981) Duet for Four (1982) The Year of Living Dangerously (1983) Phar Lap (1983) The Last Bastion (1984) (TV series) - also produced The Perfectionist (1987) (TV movie) Emerald City (1987) Travelling North (1987) Touch the Sun: Princess Kate (1988) (TV) A Dangerous Life (1988) (TV mini-series) The Four Minute Mile (1988) Sanctuary (1995) Brilliant Lies (1996) Dog's Head Bay (1999) (TV series) On the Beach (2000) (TV series) Balibo (2009) Face to Face (2011) vte JC Williamson Award Edna Edgley (1998) Kenn Brodziak (1998) Googie Withers (1999) John McCallum (1999) Ruth Cracknell (2001) Clifford Hocking (2001) Kevin Jacobsen (2002) Graeme Murphy (2002) Wendy Blacklock (2003) John Robertson (2003) John Farnham (2004) John Sumner (2004) Joan Sutherland (2005) David Williamson (2005) John Clark (2006) Graeme Bell (2006) Margaret Scott (2007) Barry Tuckwell (2007) Sue Nattrass (2008) Barry Humphries (2008) John Bell (2009) Michael Gudinski (2009) Tony Gould (2010) Brian Nebenzahl (2010) Nancye Hayes (2011) Toni Lamond (2011) Jill Perryman (2011) Jimmy Little (2012) Katharine Brisbane (2012) Kylie Minogue (2013) David Blenkinsop (2013) John Frost (2014) Paul Kelly (2015) Stephen Page (2016) Richard Tognetti (2017) Robyn Archer (2018) Reg Livermore (2018) Robyn Nevin (2018) Archie Roach (2018) Jim Sharman (2018) Kev Carmody (2019) vte Longford Lyell Award Ian Dunlop (1968) Stanley Hawes (1970) Ken G. Hall (1976) Charles Chauvel (1977) Marie Lorraine, Paulette McDonagh, and Phyllis McDonagh (1978) Jerzy Toeplitz (1979) Tim Burstall (1980) Phillip Adams (1981) Eric Porter (1982) Bill Gooley (1983) David Williamson (1984) Don Crosby (1985) Barry Jones (1986) Paul Riomfalvy (1987) Russell Boyd (1988) John Meillon (1989) Peter Weir (1990) Fred Schepisi (1991) Lee Robinson (1992) Sue Milliken (1993) Jack Thompson (1994) George Miller (1995) Jan Chapman (1997) Bud Tingwell (1998) John Politzer (1999) Anthony Buckley (2000) David Stratton (2001) Patricia Edgar (2002) Ted Robinson (2003) Patricia Lovell (2004) Ray Barrett (2005) Ian Jones (2006) David Hannay (2007) Dione Gilmour (2008) Geoffrey Rush (2009) Reg Grundy (2010) Donald McAlpine (2012) Al Clark (2013) Jacki Weaver (2014) Andrew Knight (2015) Cate Blanchett (2015) Paul Hogan (2016) Phillip Noyce (2017) Bryan Brown (2018) Sam Neill (2019) David Gulpilil (2021) Catherine Martin (2022) Portals: Biography icon Theatre flag Australia Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata International FAST ISNI VIAF National Norway Spain France BnF data Germany Israel United States Czech Republic Australia Croatia Netherlands Poland Academics CiNii Other SNAC IdRef Categories: 1942 births20th-century Australian dramatists and playwrights20th-century Australian male writers20th-century Australian non-fiction writers20th-century Australian screenwriters20th-century essayists21st-century Australian dramatists and playwrights21st-century Australian male writers21st-century Australian non-fiction writers21st-century Australian screenwriters21st-century essayists21st-century memoiristsActing theoristsAustralian essayistsAustralian historical fiction writersAustralian male dramatists and playwrightsAustralian male non-fiction writersAustralian male screenwritersAustralian memoiristsAustralian satiristsAustralian television writersCritics of postmodernismHelpmann Award winnersLecturersLiving peopleMonash University alumniOfficers of the Order of AustraliaPeople educated at University High School, MelbournePeople from BairnsdaleAustralian psychological fiction writersAcademic staff of Swinburne University of TechnologyTheatre theoristsTheatrologistsWriters about activism and social changeWriters about theatreWriters from MelbourneWriters of historical fiction set in the Middle AgesWriters of historical fiction set in the modern age

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ A searing documentary that thrusts viewers into the heart of the Cambodian tragedy under Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge regime. This raw, unfiltered reporting exposes the harrowing aftermath of genocide, attributing the devastating events to geopolitical power plays. With haunting imagery and poignant narratives, the film captures the desolation, starvation, and utter despair faced by a ravaged nation, emphasizing the human toll amid political maneuvering. Its impassioned advocacy mobilized global aid, offering a glimmer of hope amidst the darkness. Year Zero (Khmer: ឆ្នាំសូន្យ, Chhnăm Sony [cʰnam soːn]) is an idea put into practice by Pol Pot in Democratic Kampuchea that all culture and traditions within a society must be completely destroyed or discarded and that a new revolutionary culture must replace it starting from scratch. In this sense, all of the history of a nation or a people before Year Zero would be largely deemed irrelevant, because it would ideally be purged and replaced from the ground up. The new rulers of Cambodia call 1975 "Year Zero", the dawn of an age in which there will be no families, no sentiment, no expressions of love or grief, no medicines, no hospitals, no schools, no books, no learning, no holidays, no music, no song, no post, no money – only work and death. John Pilger, Year Zero: The Silent Death of Cambodia (1979)[1] The first day of "Year Zero" was declared by the Khmer Rouge on 17 April 1975 upon their takeover of Cambodia in order to signify a rebirth of Cambodian history.[2][better source needed] Adopting the term as an analogy to the "Year One" of the French Revolutionary Calendar,[3][better source needed] Year Zero was effectually an attempt by the Khmer Rouge to erase history and reset Cambodian society, removing any vestiges of the past. Concept and background Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, most of whom were French-educated communists,[4] took inspiration from the concept of "Year One" in the French Revolutionary Calendar.[citation needed] The French "Year One" came about during the French Revolution when, after the abolition of the French monarchy on 20 September 1792, the National Convention instituted a new calendar and declared that date to be the beginning of Year I.[3] Year Zero of Cambodia In 1975, the Khmer Rouge forces took over Phnom Penh, the capital of Cambodia (subsequently renamed Democratic Kampuchea, 1975–1979).[5] Upon seizing power, Year Zero was decreed.[3][better source needed] Hoping to transform the nation into an agrarian utopia, communist leader Pol Pot set out to reconstruct the country into a pre-industrial, classless society by attempting to turn all citizens into rural agricultural workers rather than educated city dwellers, whom Pot and his regime believed to have been corrupted by western, capitalist ideas.[6][5] He declared that the nation would start again at "Year Zero", and everything that existed before Year Zero was to be eradicated. In other words, this was to be a complete and thorough reset (or even cleansing) of Cambodian society. He isolated his people from the global community; established rural collectives; dismantled the social fabric and infrastructure of Cambodia; and set about the emptying of cities, as well as the abolition of money (thus also destroying banks), private property, families, and religion.[5] To build the new Cambodian society, the inhabitants of the depopulated cities were sent to labour camps.[7] The people of Phnom Penh, in particular, were forced immediately to "return to the villages" to work. Similar evacuations occurred at Batdambang, Kampong Cham, Siem Reap, Kampong Thom, among others.[2][better source needed] Knowledge of anything pre-Year Zero was prohibited. To ensure that there was no recorded memory of a pre-Year Zero society, books were burned. (Wearing glasses was also criminalized as it was taken to indicate that one might habitually read books.)[4][failed verification] In Democratic Kampuchea, the only acceptable lifestyle was that of peasant agricultural workers. Centuries of Cambodian culture and institutions were thereby eliminated—shutting down factories, hospitals, schools, and universities—along with anyone who expressed interest in their preservation. So-called New People—members of the old governments and intellectuals in general, including lawyers, doctors, teachers, engineers, clergy, and qualified professionals in all fields—were thought to be a threat to the new regime and were therefore especially singled out and executed during the purges accompanying Year Zero.[6] The Khmer Rouge's takeover was rapidly followed by a series of drastic revolutionary de-industrialization policies which resulted in a death toll that vastly exceeded the toll that resulted from the French Reign of Terror.[citation needed] See also Cambodian genocide Killing Fields Communist terrorism Crimes against humanity under Communist regimes Cultural genocide Germany, Year Zero (1948 film) Mass killings under Communist regimes Stunde Null Year One Year Zero: The Silent Death of Cambodia (1979 documentary film) Man in the High Castle (2015-2019 TV series) - In a 2018 episode of the show titled 'Jahr Null', a 'Year Zero' similar to that enacted in Cambodia by Pol Pot is enacted in the United States by ruling Nazi German forces. References "Year Zero: The Silent Death of Cambodia". Hays, Jeffrey. "KHMER ROUGE YEAR ZERO: THE EMPTYING OF PHNOM PENH | Facts and Details". factsanddetails.com. Retrieved 2021-04-25. Gfroerer, John. 2017 December 3. "John Gfroerer: Moving to Year Zero." Concord Monitor. Retrieved 2021 April 25. Thul, Prak Chan (2019-08-04). "Cambodian Khmer Rouge's chief ideologist, 'Brother Number Two', dead at 93". Reuters. Retrieved 2021-04-26. "Khmer Rouge: Cambodia's years of brutality". BBC News. 2018-11-16. Retrieved 2021-04-25. "Khmer Rouge ideology". Holocaust Memorial Day Trust. Retrieved 2021-04-25. Blue, Wayland J. (2020-07-19). "Return to Year Zero: The Cambodian Genocide". History of Yesterday. Medium. Retrieved 2021-04-25. Further reading Lunn, Richard. 2004. Leaving Year Zero: Stories of Surviving Pol Pot's Cambodia. UWA Publishing. ISBN 1920694102. Pilger, John. 2014. "Year Zero." In Tell Me No Lies: Investigative Journalism and its Triumphs, edited by J. Pilger. London: Random House UK. Ponchaud, François. 1978. Cambodia: Year Zero, translated by N. Amphoux. New York: Henry Holt & Co. ISBN 9780030403064. See, excerpt from pp. 67, 69, 70 vte Cambodian genocide Ideologies Communism Marxism–Leninism New People Year Zero Khmer nationalism Stalinism Crimes Killing caves of Phnom Sampeau Killing Fields Ba Chúc massacre Thổ Chu Island massacre S-21 Choeung Ek Dangrek genocide Perpetrators "Angkar" Pol Pot Nuon Chea Ieng Sary Khieu Samphan Son Sen Ta Mok Khmer Rouge Communist Party of Kampuchea Liberation Army of Kampuchea Santebal Kang Kek Iew Mam Nai Tang Sin Hean Victims Bun Chanmol Chau Seng Chou Chet Hu Nim John Dawson Dewhirst Joseph Chhmar Salas Keo Meas Kerry Hamill Koy Thuon Ly Theam Teng Michael S. Deeds Ney Sarann Non Suon Phouk Chhay Tauch Phoeun Trinh Hoanh Paul Tep Im Sotha So Phim Tiv Ol Vorn Vet Survivors Bou Meng Chum Mey Dith Pran Haing S. Ngor Kim Sathavy Mengly Jandy Quach Prum Manh Vann Nath Investigations People's Revolutionary Tribunal Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia Documentation Center of Cambodia Bophana Center Categories: Khmer Rouge Cambodian genocide1975 in Cambodia Pol Pot

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The Rockefeller family is an American industrial, political, and banking family that owns one of the world's largest fortunes. The fortune was made in the American petroleum industry during the late 19th and early 20th centuries by brothers John D. Rockefeller and William A. Rockefeller Jr., primarily through Standard Oil (the predecessor of ExxonMobil and Chevron Corporation).[1] The family had a long association with, and control of, Chase Manhattan Bank.[2] By 1987, the Rockefellers were considered one of the most powerful families in American history.[3] The Rockefeller family originated in Rhineland in Germany and family members moved to the Americas in the early 18th century, while through Eliza Davison, with family roots in Middlesex County, New Jersey, John D. Rockefeller and William A. Rockefeller Jr. and their descendants are also of Scots-Irish ancestry.[4] Background The Rockefeller family originated in the Rhineland region in Germany and can be traced to the town Neuwied in the early 17th century. The American family branch is descended from Johann Peter Rockefeller (1681-1763), who migrated from the Rhineland to Philadelphia in the Province of Pennsylvania around 1723. In the US, he became a plantation owner and landholder in Somerville, and Amwell, New Jersey.[5][6][7] One of the first members of the Rockefeller family in New York was businessman William A. Rockefeller Sr., who was born to a Protestant family in Granger, New York. He had six children with his first wife Eliza Davison, a daughter of a Scots-Irish farmer,[4] the most prominent of which were oil tycoons John D. Rockefeller and William A. Rockefeller Jr., the co-founders of Standard Oil. John D. Rockefeller (known as "Senior", as opposed to his son John D. Rockefeller Jr., known as "Junior") was a devout Northern Baptist, and he supported many church-based institutions.[8][9][10] While the Rockefeller family are mostly Baptists,[11][12] some of the Rockefellers were Episcopalians.[13] Wealth The Rockefeller brothers John D. Rockefeller Sr. William A. Rockefeller Jr. The combined wealth of the family—their total assets and investments plus the individual wealth of its members—has never been known with any precision. The records of the family archives relating to both the family and individual members' net worth are closed to researchers.[14] From the outset, the family's wealth has been under the complete control of the male members of the dynasty, through the family office. Despite strong-willed wives who had influence over their husbands' decisions—such as the pivotal female figure Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, wife of John D. Rockefeller Jr.—in all cases they received allowances only and were never given even partial responsibility for the family fortune.[15] Much of the wealth has been locked up in the family trust of 1934 (which holds the bulk of the fortune and matures on the death of the fourth generation) and the trust of 1952, both administered by Chase Bank, the corporate successor to Chase Manhattan Bank. These trusts have consisted of shares in the successor companies to Standard Oil and other diversified investments, as well as the family's considerable real estate holdings. They are administered by a trust committee that oversees the fortune. Management of this fortune today also rests with professional money managers who oversee the principal holding company, Rockefeller Financial Services, which controls all the family's investments. The Rockefeller Center is no longer owned by the family. Its present chairman and patriarch is David Rockefeller Jr. In 1992, it had five main arms: Rockefeller & Co. (Money management: Universities have invested some of their endowments in this company); Venrock Associates (Venture Capital: an early investment in Apple Computer was one of many it made in Silicon Valley entrepreneurial start-ups); Rockefeller Trust Company (Manages hundreds of family trusts); Rockefeller Insurance Company (Manages liability insurance for family members); Acadia Risk Management (Insurance Broker: Contracts out policies for the family's vast art collections, real estate and private planes.)[16] Real estate and institutions Rockefeller Center at night, December 1934 John D. Rockefeller Jr., the first president of the Rockefeller Foundation The family was heavily involved in numerous real estate construction projects in the U.S. during the 20th century.[17] Chief among them: Rockefeller Center, a multi-building complex built at the start of the Depression in Midtown Manhattan. The construction of Rockefeller Center was financed solely by the family International House of New York, New York City, 1924 (John Jr.) {Involvement: John III, Abby Aldrich, David & Peggy, David Jr., Abby O'Neill} Wren Building, College of William and Mary, Virginia, from 1927 (Renovation funded by Junior) Colonial Williamsburg, Virginia, from 1927 onwards (Junior), Abby Aldrich, John III and Winthrop, historical restoration Colonial Williamsburg Museum of Modern Art, New York City, from 1929 (Abby Aldrich, John Jr., Blanchette, Nelson, David, David Jr., Sharon Percy Rockefeller) Riverside Church, New York City, 1930 (John Jr.) The Cloisters, New York City, from 1934 (John Jr.) Rockefeller Apartments, New York City, 1936 (John Jr., Nelson)[18]: 333–334  The Interchurch Center, New York City, 1948 (John Jr.) Asia Society (Asia House), New York City, 1956 (John III) One Chase Manhattan Plaza, New York City, 1961 (David) Nelson A. Rockefeller Empire State Plaza, Albany, New York, 1962 (Nelson) Lincoln Center, New York City, 1962 (John III) World Trade Center Twin Towers, New York City, 1973–2001 (David and Nelson) Embarcadero Center, San Francisco, 1974 (David) Council of the Americas/Americas Society, New York City, 1985 (David) In addition to this is Senior and Junior's involvement in seven major housing developments: Forest Hill Estates, Cleveland, Ohio City Housing Corporation's efforts, Sunnyside Gardens, Queens, New York City Thomas Garden Apartments, The Bronx, New York City Paul Laurence Dunbar Housing, Harlem, New York City Lavoisier Apartments, Manhattan, New York City Van Tassel Apartments, Sleepy Hollow, New York (formerly North Tarrytown) A development in Radburn, New Jersey[19][20] A further project involved David Rockefeller in a major middle-income housing development when he was elected in 1947 as chairman of Morningside Heights, Inc., in Manhattan by fourteen major institutions that were based in the area, including Columbia University. The result, in 1951, was the six-building apartment complex known as Morningside Gardens.[21] Senior's donations led to the formation of the University of Chicago in 1889; the Central Philippine University in the Philippines (The first Baptist university and second American university in Asia); and the Chicago School of Economics.[22] This was one instance of a long family and Rockefeller Foundation tradition of financially supporting Ivy League and other major colleges and universities over the generations—seventy-five in total. These include: Harvard University Dartmouth College Princeton University University of California, Berkeley Stanford University Yale University Massachusetts Institute of Technology Brown University Tufts University Columbia University Cornell University University of Pennsylvania Spelman College Case Western Reserve University Institutions overseas such as London School of Economics and University College London, among many others.[23] Rockefeller University Senior (and Junior) also created Rockefeller University in 1901 General Education Board in 1902, which later (1923) evolved into the International Education Board Rockefeller Sanitary Commission in 1910 Bureau of Social Hygiene in 1913 (Junior) International Health Division in 1913 China Medical Board in 1915. Rockefeller Museum, British Mandate of Palestine, 1925–30 In the 1920s, the International Education Board granted important fellowships to pathbreakers in modern mathematics, such as Stefan Banach, Bartel Leendert van der Waerden, and André Weil, which was a formative part of the gradual shift of world mathematics to the US over this period. To help promote cooperation between physics and mathematics Rockefeller funds also supported the erection of the new Mathematical Institute at the University of Göttingen between 1926 and 1929 The rise of probability and mathematical statistics owes much to the creation of the Institut Henri Poincaré in Paris, partly by the Rockefellers' finances, also around this time.[24] John D Jr. established International House at Berkeley. Junior was responsible for the creation and endowment of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, which operates the restored historical town at Williamsburg, Virginia, one of the most extensive historic restorations ever undertaken. Residences Over the generations, the family members have resided in some historic homes. A total of 81 Rockefeller residences are on the National Register of Historic Places.[25] Not including all homes owned by the five brothers, some of the more prominent of these residences are: One Beekman Place - The residence of Laurance in New York City. 10 West 54th Street - A nine-story single-family home, the former residence of Junior before he shifted to 740 Park Avenue, and the largest residence in New York City at the time, it was the home for the five young brothers; it was later given by Junior to the Museum of Modern Art.[26] 13 West 54th Street - A four-story townhouse used by Junior and Abby between 1901[27] and 1913.[26] 740 Park Avenue - Junior and Abby's famed 40-room triplex apartment in the luxury New York City apartment building, which was later sold for a record price. Bassett Hall - The house at Colonial Williamsburg bought by Junior in 1927 and renovated by 1936, it was the favourite residence of both Junior and Abby and is now a house museum at the family-restored Colonial Revival town. The Casements - A three-story house at Ormond Beach in Florida, where Senior spent his last winters, from 1919 until his death. The Eyrie - A sprawling 100-room summer holiday home on Mount Desert Island in Maine, demolished by family members in 1962. Forest Hill - The family's country estate and a summer home in Cleveland, Ohio, for four decades; built and occupied by Senior, it burned down in 1917. Golf House at Lakewood, New Jersey - The former three-story clubhouse for the elite Ocean County Hunt and Country Club, which Senior bought in 1902 to play golf on its golf course. Kykuit, also known as the John D. Rockefeller Estate - The landmark six-story, 40-room home on the vast Westchester County family estate, home to four generations of the family. The JY Ranch - The landmark ranch in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, the holiday resort home built by Junior and later owned by Laurance, which was used by all members of the family and had many prominent visitors, including presidents until Laurance donated it to the federal government in 2001. The Rocks - 1940 Shepard Street NW and 2121 Park Road NW, Washington, DC - The 12,000 square foot house sits on 15.9 acres bordering Rock Creek Park; and is the largest residential property in the District of Columbia. Built by Daisy Blodgett for her daughter Mona in 1927, the name refers to its location, not the current owner. The property was purchased by Jay Rockefeller in 1984 when he became US Senator for West Virginia. He and his wife, Sharon Percy Rockefeller continue to live there.[28] Rockwood Hall - The former home of William Rockefeller Jr. (demolished in the 1940s). Rockefeller Guest House - The guest house of Blanchette Ferry Rockefeller.[18] Kykuit, the landmark family home in Sleepy Hollow, New York Kykuit, the landmark family home in Sleepy Hollow, New York The Casements, the family's former winter residence in Florida The Casements, the family's former winter residence in Florida Rockwood Hall, Mount Pleasant, New York Rockwood Hall, Mount Pleasant, New York Rockefeller Guest House, New York City Rockefeller Guest House, New York City Politics Prominent banker David Rockefeller Sr. was the family patriarch until his death in 2017. In 1960, when his brother Nelson Rockefeller was governor of New York, David Sr. successfully pressed for a repeal of a New York state law that restricted Chase Manhattan Bank from operating outside the city. David Sr. was twice offered the post of Treasury secretary by President Richard M. Nixon, but declined on both occasions. In 1979, he used his high-level contacts to bring Mohammad Reza Shah of Iran, who had been overthrown in the Iranian Revolution and was in poor health, for medical treatment in the United States. In 1998, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton for his work on International Executive Service Corps.[29] Political offices held Vice President Nelson Rockefeller Governor Winthrop Rockefeller Senator John D. Rockefeller IV Nelson Rockefeller (1908–1979) 1st Assistant Secretary of State for American Republic Affairs, 1944–1945 1st Under Secretary Health, Education and Welfare, 1953–1954 Governor of New York, 1959–1973 U.S. Vice President, 1974–1977 Winthrop Rockefeller (1912–1973) Governor of Arkansas, 1967–1971 John Davison Rockefeller IV (b. 1937) Member of West Virginia House of Delegates, 1966–1968 Secretary of State of West Virginia, 1969–1973 Governor of West Virginia, 1977–1985 U.S. Senator from West Virginia, 1985–2015 Winthrop Paul Rockefeller (1948–2006) Lieutenant Governor of Arkansas, 1996–2006 Legacy A trademark of the dynasty over its 140-plus years has been the remarkable unity it has maintained, despite major divisions that developed in the late 1970s, and unlike other wealthy families such as the Du Ponts and the Mellons. A primary reason has been the lifelong efforts of "Junior" to not only cleanse the name from the disgrace stemming from the ruthless practices of Standard Oil but his tireless efforts to forge family unity even as he allowed his five sons to operate independently. This was partly achieved by regular brothers and family meetings, but it was also because of the high value placed on family unity by first Nelson and John III, and later especially with David.[30] Regarding achievements, in 1972, on the 100th anniversary of the founding of Andrew Carnegie's philanthropy, the Carnegie Corporation, which has had a long association with the family and its institutions, released a public statement on the influence of the family on not just philanthropy but encompassing a much wider field. Summing up a predominant view among the international philanthropic world, albeit one poorly grasped by the public, one sentence of this statement read: "The contributions of the Rockefeller family are staggering in their extraordinary range and in the scope of their contribution to humankind."[31] John D. Rockefeller gave away US$540 million over his lifetime (in dollar terms of that time), and became the greatest lay benefactor of medicine in history.[32] His son, Junior, also gave away over $537 million over his lifetime, bringing the total philanthropy of just two generations of the family to over $1 billion from 1860 to 1960.[33] Added to this, The New York Times declared in a report in November 2006 that David Rockefeller's total charitable benefactions amount to about $900 million over his lifetime.[34] The combined personal and social connections of the various family members are vast, both in the United States and throughout the world, including the most powerful politicians, royalty, public figures, and chief businessmen. Figures through Standard Oil alone have included Henry Flagler and Henry H. Rogers. Contemporary figures include Henry Kissinger, Richard Parsons (chairman and CEO of Time Warner), C. Fred Bergsten, Peter G. Peterson (Senior Chairman of the Blackstone Group), and Paul Volcker. In 1991, the family was presented with the Honor Award from the National Building Museum for four generations worth of preserving and creating some of the U.S.'s most important buildings and places. David accepted the award on the family's behalf.[35] The ceremony coincided with an exhibition on the family's contributions to the built environment, including John Sr.'s preservation efforts for the Hudson River Palisades, the restoration of Williamsburg, Virginia, construction of Rockefeller Center, and Governor Nelson's efforts to construct low- and middle-income housing in New York state.[36] The Rockefeller name is imprinted in numerous places throughout the United States, including within New York City, but also in Cleveland, where the family originates: Rockefeller Center - A landmark 19-building 22-acre (89,000 m2) complex in Midtown Manhattan established by Junior: Older section constructed from 1930 to 1939; Newer section constructed during the 1960s-1970s; Rockefeller Apartments - An apartment building in Midtown Manhattan Rockefeller University - Renamed in 1965, this is the distinguished Nobel prize-winning graduate/postgraduate medical school (formerly the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, established by Senior in 1901); Rockefeller Foundation - Founded in 1913, this is the famous philanthropic organization set up by Senior and Junior; Rockefeller Brothers Fund - Founded in 1940 by the third-generation's five sons and one daughter of Junior; Rockefeller Family Fund - Founded in 1967 by members of the family's fourth-generation; Rockefeller Group - A private family-run real estate development company based in New York that originally owned, constructed and managed Rockefeller Center, it is now wholly owned by Mitsubishi Estate Co. Ltd; Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors - is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that advises donors in their philanthropic endeavours throughout the world; Rockefeller Research Laboratories Building - A major research centre into cancer that was established in 1986 and named after Laurance, this is located at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; Rockefeller Center - Home of the International Student Services office and department of philosophy, politics and law at the State University of New York at Binghamton; Rockefeller Chapel - Completed in 1928, this is the tallest building on the campus of the University of Chicago, established by Senior in 1889; Rockefeller Hall - Established by Senior in 1906, this building houses the Case Western Reserve University Physics Department; Rockefeller Hall - Established by Senior and completed in 1906, this building houses the Cornell University Physics Department;[37] Rockefeller Hall - Established by Senior in 1887, who granted Vassar College a $100,000 ($2.34 million in 2006 dollars) allowance to build additional, much needed lecture space. The final cost of the facility was $99,998.75. It now houses multi-purpose classrooms and departmental offices for political science, philosophy and math; Rockefeller Hall - Established by Senior and completed in 1886, this is the oldest building on the campus of Spelman College; Rockefeller College - Named after John D. Rockefeller III, this is a residential college at Princeton University; Michael C. Rockefeller Arts Center - Completed in 1969 in memory of Nelson Rockefeller's son, this is a cultural centre at the State University of New York at Fredonia; The Michael C. Rockefeller Collection and the Department of Primitive Art - Completed in 1982 after being initiated by Nelson, this is a wing of the Metropolitan Museum of Art; David and Peggy Rockefeller Building - A tribute to David's wife, Peggy Rockefeller, this is a new (completed in 2004) six-story building housing the main collection and temporary exhibition galleries of the family's Museum of Modern Art; Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Sculpture Garden - Completed in 1949 by David, this is a major outdoor feature of the Museum of Modern Art; Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Folk Art Museum - Opened in 1957 by Junior, this is a leading folk art museum just outside the historic district of Junior's Colonial Williamsburg; Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Hall - The freshman residence hall on the campus of Spelman College; Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Building - Completed in 1918, it is among other things a student residence hall at Spelman College, after the wife of Senior and after whom the college was named; Rockefeller State Park Preserve - Part of the 3,400-acre (14 km2) family estate in Westchester County, this 1,233-acre (5 km2) preserve was officially handed over to New York State in 1983, although it had previously always been open to the public; Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller National Historical Park - Established as a historical museum of conservation by Laurance during the 1990s. John D. Rockefeller Jr. Memorial Parkway - Established in 1972 through Congressional authorization, connecting Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks; Rockefeller Forest - Funded by Junior, this is located within Humboldt Redwoods State Park, California's largest redwood state park; Either of two US congressional committees {in 1972 - John D. III and 1975 - Nelson dubbed the Rockefeller Commission}. Rockefeller Park, a scenic park featuring gardens dedicated to several world nations along Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. between University Circle and Lake Erie in Cleveland. Winthrop Rockefeller Institute of the University of Arkansas System was established in 2005 with a grant from the Winthrop Rockefeller Charitable Trust. The educational center with conference and lodging facilities is located on Petit Jean Mountain near Morrilton, Arkansas, on the original grounds of Gov. Winthrop Rockefeller's model cattle farm. David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard University. Rockefeller Quad at the Loomis Chaffee School Rockefeller Complex library at Niels Bohr Institute, Nørrebro, Copenhagen Municipality in Denmark John Jr., through his son Nelson, purchased and then donated the land upon which sits the United Nations headquarters, in New York, in 1946. Earlier, in the 1920s, he had also donated a substantial amount towards the restoration and rehabilitation of major buildings in France after World War I, such as the Rheims Cathedral, the Fontainebleau Palace and the Palace of Versailles, for which he was later (1936) awarded France's highest decoration, the Grand Croix of the Legion d'Honneur (subsequently also awarded decades later to his son, David Rockefeller). He also funded the excavations at Luxor in Egypt, as well as establishing a Classical Studies School in Athens. In addition, he provided the funding for the construction of the Palestine Archaeological Museum in East Jerusalem - the Rockefeller Museum.[38] Conservation Beginning with John D. Rockefeller Sr., the family has been a major force in land conservation.[39] Over the generations, it has created more than 20 national parks and open spaces, including the Cloisters, Acadia National Park, Forest Hill Park, the Nature Conservancy, the Rockefeller Forest in California's Humboldt Redwoods State Park (the largest stand of old-growth redwoods), and Grand Teton National Park, among many others. John Jr., and his son Laurance (and his son Laurance Jr. aka Larry) were particularly prominent in this area. The family was honoured for its conservation efforts in November 2005, by the National Audubon Society, one of the United States' largest and oldest conservation organizations, at which over 30 family members attended. At the event, the society's president, John Flicker, stated: "Cumulatively, no other family in America has made the contribution to conservation that the Rockefeller family has made".[39] In 2016 fifth-generation descendants of John Sr. criticized ExxonMobil, one of the successors to his company Standard Oil, for their record on climate change. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Rockefeller Family Fund both backed reports suggesting that ExxonMobil knew more about the threat of global warming than it had disclosed. David Kaiser, grandson of David Rockefeller Sr. and president of the Rockefeller Family Fund, said that the "...company seems to be morally bankrupt." Valerie Rockefeller Wayne, daughter of former Senator Jay Rockefeller, said, "Because the source of the family wealth is fossil fuels, we feel an enormous moral responsibility for our children, for everyone -- to move forward."[40] The Rockefeller Brothers Fund announced it was divesting from fossil fuels in September 2014, the Rockefeller Family Fund announced plans to divest in March 2016, and the Rockefeller Foundation pledged to dump their fossil fuel holdings in December 2020.[41][42][43] With a $5 billion endowment, the Rockefeller Foundation was "the largest US foundation to embrace the rapidly growing divestment movement." CNN writer Matt Egan noted, "This divestment is especially symbolic because the Rockefeller Foundation was founded by oil money."[43] In May 2021 Rockefeller descendants Rebecca Rockefeller Lambert and Peter Gill Case announced a ten-year funding initiative, the Equation Campaign, to fight new fossil fuel development.[44] The archives The Rockefeller family archives are held at the Rockefeller Archive Center in Pocantico Hills, North Tarrytown, New York.[45] At present, the archives of John D. Rockefeller Sr. William Rockefeller, John D. Rockefeller Jr., Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, Abby Rockefeller Mauzé, John D. Rockefeller III, Blanchette Rockefeller, and Nelson Rockefeller are processed and open by appointment to readers in the Archive Center's reading room. Processed portions of the papers of Laurance Rockefeller are also open. In addition, the Archive Center has a microfilm copy of the Winthrop Rockefeller papers, the originals of which are held at the University of Arkansas, Little Rock. The papers of the family office, known as the Office of the Messrs. Rockefeller, are also open for research, although those portions that relate to living family members are closed.[46] Members Ancestors Godfrey Lewis Rockefeller (1783–1857) (m. 1806) Lucy Avery (1786–1867) (ten children) William Avery Rockefeller Sr.[47] (1810–1906) (m. 1837) Eliza Davison (1813–1889) (eight children) Lucy Rockefeller (1838–1878) (m. 1856) Pierson D. Briggs Clorinda Rockefeller (c. 1838–?, died young) (daughter from Nancy Brown) John Davison Rockefeller Sr. (1839–1937) (m. 1864) Laura Celestia "Cettie" Spelman (1839–1915) Cornelia Rockefeller (c. 1840–?) (daughter from Nancy Brown) William Avery Rockefeller Jr. (1841–1922) (m. 1864) Almira Geraldine Goodsell Mary Ann Rockefeller (1843–1925) (m. 1872) William Cullen Rudd Franklin "Frank" Rockefeller (1845–1917) (m. 1870) Helen Elizabeth Scofield Frances Rockefeller (1845–1847) William W. Rockefeller (1788–1851) (m. early 19th century) Eleanor Kisselbrack (1784–1859) Descendants of John Davison Rockefeller Sr. The total number of blood relative descendants as of 2006 was about 150.[citation needed] Elizabeth "Bessie" Rockefeller (1866–1906) (m.1889) Charles Augustus Strong (1862–1940) Margaret Rockefeller Strong (1897–1985) (m. 1st 1927) George de Cuevas (1885–1961), (m. 2nd 1977) Raimundo de Larrain Alice Rockefeller (1869–1870) Alta Rockefeller (1871–1962) (m.1901) Ezra Parmelee Prentice (1863–1955) John Rockefeller Prentice (1902–1972) (m. 1941) Abra Cantrill (1912–1972) Abra Prentice Wilkin (born 1942) Mary Adeline Prentice Gilbert (1907–1981) (m. 1937) Benjamin Davis Gilbert (1907–1992) Spelman Prentice (1911–2000) (m. 3rd 1972) Mimi Walters (four children) Peter Spelman Prentice (born 1940) Alexandra Sartell Prentice (born 1962) Michael Andrew Prentice (born 1964) Edith Rockefeller (1872–1932) (m. 1895) Harold Fowler McCormick John Rockefeller McCormick (1896–1901) Editha McCormick (1897–1898) Harold Fowler McCormick Jr. (1898–1973) (m. 1931) Anne "Fifi" Potter (1879–1969) Muriel McCormick (1902–1959) (m. 1931) Elisha Dyer Hubbard (1906) Mathilde McCormick (1905–1947) (m. 1923) Max Oser (1877–1942) (one child) John Davison Rockefeller Jr. (1874–1960) (m. 1st 1901) Abigail Greene "Abby" Aldrich (1874–1948) Abigail Aldrich "Babs" Rockefeller (1903–1976) (m. 1st 1925, div. 1954) David M. Milton (1900–1976) (m. 2nd 1946, d. 1949) Irving H. Pardee (1892–1949) (m. 3rd 1953, d. 1974) Jean Mauzé (1903–1974) (two children) Abigail Rockefeller "Abby" "Mitzi" Milton O'Neill (1928-2017) m. George Dorr O'Neill Sr. (six children; eighteen grandchildren) Marilyn Ellen Milton (1931–1980) (two children) John Davison Rockefeller III (1906–1978) (m. 1932) Blanchette Ferry Hooker (four children) John Davison "Jay" Rockefeller IV (born 1937) (m. 1967) Sharon Percy (four children) John Davison Rockefeller V (born 1969) m. Emily Tagliabue John Davison Rockefeller VI (born 2007) Justin Aldrich Rockefeller (born 1979) m. Indré Vengris Valerie Rockefeller Wayne Hope Aldrich Rockefeller (born 1938) (three children) Alida Ferry Rockefeller Messinger (born 1949) (m. 1st 1978–1986) Mark Dayton (m. 2nd) William Messinger (three children) Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller (1908–1979) (m. 1st 1930–1962) Mary Todhunter Clark (m. 2nd 1963) Margaretta Large "Happy" Fitler (1926–2015) (seven children) Rodman Clark Rockefeller (1932–2000) (m. 1st 1953–1979) Barbara Ann Olsen (m. 2nd 1980) Alexandra von Metzler (four children) Meile Rockefeller (born 1955) Peter C. Rockefeller (m. 1987) Allison Whipple Rockefeller[48] Steven Clark Rockefeller (born 1936) Mary Clark Rockefeller (born 1938) m. 1st (1961–1974) William J. Strawbridge (three children) Michael Clark Rockefeller (1938–1961) Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller Jr. (born 1964) Mark Fitler Rockefeller (born 1967) Laurance Spelman Rockefeller (1910–2004) (m. 1934) Mary French Laura Spelman Rockefeller Chasin (1936–2015) Marion French Rockefeller (born 1938) Dr. Lucy Rockefeller Waletzky (born 1941) Laurance Rockefeller Jr. (born 1944) (m. 1982) Wendy Gordon (two children)[49] Winthrop Rockefeller (1912–1973) (m. 1st 1948, div. 1954) Jievute "Bobo" Paulekiute (1916–2008) (m. 2nd 1956, div. 1971) Jeannette Edris (1918–1997) Winthrop Paul Rockefeller (1948–2006) (m. 1st 1971, div. 1979) Deborah Cluett Sage (m. 2nd 1983) Lisenne Dudderar (seven children) Andrea Davidson Rockefeller (b. 1972) Katherine Cluett Rockefeller (b. 1974) Winthrop Paul Rockefeller Jr. (b. 1976) William Gordon Rockefeller Colin Kendrick Rockefeller (b. 1990) John Alexander Camp Rockefeller Louis Henry Rockefeller David Rockefeller (1915–2017) (m. 1940) Margaret McGrath (1915–1996) David Rockefeller Jr. (born 1941) (m. 1st divorced) Diana Newell-Rowan (m. 2nd 2008) Susan Cohn (two children) Ariana Rockefeller (born 1982) (m. 1st 2010, div. 2019) Matthew Bucklin[50] Camilla Rockefeller (born 1984)[51][52] Abigail Rockefeller (born 1943) Neva Goodwin Rockefeller (born 1944) (m. 1st divorced) Walter J. Kaiser[53] (m. 2nd) Bruce Mazlish (1923–2016)[54] David Kaiser (1969–2020)[55] Margaret Dulany "Peggy" Rockefeller[56] (born 1947) Richard Gilder Rockefeller (1949–2014);[57][58] married to Nancy King[56] (two children, two step-children)[56][57] Clayton Rockefeller Rebecca Rockefeller Eileen Rockefeller[56] (born 1952) m. Paul Growald (two children) Descendants of William Avery Rockefeller Jr. An article in The New York Times in 1937 stated that William Rockefeller had, at that time, 28 great-grandchildren.[59] Lewis Edward Rockefeller (1865–1866) Emma Rockefeller McAlpin (1868–1934) William Goodsell Rockefeller (1870–1922) (five children) William Avery Rockefeller III (1896–1973) (three children) Elsie Rockefeller m. William Proxmire Godfrey Stillman Rockefeller (1899–1983) (seven children) Godfrey Anderson Rockefeller (1924–2010) James Stillman Rockefeller (1902–2004) (four children) Georgia Rockefeller Rose Andrew Carnegie Rose Louisa d'Andelot du Pont Rose John Davison Rockefeller II (1872–1877) Percy Avery Rockefeller (1878–1934) m. Isabel Goodrich Stillman (five children) Isabel Stillman Rockefeller (1902–1980) m. Frederic Walker Lincoln IV Isabel Lincoln (1927-2016) m. Basil Beebe (Stephen Basil) Elmer Jr. (1924-2007) David Basil Elmer Lucy Lincoln Elmer Monica Elmer Veronica Hoyt Elmer m. Clinton Richard Kanaga Anthony Kanaga Joshua Kanaga Lindsey Kanaga Calista Lincoln (1930-2012) m. Henry Upham Harder (1925-2004) Frederic Walker Lincoln Harder (b. 1953) m. Karin J. E. Bolang (b. 1954) Frederic Harder Calista Harder Gertrude Upham Lincoln Harder (b. 1955) m. James Briggs Alexander Briggs George Briggs Holly Briggs Katherine Briggs Calista Harder (b. 1957) m. Jan Hollyer Elsa Hollyer Ian Hollyer Holly Harris Harder (b. 1961) m. Bruce Kenneth Catlin (b. 1956) Augustus Attilio Catlin (b. 1997) Nickolas Charles Catlin (b. 2000) Caroline Catlin Henry Upham Harder Jr. (b. 1965) m. Natalie Rae Borrok (b. 1965) Haley Rae Harder (b. 1997) Henry Rolston Harder (b. 1999) Charles Lincoln Harder (b. 2003) Percilla Avery Lincoln (1937-2019) m. William Blackstone Chappell Jr. (1935-2017) Richard Blackstone Chappell (1964-2014) Avery Lincoln Chappell (1966-2005) m. J. Kevin Smith Ellery Smith Emeline Smith Stillman Smith Florence Philena Lincoln (b. 1940) m. Thomas Lloyd Short Avery Rockefeller (1903–1986) m. 1923 Anna Griffith Mark (three children) Faith Rockefeller Model (1909–1960) Robert Model (born 1942) Geraldine Rockefeller Dodge (1882–1973) m. Marcellus Hartley Dodge Sr. Marcellus Hartley Dodge Jr. (1908–1930) Spouses Laura Celestia "Cettie" Spelman (1839–1915) – John D. Rockefeller Sr. Abby Greene Aldrich (1874–1948) – John D. Rockefeller Jr. Martha Baird Allen (1895–1971) – John D. Rockefeller Jr. Mary Todhunter Clark "Tod" (1907–1999) – Nelson Rockefeller Margaretta "Happy" Fitler (1926–2015) – Nelson Rockefeller Anne Marie Rasmussen – Steven Clark Rockefeller Blanchette Ferry Hooker (1909–1992) – John D. Rockefeller III Sharon Lee Percy – John D. Rockefeller IV Mary French (1910–1997) – Laurance Rockefeller Wendy Gordon – Laurance "Larry" Rockefeller Jr. Jievute "Bobo" Paulekiute (1916–2008) – Winthrop Rockefeller Jeannette Edris (1918–1997) – Winthrop Rockefeller Deborah Cluett Sage – Winthrop Paul Rockefeller Lisenne Dudderar – Winthrop Paul Rockefeller Margaret "Peggy" McGrath (1915–1996) – David Rockefeller Diana Newell Rowan – David Rockefeller Jr. Nancy King – Richard Gilder Rockefeller. Sarah Elizabeth "Elsie" Stillman (1872–1935) – William Goodsell Rockefeller Isabel Goodrich Stillman (1876–1935) – Percy Avery Rockefeller Family tree Network Associates The following is a list of figures closely aligned with or subordinate to the Rockefeller family. Gianni Agnelli[60][additional citation(s) needed] Nelson W. Aldrich John Dustin Archbold Jabez A. Bostwick Benjamin Brewster Samuel P. Bush Duncan Candler Daniel O'Day C. Douglas Dillon J. Richardson Dilworth Samuel Calvin Tate Dodd William Lukens Elkins[61] Henry Morrison Flagler Simon Flexner Henry Clay Folger Joseph B. Foraker Raymond B. Fosdick Herman Frasch Frederick Taylor Gates Jerome Davis Greene Harkness family Mark Hanna[62][63][64][65] William Rainey Harper E.H. Harriman[66][additional citation(s) needed] Wallace Harrison Oliver Burr Jennings William Lyon Mackenzie King Henry Kissinger Ivy Lee John J. McCloy McCormick family Charles Edward Merriam William S. Paley Richard Parsons Oliver H. Payne Charles H. Percy Peter G. Peterson Pratt family Matthew Quay Eddie Rickenbacker[67][68] Henry H. Rogers Beardsley Ruml[69] John D. Ryan Jacob Schiff[citation needed] Louis Severance James Stillman Feargus B. Squire Walter Teagle Henry Morgan Tilford Paul Volcker John C. Whitehead Businesses The following is a list of companies in which the Rockefeller family have held a controlling or otherwise significant interest. Allegheny Transportation Company Anaconda Copper Arabian-American Oil Company American Smelting & Refining Company Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway[70][71] Atlantic Petroleum[72] Baltimore & Ohio Railroad[73] Brooklyn Rapid Transit Company Buckeye Steel Castings Chase Manhattan Bank[74] Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railroad[75] Chrysler Corporation[76] Clivus Multrum, Inc.[77] Colorado Fuel and Iron[78] Consolidation Coal Company[79] Consolidated Edison[80][81][82] Continental Oil[72] Cranston Print Works [83] Duluth, Missabe & Northern Railway[84] Eastern Air Lines[85] Intercontinental Rubber Company of New York[86] International Basic Economy Corporation [87] Itek Kyso[72] Marquardt Corporation McDonnell Aircraft Corporation[88][89] Mutual Alliance Trust Company Ohio Oil Company[90][72] National City Bank of New York Piasecki Helicopter Public Service Corporation of New Jersey[91] RKO Pictures[92] Rockefeller Apartments Rockefeller Capital Management Rockefeller Group RockResorts Santa Fe Reporter[93] Schroder, Rockefeller & Company [94] Socal[90] Socony-Vacuum Oil[90] Sohio[95] Standard Oil Company, Inc. Standard Oil of Indiana[90] Standard Oil of New Jersey[90][95] Union Sulphur Company Union Tank Car Company United Gas Improvement Corporation[61] U.S. Steel (1901–1911)[96][97] Venrock Associates Western Maryland Railway[98][61][99] Wheeling & Lake Erie Railway[100][99] Charities, colleges, and nonprofit organizations Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Folk Art Museum Asia Society Central Philippine University China Medical Board Council of the Americas Council on Foreign Relations David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies General Education Board Great Smoky Mountains National Park Group of 30 Industrial Relations Counselors, Inc. Historic Hudson Valley Institute for Pacific Relations International House of New York Jackson Hole Preserve, Inc. John D. Rockefeller Jr. Library Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity & Eugenics Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Michael Rockefeller Wing of the Met Museum of Automobiles Museum of Modern Art National Institute of Social Sciences[101] Nelson A. Rockefeller College of Public Affairs & Policy New York Cancer Hospital Population Council Rockefeller Archeological Museum Rockefeller Archive Center Rockefeller Brothers Fund Rockefeller College Rockefeller Foundation Rockefeller Institute of Government Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Rockefeller University Social Science Research Council Spelman College Trilateral Commission United Nations Association[citation needed] University of Chicago Winrock International Winthrop Rockefeller Institute Buildings, estates and historic sites Bassett Hall Colonial Williamsburg The Casements The Cloisters Eliza Davison House Elm Tree House[102] Embarcadero Center The Eyrie Summer Home First Baptist Church of Tarrytown Forest Hill Park (Ohio) Giralda Farms Grand Teton National Park Greenacre Park Headquarters of the United Nations The Interchurch Center JY Ranch Kykuit Lincoln Center Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller National Historical Park Mount Hope Farm [103] Ocean County Park One Chase Manhattan Plaza Overhills [104] Riverside Church Rockefeller Center Rockefeller Golf House Rockefeller Guest House Rockefeller State Park Preserve The Rocks [28] Rockwood Hall Strong House (Vassar College) Standard Oil Building Villa Le Balze Virgin Islands National Park William Murray Residences World Trade Center (1973–2001) See also Gilded Age References Citations World's largest private fortune - see Ron Chernow, Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller Sr., London: Warner Books, 1998. (p.370) The Political Economy of Third World Intervention: Mines, Money, and U.S. Policy in the Congo Crisis, David N. Gibbs, University of Chicago Press 1991, page 113 The Rockefeller inheritance, Alvin Moscow, Doubleday 1977, page 418 Chernow, Ron (1998). Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller. New York: Vintage Books. p. 7. ISBN 978-1-4000-7730-4. "[William Rockefeller Sr.] met his future wife, Eliza Davison, at her father's farmhouse.... A prudent, straitlaced Baptist of Scottish-Irish descent, deeply attached to his daughter, John Davison must have sensed the world of trouble that awaited Eliza..." Ron Chernow, Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. (p. 3). 2007 John Thomas Flynn, God's Gold: The Story of Rockefeller and His Times (p. 9). 1933 Henry Oscar Rockefeller, Benjamin Franklin Rockefeller. The Transactions of the Rockefeller Family Association for 1905. Knickerbocker Press, 1915 Martin, Albro (1999), "John D. Rockefeller", Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 23 Chernow 1998, p. 52 "The 9 most amazing facts about John D. Rockefeller". Oil Patch Asia. Archived from the original on January 2, 2014. Alsop, Stewart (2016). Nixon & Rockefeller: A Double Portrait. Open Road Media. ISBN 9781480446007. "Although the Nixon family was Quaker and the Rockefeller family Baptist" Schmiesing, Kevin (2016). Merchants and Ministers: A History of Businesspeople and Clergy in the United States. Lexington Books. p. 115. ISBN 9781498539258. W. Williams, Peter (2016). Religion, Art, and Money: Episcopalians and American Culture from the Civil War to the Great Depression. University of North Carolina Press. p. 176. ISBN 9781469626987. "The names of fashionable families who were already Episcopalian, like the Morgans, or those, like the Fricks, who now became so, goes on interminably: Aldrich, Astor, Biddle, Booth, Brown, Du Pont, Firestone, Ford, Gardner, Mellon, Morgan, Procter, the Vanderbilt, Whitney. Episcopalians branches of the Baptist Rockefellers and Jewish Guggenheims even appeared on these family trees." "Rockefeller Archive Center "Family, JDR"". Rockarch.org. Retrieved February 19, 2013. Women in the family with no control over the family fortune—see Bernice Kert, Abby Aldrich Rockefeller: The Woman in the Family. New York: Random House, 1993. (p.100) Managing the family wealth, 1992 New York Times article Rockefeller Family Tries to Keep A Vast Fortune From Dissipating (see External Links). (Note: The names and nature of these departments may have changed since 1992.) The Edifice Complex: The Architecture of Power, By Deyan Sudjic, Penguin, April 7, 2011, page 245–255 White, Norval; Willensky, Elliot; Leadon, Fran (2010). AIA Guide to New York City (5th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19538-386-7. "Rockefeller Archive Center "Family, OMR"". Rockarch.org. Retrieved February 19, 2013. "John D. Rockefeller Jr. and the Van Tassel Apartments, Rockefeller Archive Newsletter, Fall 1997" (PDF). Retrieved February 19, 2013. The Morningside Heights housing project - see David Rockefeller, Memoirs, New York: Random House, 2002. (pp.385-87). "UChicago.edu, "News, Nobel"". News.uchicago.edu. Retrieved February 19, 2013. Funded colleges and Ivy League universities - see Robert Shaplen, Toward the Well-Being of Mankind: Fifty Years of the Rockefeller Foundation, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1964. (passim) Siegmund-Schultze, Reinhard (April 1, 2003). Google Books: Rockefeller and the Internationalization of Mathematics. Springer. ISBN 9783764364687. Retrieved February 19, 2013. Gregor, Sharon (2006). Amazon Books: Forest Hill. Arcadia. ISBN 0738540943. Gray, Christopher (May 22, 1994). "Streetscapes/The Rockefeller City House; Pied-a-Terre Off Fifth for a Parsimonious Billionaire". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved May 25, 2021. "New Home for John D. Rockefeller Jr". The New York Times. September 26, 1901. p. 16. Retrieved May 24, 2021. Elliot Carter (October 16, 2016). "Check Out The Rockefeller Mansion in Rock Creek Park". Architect of the Capital.org. Smith, Timothy R. "David Rockefeller Sr., steward of family fortune and Chase Manhattan Bank, dies at 101". The Washington Post. Retrieved November 6, 2017. Family unity maintained over the decades - see John Ensor Harr and Peter J. Johnson, The Rockefeller Century: Three Generations of America's Greatest Family, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1988. (pp.370-71, passim); David's unifying influence - see Memoirs (pp.346-7) Carnegie.Org "Rockefellers" Archived August 31, 2006, at the Wayback Machine Greatest benefactor of medicine in history - see Ron Chernow, Titan: op.cit. (p.570) "Rockefeller Archive Center "JDR Jr"". Rockarch.org. Retrieved February 19, 2013. New York Times, November 21, 2006 Barbara Gamarekian (March 15, 1991). "Museum Honors All Rockefellers and Gifts". The New York Times. Jene Stonesifer (March 14, 1991). "Rockefellers and Design". The Washington Post. Cornell.Edu "Infobase" Retrieved January 30, 2007. Restorations and constructions in France, Egypt, Greece and Jerusalem - see Memoirs, (pp.44-48). Depalma, Anthony (November 15, 2005). "They Saved Land Like Rockefellers". The New York Times. Retrieved March 23, 2008. "Rockefeller descendants speak out against company to which they owe their prosperity". CBS News. December 2, 2016. Retrieved February 7, 2018. Schwartz, John (September 21, 2014). "Rockefellers, Heirs to an Oil Fortune, Will Divest Charity of Fossil Fuels". The New York Times. Retrieved September 23, 2014. Wade, Terry; Driver, Anna (March 24, 2016). "Rockefeller Family Fund hits Exxon, divests from fossil fuels". Reuters. Retrieved March 18, 2018. Egan, Matt (December 18, 2020). "Exclusive: A $5 billion foundation literally founded on oil money is saying goodbye to fossil fuels". CNN.com. Retrieved December 20, 2020. "Heirs to Rockefeller fortune launch effort to slow oil and gas growthg". The Hill. May 6, 2021. Retrieved May 6, 2021. Haskell, Mary B. (Winter 1996). "Brother, Can You Share a Dime?: The Rockefeller Family and Libraries". Libraries & Culture. 31 (1): 130–143. JSTOR 25548427. "DIMES: Online Collections and Catalog of Rockefeller Archive Center". dimes.rockarch.org. Retrieved January 4, 2019. Chernow, R. (1998). Titan: The life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. "Allison H. Whipple, Broker, Marries Peter C. Rockefeller". The New York Times. December 20, 1987. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved June 2, 2022. Deutsch, Claudia H. (January 15, 2006). "AT LUNCH WITH: WENDY GORDON; Living Green, but Allowing for Shades of Gray". The New York Times. Sipher, Devan (September 18, 2010). "Ariana Rockefeller and Matthew Bucklin". The New York Times. Retrieved July 22, 2020. "World's Richest Heirs | Mom.com". mom.com. Retrieved July 22, 2020. Conley, Kevin (May 11, 2016). "How the Name Rockefeller Came to Mean More Than Just Wealth". Town & Country. Retrieved July 22, 2020. "Neva Rockefeller Engaged to Wed Walter J. Kaiser; Niece of Governor Will Be Bride of Professor at Harvard, Author". The New York Times. October 18, 1966. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved July 22, 2020. Vitello, Paul (November 29, 2016). "Bruce Mazlish, Who Fused Psychoanalysis and History in His Books, Dies at 93". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved July 22, 2020. Schwartz, John (July 16, 2020). "David Kaiser, Rockefeller Heir Who Fought Exxon Mobil, Dies at 50". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved July 22, 2020. Berger, Joseph, "A Rockefeller Known Not for Wealth but for His Efforts to Help", New York Times, June 23, 2014. Retrieved June 24, 2014. Santora, Marc, "Richard Rockefeller Killed in New York Plane Crash", New York Times, June 13, 2014. Retrieved June 13, 2014. Fallows, James, "Richard Rockefeller, MD What would you do, if you could do anything? An inspiring answer to that question.", June 14, 2014. Retrieved June 14, 2014. "Rockefeller Archive Center "Family, JDR"". Rockarch.org. Retrieved February 19, 2013. [verification needed] Association with David Rockefeller – see his Memoirs, New York: Random House, 2002 (pp. 208, 479, 481) Flynn, John T. (1932). God's Gold: The Story of Rockefeller and His Times. Quinn & Boden Company. p. 347. ISBN 978-1-61016-411-5. Collier, Peter; Horowitz, David (1976). The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty. New York City, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. pp. 11–12. ISBN 0-03-008371-0. "[John D. Rockefeller] had few friends in Cleveland's Central High School...although he did form a lasting bond with classmate Mark Hanna, later to be a U.S. senator, presidential kingmaker, and political fixer for the Standard Oil trust." Chernow 1999, p. 332. Chernow 1999, p. 388. Chernow 1999, p. 508. Josephson, Matthew (October 27, 2015) [1934]. The Robber Barons: The Classic Account of the Influential Capitalists Who Transformed America's Future. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. pp. 432–433. ISBN 978-0-15-676790-3. "...[T]he various invasions of Harriman would have been impossible without tremendous draughts upon the reservoir of money at 26 Broadway. Else he could not have seized and rebuilt so quickly the Union Pacific; nor added to this Colis Huntington's huge Southern Pacific…To carry these enterprises, Harriman's biographer tells us, the men of the Standard Oil family ' gave Harriman financial support when he needed tens of millions of dollars, in credit or cash'." Daly Bednarek, Janet Rose; Launius, Roger D. (2003). Reconsidering a Century of Flight. UNC Press Books. p. 120. ISBN 978-0-8078-5488-4. Retrieved August 1, 2014. Chernow 1999, pp. 658–659. Domhoff, G.William (1996). State Autonomy or Class Dominance?: Case Studies on Policy Making In America. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. pp. 60–61. ISBN 0-202-30512-0. Bryant Jr., Keith L.; Frailey, Fred W. (2020). History of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway. University of Nebraska Press. p. 185. ISBN 9781496214102. White, Leslie A. (2016). Modern Capitalist Culture. New York City, NY: Routledge. p. 379. ISBN 978-1-59874-157-5. Auzanneau, Matthieu (2018) [2015]. Oil, Power and War: A Dark History. Chelsea Green Publishing. p. 80. ISBN 978-1-60358-743-3. "The dismantling of Standard Oil appears to have been only a formality. The subsidiaries sold their products under the same brand and divided the sales territories; during the next two or three decades, there was virtually no perceptible competition between them...¶Above all, the main shareholders remained the same as before, beginning with John D. Rockefeller, who retained about one-quarter of the shares of each of the thirty-three companies created after the Supreme Court ruling." Chernow 1999, p. 373. Caro, Robert (1975) [1974]. The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York. Random House, Inc. p. 1067. ISBN 0-394-72024-5. "There is scarcely a bank in New York State with which the Rockefellers do not have some link, direct or hidden. As for the state's largest bank, the Chase Manhattan Bank that is probably the most powerful financial institution anywhere on earth, Chase is, as [Theodore H.] White notes, 'the last great bank controlled by an individual family—the Rockefellers." "Who Built the Roads? A Modern Parable". The Railroad Telegrapher: Volume 39, Part 2. Order of Railroad Telegraphers. 1922. pp. 937–938. Retrieved March 4, 2023. "William Rockefeller, brother of John D., died a few weeks ago in his palatial home on the Hudson." “Nomination of Nelson A. Rockefeller to be Vice President of the United States” Hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Ninety-Third Congress, Second Session, November 21, 1974, (Serial No. 45), p.1069. "As for the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, in 1972 more than half of the 15 persons listed as trustees were members of the [Rockefeller] Family's investment counselors...[T]he Fund portfolio's largest holdings are in Exxon, Standard Oil of California, Chase Manhattan Bank, and Rockefeller Center, all considered controlled by, or heavily influenced by, the Rockefeller Family. The next largest holding is in the Chrysler Corporation where in the period 1966-1970, they held 80,000 shares of Chrysler common stock plus $1.6 million in notes of the Chrysler Financial and Realty Corporation. Remember that J.Richardson Dilworth has been a director of Chrysler since 1962, when the Rockefellers bought a major stock position in that company." McCandlish, Laura (May 22, 2005). "Indoor composting toilets waste not, want not". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved September 29, 2021. Chernow 1999, p. 571. "Rockefellers in the Consolidation Coal Co". The Big Sandy News. Louisa, KY. February 2, 1917. Retrieved May 26, 2021. Groner, Alex (1972). The American Heritage History of American Business & Industry. American Heritage Publishing Company. p. 213. ISBN 0070011567. U.S. Congress House Committee on the Judiciary (1974). Nomination of Nelson A. Rockefeller to be Vice President of the United States: Hearings Before the Committee on the Judiciary (Report). U.S. Government Printing Office. p. 665. Retrieved March 3, 2024. "Consolidated Edison—[Nelson] Rockefeller's conflict of interest statement on file with the N.Y. Secretary of State, shows the [Rockefeller] family ownership of this big utility. With ownership goes control, of course." Collier, Peter; Horowitz, David (1976). The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty. Holt, Rinehart and Winston. p. 389. ISBN 0-03-008371-0. "Nelson [Rockefeller] and Laurance's Great-Uncle William Rockefeller had been, in fact, one of the original owners of Con Ed, and based on figures Junior had given TNEC investigators in 1937, the [Rockefeller] family's current holdings would amount to better than $10 million." "Godfrey S. Rockefeller, Dies; Executive in Textiles Was 83". The New York Times. February 25, 1983. Retrieved November 30, 2016. Drury 2007, p. 398. Kaufman, Michael T. (July 11, 2004). "Laurance Rockefeller, Venture Capitalist and Philanthropist, Dies at 94". The New York Times. New York City. Retrieved May 26, 2021. "In the late 1930's, [Laurance Rockefeller] provided much of the capital to help Capt. Eddie Rickenbacker, the World War I fighter pilot, start Eastern Airlines and was for many years the airline's largest stockholder." Hart, John Mason. Empire and Revolution: The Americans in Mexico since the Civil War. Berkeley: University of California Press 2002, pp. 183–84. Schroy, John Oswin. "The International Basic Economy Corporation, IBEC, CRESCINCO, Nelson Rockefeller, and the Brazilian Capital Market". www.capital-flow-analysis.com. Chernow 1999, p. 659. Kaufman, Michael T. (July 11, 2004). "Laurance Rockefeller, Venture Capitalist and Philanthropist, Dies at 94". The New York Times. Retrieved March 3, 2023. White, Leslie A. (2016). Modern Capitalist Culture. New York City, NY: Routledge. p. 379. ISBN 978-1-59874-157-5. "The Rockefeller family owned enough stock in five of the 200 largest non-financial corporations to insure virtual control over them. They were: (1) Standard Oil Company (New Jersey) of whose stock 13.5 percent was owned by members of the Rockefeller family and by family foundations; this was by far the largest block of stock extant. (2) Socony Vacuum Oil Company, Inc, 16.3 percent of whose common stock was owned by members of the Rockefeller family; (3) Standard Oil (Indiana), 11.4 percent of common stock owned by family and foundations; (4) Standard Oil Company of California, 11.9 percent of common stock held by family, 0.5 percent by foundations; (5) Ohio Oil Company, family held 9.5 percent, foundations held 9.1 percent of common stock; family and foundations each owned about 10 percent of the preferred stock" Shannon, David A. (1977). Twentieth Century America, Volume I: The Progressive Era. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally College Publishing Company. pp. 73–74. Lasky, Betty (1984). RKO, The Biggest Little Major of Them All. Prentice Hall, Inc. p. 55. ISBN 0-13-781451-8. "Wrestling toward the Truth". Santa Fe Reporter. June 25, 2014. Retrieved December 22, 2022. "ROCKEFELLER KIN IN BANKING FIELD; Avery, Grandson of William Rockefeller, a Founder of New Investment Concern. A PRINCIPAL STOCKHOLDER Schroder, Rockefeller & Co., Inc., Will Do Underwriting and Securities Business". The New York Times. July 9, 1936. Retrieved February 16, 2023. Collier, Peter; Horowitz, David (1976). The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty. Holt, Rinehart and Winston. p. 389. ISBN 0-03-008371-0. "The [Standard Oil] trust was dead, but Rockefeller continued to hold controlling interest[s] in the constituent companies. As late as 1931, he had some 23 percent of Standard Oil of New Jersey, 18 percent of Standard of Ohio, 15 percent of Standard Oil of California, and 10 percent Standard of Indiana" Chernow 1999, pp. 392–393. Collier, Peter; Horowitz, David (1976). The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty. Holt, Rinehart and Winston. p. 389. ISBN 0-03-008371-0. "[Rockefeller's] agreement with Morgan on the Mesabi property had made him the largest stockholder in U.S. Steel and given him a seat on the board of directors." United States Congress Joint Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce (1918). Interstate and Foreign Transportation: Hearings Before the Joint Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, Congress of the United States, Pursuant to Public J. Res. 25, a Joint Resolution Creating a Joint Subcommittee from the Membership of the Senate Committee on Interstate Commerce and the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce to Investigate the Conditions Relating to Interstate and Foreign Commerce, and the Necessity of Further Legislation Relating Thereto, and Defing the Powers and Duties of Such Subcommittee, Volume 4, Parts 13-14 (Report). U.S. Government Printing Office. p. 2109. Retrieved February 28, 2024. Grant, H. Roger (2019) [2004]. "Follow the Flag": A History of the Wabash Railroad Company. Northern Illinois University Press. p. 265. ISBN 978-1-5017-4777-9. Price & Spillane 1917, p. 455. "Gold Medal Honorees". "Mrs. E. Parmalee Prentice Dies; Daughter of J.D. Rockefeller Sr" (PDF). The New York Times. June 22, 1962. Retrieved May 3, 2019. "J. R. Prentice Dies; Cattle Breeder, 69". The New York Times. June 16, 1972. Retrieved May 3, 2019. Irwin, Jeffrey D.; O'Shea, Kaitlin (2008). Overhills. Arcadia Publishing. pp. 8–9. ISBN 978-0-7385-5433-4. Other sources Chernow, Ron (1999). Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller Sr. New York City, United States: Vintage Books; Random House, Inc. ISBN 0-679-75703-1. Depalma, Anthony, They Saved Land Like Rockefellers, The New York Times Archive, November 15, 2005. Drury, George H. (2007). "Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway". In Middleton, William D.; Smerk, George M.; Diehl, Roberta L. (eds.). Encyclopedia of North American Railroads. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. pp. 398–399. ISBN 978-0-253-34916-3. O'Connell, Dennis, Top 10 Richest Men Of All Time, AskMen.com, undated. Price, Theodore H.; Spillane, Richard, eds. (1917). "The Economic Panorama of the Week". Commerce and Finance, Volume 6. pp. 452–457. Retrieved February 29, 2024. Rose, Kenneth W., Select Rockefeller Philanthropies, Booklet (pdf, 23 pages) of the Rockefeller Archive Center, 2004. Strom, Stephanie, Manhattan: A Rockefeller Plans a Huge Bequest, The New York Times Archive, November 21, 2006. Origin of Rockenfeld, in German Descendants of Goddard Rockenfeller Listing of University of Chicago Nobel Laureates, News Office, University of Chicago website, undated. Carnegie Corporation of New York, Celebrating 100 years of Andrew Carnegie's Philanthropy - awarding the inaugural Andrew Carnegie Medal of Philanthropy to David and Laurance Rockefeller, 2001. The Rockefeller Archive Center, John D. Rockefeller, Junior, 1874–1960, Overview of his life and philanthropy, 1997. Further reading Abels, Jules. The Rockefeller Billions: The Story of the World's Most Stupendous Fortune. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1965. Aldrich, Nelson W. Jr. Old Money: The Mythology of America's Upper Class. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1988. Allen, Gary. The Rockefeller File. Seal Beach, California: 1976 Press, 1976. Boorstin, Daniel J. The Americans: The Democratic Experience. New York: Vintage Books, 1974. Brown, E. Richard. Rockefeller Medicine Men: Medicine and Capitalism in America. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979. Caro, Robert (1974). The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York. New York: Knopf. ISBN 978-0-394-48076-3. OCLC 834874. Chernow, Ron. Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. London: Warner Books, 1998. Collier, Peter, and David Horowitz. The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1976. Elmer, Isabel Lincoln. Cinderella Rockefeller: A Life of Wealth Beyond All-Knowing. New York: Freundlich Books, 1987. Ernst, Joseph W., editor. "Dear Father"/"Dear Son:" Correspondence of John D. Rockefeller and John D. Rockefeller Jr. New York: Fordham University Press, with the Rockefeller Archive Cen

More CIA stories from John Stockwell: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ In this thought-provoking video, former CIA official John Stockwell delves into the covert actions undertaken by the United States in Nicaragua, Libya, and Angola. Drawing from his extensive experience, Stockwell provides insights into his travels in Nicaragua, involvement in early covert operations against Gaddafi, and leadership in the CIA's Angolan task force. The discussion sheds light on a lesser-known shift in American foreign policy following Reagan's presidency—a transition towards engaging in "low-intensity" conflicts of prolonged duration across the globe, instead of larger-scale wars. Stockwell outlines at least 15 of these covert conflicts underway, alongside revealing insights into approximately 35 other CIA operations happening worldwide. Recorded in 1986, this compelling conversation offers a rare glimpse into the intricate world of clandestine operations, unveiling the strategies and geopolitical implications of these undisclosed conflicts shaping global affairs.

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Bilderberg Group: Founded in 1954, the Bilderberg Group is an annual conference attended by influential figures from North America and Europe, including politicians, bankers, business leaders, and academics. Discussions at Bilderberg meetings are off the record, leading to speculation about their influence on global affairs. Trilateral Commission: Established in 1973 by David Rockefeller, the Trilateral Commission aims to foster cooperation between North America, Europe, and East Asia. Its members are influential figures from politics, business, and academia. Critics argue that it promotes a globalist agenda and concentrates power among elites. Council on Foreign Relations (CFR): Founded in 1921, the CFR is a U.S.-based think tank specializing in foreign policy and international affairs. Its members include politicians, diplomats, journalists, and scholars. The CFR publishes Foreign Affairs, a leading journal on international relations, and its influence extends to shaping U.S. foreign policy. Economic Concentration: The concentration of economic power refers to the dominance of a few corporations or individuals in key industries. This concentration can lead to monopolistic practices, stifling competition, and influencing government policies in favor of the elite. Interlocking Directorates: Interlocking directorates occur when individuals serve on the boards of multiple companies, creating connections and shared interests between corporations. This practice can reinforce the influence of a small group of individuals over multiple sectors of the economy. Rockefeller Empire: The Rockefeller family, particularly through figures like John D. Rockefeller, amassed considerable wealth and influence in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The Rockefeller Foundation and other philanthropic endeavors further extended their reach into various sectors, including education, healthcare, and research. Wealth and Income Distribution: Studies consistently show that wealth and income in the U.S. are highly concentrated among the top earners and wealthiest individuals. The top 1% of the population often controls a disproportionate share of the nation's wealth, leading to concerns about economic inequality and its impact on society. The Bilderberg Meeting (also known as the "Bilderberg Group", "Bilderberg Conference" or "Bilderberg Club") is an annual off-the-record forum established in 1954 to foster dialogue between Europe and North America. The group's agenda, originally to prevent another world war, is now defined as bolstering a consensus around free market Western capitalism and its interests around the globe. Participants include political leaders, experts, captains of industry, finance, academia, numbering between 120 and 150. Attendees are entitled to use information gained at meetings, but not attribute it to a named speaker (known as the Chatham House Rule). The group states that the purpose of this is to encourage candid debate while at the same time maintaining privacy, but critics from a wide range of viewpoints have called it into question, and it has provoked conspiracy theories from both the left and right. Meetings were chaired by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands until 1975. The current Chairman is French businessman Henri de Castries. Since 1954, the meeting has taken place every year except in 1976, when it was cancelled due to the Lockheed bribery scandals involving Prince Bernhard,[1] and in 2020 and 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.[2] Lisbon hosted the 69th meeting in 2023.[3] Origin Main article: 1954 Bilderberg Conference The first conference was held at the Bilderberg Hotel (Hotel de Bilderberg) in Oosterbeek, Netherlands, from 29 to 31 May 1954.[4][5] The hotel gave its name both to the group and to the "Bilderbergers" who participate in its activities. The hotel is situated in a quiet location, approximately 7 km west of the city of Arnhem.[6] It is owned and operated by the Bilderberg hotel chain, which runs 12 hotels and an event location in the Netherlands and one hotel in Germany.[7] At the time of the 1954 conference, it was a medium-sized family-run hotel.[6] The conference was initiated by several people, including Polish politician-in-exile Józef Retinger who, concerned about the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe, proposed an international conference at which leaders from European countries and the United States would be brought together with the aim of promoting Atlanticism—better understanding between the cultures of the United States and Western Europe to foster cooperation on political, economic, and defense issues.[8][9] Retinger approached Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands[10] who agreed to promote the idea, together with former Belgian prime minister Paul van Zeeland, and the then head of Unilever, Paul Rijkens. Bernhard in turn contacted Walter Bedell Smith, the then head of the CIA, who asked Eisenhower adviser Charles Douglas Jackson to deal with the suggestion.[11] The guest list was to be drawn up by inviting two attendees from each nation, one of each to represent "conservative" and "liberal" points of view.[9] Fifty delegates from 11 countries in Western Europe attended the first conference, along with 11 Americans.[12] The success of the meeting led the organizers to arrange an annual conference. A permanent steering committee was established with Retinger appointed as permanent secretary. As well as organizing the conference, the steering committee also maintained a register of attendee names and contact details with the aim of creating an informal network of individuals who could call upon one another in a private capacity.[13] Conferences were held in France, Germany, and Denmark over the following three years. In 1957, the first U.S. conference was held on St. Simons Island, Georgia, with $30,000 from the Ford Foundation. The foundation also supplied funding for the 1959 and 1963 conferences.[11] Participants Main article: List of Bilderberg participants The participants are between 120 and 150 people, including political leaders, experts from industry, finance, academia and the media.[8] About two thirds of the participants come from Europe and the rest from North America; one third from politics and government and the rest from other fields.[8][5] Historically, attendee lists have been weighted toward bankers, politicians, directors of large businesses[14] and board members from large publicly traded corporations, including Wallenberg-owned conglomerate holding company Investor AB and other Wallenberg-owned multinationals such as Ericsson and ABB, IBM, Xerox, Royal Dutch Shell, Nokia and Daimler.[15] Heads of state, including former King Juan Carlos I of Spain and former Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, have attended meetings.[15][16] A source connected to the group told The Daily Telegraph in 2013 that other individuals, whose names are not publicly issued, sometimes turn up "just for the day" at the group's meetings.[17] The banker and industrialist Marcus Wallenberg Jr. was a member of the steering committee and attended the meeting twenty-two times from the 1950s to 1981, a year prior to his death. His grandson Marcus Wallenberg has attended it eight times and his other grandson, Jacob Wallenberg, seventeen times.[18] Meetings Further information: List of Bilderberg meetings Activities and goals The group's original goal of promoting Atlanticism, of strengthening U.S.-European relations and preventing another world war has grown; according to Andrew Kakabadse, the Bilderberg Group's theme is to "bolster a consensus around free-market Western capitalism and its interests around the globe".[5] In 2001, Denis Healey, a Bilderberg group founder and a steering committee member for 30 years, said, "To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing."[19] According to the web page of the group, the meetings are conducted under the Chatham House Rule, allowing the participants to use any information they gained during the meeting, but not to disclose the names of the speakers or any other participants. According to former chairman Étienne Davignon in 2011, a major attraction of Bilderberg group meetings is that they provide an opportunity for participants to speak and debate candidly and to find out what major figures really think, without the risk of off-the-cuff comments becoming fodder for controversy in the media.[20] A 2008 press release from the "American Friends of Bilderberg" stated that "Bilderberg's only activity is its annual Conference and that at the meetings, no resolutions were proposed, no votes taken, and no policy statements issued."[21] However, in November 2009, the group hosted a dinner meeting at the Château of Val-Duchesse in Brussels outside its annual conference to promote the candidacy of Herman Van Rompuy for President of the European Council.[22] Organizational structure Meetings are organized by a steering committee with two members from each of approximately 18 nations.[23] Official posts include a chairman and an Honorary Secretary General.[15] The group's rules do not contain a membership category but former participants receive the annual conference reports.[24] The only category that exists is "member of the steering committee".[25] Besides the committee, there is a separate advisory group with overlapping membership.[26] Dutch economist Ernst van der Beugel became permanent secretary in 1960, upon Retinger's death. Prince Bernhard continued to serve as the meeting's chairman until 1976, the year of his involvement in the Lockheed affair. The position of Honorary American Secretary General has been held successively by Joseph E. Johnson of the Carnegie Endowment; William Bundy of Princeton University; Theodore L. Eliot Jr., former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan; and Casimir A. Yost of Georgetown University's Institute for the Study of Diplomacy.[27] According to James A. Bill, the "steering committee usually met twice a year to plan programs and to discuss the participant list".[28] In 2002, in Them: Adventures with Extremists, author Jon Ronson wrote that the group has a small central office in Holland [sic] which each year decides what country will host the forthcoming meeting. The host country then has to book an entire hotel for four days, plus arrange catering, transport and security. To fund this, the host solicits donations from sympathetic corporations such as Barclays, Fiat Automobiles, GlaxoSmithKline, Heinz, Nokia and Xerox.[29] Chairmen of the Steering Committee Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Meetings Tenure as Chairman Country Office(s) Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld (1911–2004) 29 May 1954 – 29 September 1976 (22 years, 123 days) [30] Netherlands Prince consort of the Netherlands (1948–1980) Inspector general of the Armed forces of the Netherlands (1970–1976) Inspector general of the Royal Netherlands Air Force (1953–1970) Inspector general of the Royal Netherlands Navy (1946–1970) Inspector general of the Royal Netherlands Army (1945–1970) Commander-in-chief of the Armed forces of the Netherlands (1944–1945) Alec Douglas-Home, Baron Home of the Hirsel Alec Douglas-Home, Baron Home of the Hirsel (1903–1995) 22 April 1977 – 20 April 1980 (2 years, 364 days) [30] United Kingdom Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (1963–1964) Leader of the Conservative Party (1963–1965) Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1960–1963, 1970–1974) Lord President of the Council (1957, 1959–1960) Leader of the House of Lords (1957–1960) Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations (1955–1960) Member of the House of Lords (1951–1963, 1974–1995) Member of Parliament (1931–1945, 1950–1951, 1963–1974) Walter Scheel Walter Scheel (1919–2016) 15 May 1981 – 12 May 1985 (3 years, 362 days) [31][32] Germany President of Germany (1974–1979) (Acting) Chancellor of Germany (1974) Vice-Chancellor (1969–1974) Minister of Foreign Affairs (1969–1974) Leader of the Free Democratic Party (1968–1974) Minister of Economic Cooperation (1961–1969) Member of the European Parliament (1956–1961) Member of the Bundestag (1953–1974) Eric Roll, Baron Roll of Ipsden (1907–2005) 25 April 1986 – 14 May 1989 (3 years, 19 days) [33] United Kingdom Member of the House of Lords (1977–2005) Peter Carington, 6th Baron Carrington Peter Carington, 6th Baron Carrington (1919–2018) 11 May 1990 – 17 May 1998 (8 years, 6 days) [12][34] United Kingdom Secretary General of NATO (1984–1988) Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1979–1982) Secretary of State for Energy (1974) Chairman of the Conservative Party (1972–1974) Secretary of State for Defence (1970–1974) Leader of the House of Lords (1963–1964) Minister without portfolio (1963–1964) First Lord of the Admiralty (1959–1963) High Commissioner to Australia (1956–1959) Member of the House of Lords (1941–2018) Étienne Davignon, Viscount Davignon Étienne Davignon, Viscount Davignon (born 1932) 3 June 1999 – 12 June 2011 (12 years, 9 days) [23][35][36] Belgium European Commissioner for Industrial Affairs and Energy (1981–1985) European Commissioner for Internal Market, Customs Union and Industrial Affairs (1977–1981) Henri de Castries, 5th Count of Castries Henri de Castries, 5th Count of Castries (born 1954) 31 May 2012 – 2019 (7 years) [37] France Chairman and CEO of AXA (2000–2016) Criticism There have been long standing concerns about lobbying,[38][39] since senior policymakers meet with corporate lobbyists, and in the case of the 2015 meeting even with senior figures at Transparency International.[40] Partly because of its working methods to ensure strict privacy and secrecy,[41] the Bilderberg Group has been criticised for its lack of transparency and accountability.[42] Ian Richardson sees Bilderberg as the transnational power elite, "an integral, and to some extent critical, part of the existing system of global governance", that is "not acting in the interests of the whole". Many of these critics have emphasized that they do not accept or do not believe that there is enough evidence to support the diversity of conspiracy theories that have arisen in regard to the group and that they disapprove of what they regard as their unpleasant associations and connotations.[43] For example, an article by the English commentator Charlie Skelton in The Guardian in June 2017 criticized the world view expressed in an agenda published by the Bilderberg group without engaging in speculation about conspiratorial activities.[44] Conspiracy theories The secrecy of the proceedings has led not only to varied criticism of the group and its activities from across the political spectrum but also to a number of conspiracy theories,[45][20][46] which have grown especially popular within certain political movements, although the different factions of theorists often disagree about the exact nature of the group's intentions and use different sources and levels of evidentiary rigor to back up their conjectures. Some on the left, or of less specific political affiliations, accuse the Bilderberg group either of covertly imposing or generally propping up capitalist domination and corporate power,[47] while some on the right have accused the group of imposing or helping to prepare the way for a world government and a global planned economy. The right-wing theorists tend to treat the group as the central directorate or planning arm of the conspiracy or at least attribute considerable importance to its role, whereas most of the left-wing and more loosely-affiliated or apolitical theorists treat it as just one of a set of institutions that help to advance international corporate interests and ideology.[48] In 2005, Davignon discussed accusations of the group striving for a one-world government with the BBC: "It is unavoidable and it doesn't matter. There will always be people who believe in conspiracies but things happen in a much more incoherent fashion. ... When people say this is a secret government of the world I say that if we were a secret government of the world we should be bloody ashamed of ourselves."[46] In a 1994 report, Right Woos Left, published by the Political Research Associates, investigative journalist Chip Berlet argued that right-wing populist conspiracy theories about the Bilderberg group date back to as early as 1964 and can be found in Phyllis Schlafly's self-published book A Choice, Not an Echo,[49] which promoted a conspiracy theory in which the Republican Party was secretly controlled by elitist intellectuals dominated by members of the Bilderberg group, whose internationalist policies would pave the way for world communism.[50] In August 2010, former Cuban president Fidel Castro wrote an article for the Cuban Communist Party newspaper Granma in which he cited Daniel Estulin's 2006 book The Secrets of the Bilderberg Club,[51] which, as quoted by Castro, describes "sinister cliques and the Bilderberg lobbyists" manipulating the public "to install a world government that knows no borders and is not accountable to anyone but its own self."[47] Proponents of Bilderberg conspiracy theories in the United States include such groups and individuals such as the John Birch Society,[48][52] political activist Phyllis Schlafly,[52] writer Jim Tucker,[53] political activist Lyndon LaRouche,[54] conspiracy theorist Alex Jones,[5][55][56] and politician Jesse Ventura, who made the Bilderberg group a topic of a 2009 episode of his TruTV series Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura.[57] Although conspiracy theories about the Bilderberg Group have gained the most widespread credence by far in the United States, some high-profile non-American proponents have raised them as well, including Lithuanian writer Daniel Estulin[58] and British politician Nigel Farage.[59] See also Bohemian Club Chatham House (The Royal Institute of International Affairs) Council on Foreign Relations Le Cercle Transnational capitalist class Trilateral Commission Valdai Discussion Club World Economic Forum References "U.S. to Urge Pact in U.N. to Combat Business Bribes". The New York Times. 6 March 1976. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 8 June 2022. Skelton, Charlie (4 June 2022). "Bilderberg reconvenes in person after two-year pandemic gap". the Guardian. Retrieved 26 April 2023. "Press release 2023". Atlas Obscura, "Hotel de Bilderberg" "Bilderberg mystery: Why do people believe in cabals?". BBC News. 7 June 2011. Archived from the original on 10 June 2011. Retrieved 14 June 2011. Gijswijt, Thomas, W., Informal Alliance: The Bilderberg Group and Transatlantic Relations during the Cold War, 1952–1968 (2018), Routledge. "The Hotel de Bilderberg was a medium-sized family-run hotel, chosen mainly for its quiet and remote location in the forests of the eastern Netherlands. It was not a particularly fancy hotel...but security was relatively easy to maintain since there was only one access road." Bilderberg hotels "About Bilderberg Meetings". Bilderberg Meetings the Official Website. Archived from the original on 17 April 2020. Retrieved 12 July 2018. Hatch, Alden (1962). "The Hôtel de Bilderberg". HRH Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands: An authorized biography. London: Harrap. OCLC 2359663. "The idea was to get two people from each country who would give the conservative and liberal slant" "Japan–US Relations – Past, Present and Future". Daily Yomiuri. 8 December 1991. "Rockefeller: The idea (of creating the Trilateral Commission) was incorporated in a speech that I made in the spring of 1972 for the benefit of some industrial forums that the Chase held in different cities around Europe, … Then Zbig (Zbig Brzezinski) and I both attended a meeting of the Bilderberg Group … and was shot down in flames. There was very little enthusiasm for the idea. I think they felt that they had a very congenial group, and they didn't want to have it interfered with by another element that would—I don't know what they thought, but in any case, they were not in favor." Aubourg, Valerie (June 2003). "Organizing Atlanticism: the Bilderberg Group and the Atlantic Institute 1952–63". Intelligence & National Security. 18 (2): 92–105. doi:10.1080/02684520412331306760. S2CID 153892953. Rockefeller, David (2002). Memoirs. New York: Random House. p. 412. ISBN 978-0679405887. Hatch, Alden (1962). "The Hôtel de Bilderberg". HRH Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands: An authorized biography. London: Harrap. OCLC 2359663. "anybody who has ever been to a Bilderberg Conference should be able to feel that he can, in a private capacity, call on any former member he has met" Moorehead, Caroline (18 April 1977). "An exclusive club, perhaps without power, but certainly with influence: The Bilderberg group". The Times. London. "Bilderberg Meeting of 1997 Assembles" (Press release). PR Newswire. 13 June 1997. Archived from the original on 30 April 2011. Oliver, Mark (4 June 2004). "The Bilderberg group". The Guardian. London. "Bilderberg Group? No conspiracy, just the most influential group in the world". The Daily Telegraph (London). 6 June 2013. Retrieved 6 June 2013. Karl, Hellberg (11 August 2018). "Bilderberggruppen och Wallenberg bakom selekteringen av svenskt regeringsstyre sedan 1950-talet". Newsvoice. Ronson, Jon (10 March 2001). "Who pulls the strings? (part 3)". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 14 May 2009. "A special report on global leaders". The Economist. 22 January 2011. pp. 12–14. "Bilderberg Announces 2008 Conference". businesswire.com. BusinessWire. 2008. Retrieved 7 June 2008. Waterfield, Bruno (16 November 2009). "EU Presidency candidate Herman Van Rompuy calls for new taxes". The Daily Telegraph. London. Archived from the original on 12 January 2022. "during a secret dinner to promote his candidacy hosted by the elite Bilderberg Group" "Inside the secretive Bilderberg Group". BBC News. 29 September 2005. Archived from the original on 29 December 2008. Retrieved 5 August 2008. Introduction p. 3 in Bilderberg meetings, Schnews, 1999 "Parliamentary questions: Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission". European Parliament. 15 May 2003. Entry for Conrad Black, The International Who's Who. Europa Publications. 2000. ISBN 9781857430509. "Bilderberg: List of Invitees" (PDF). United States Department of Defense. 31 January 1996. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 May 2006. Retrieved 6 June 2009. Bill, James A. (August 1998). George Ball: Behind the Scenes in U.S. Foreign Policy. Yale University Press. p. 53. ISBN 978-0300076462. Ronson, Jon (2015) [First published 2002]. Them: Adventures with Extremists. London: Picador Classic. pp. 271–72. ISBN 978-1447275466. "Twenty-fifth Bilderberg meeting held in St joseph MO". Facts on File World News Digest. 14 May 1977. "Bilderberg Meetings Conference Report 1981". "Bilderberg Meetings Conference Report 1985". Who's Who. 1999. "Bilderberg Meetings Conference Report 1990". "Booklet of the 1999 annual conference". Schnews. Archived from the original on 2 March 2000. "Final List of Participants of the 2011 Bilderberg annual conference". Official website. Archived from the original on 28 August 2011. "Final List of Participants of the 2012 Bilderberg annual conference". Bilderberg Meetings. Archived from the original on 26 July 2013. "Bilderberg Conference Watford 'Too Secret'". Sky News. 6 June 2013. Retrieved 11 June 2013. Jones, Nelson (10 June 2013). "My brush with Bilderberg". New Statesman. Archived from the original on 15 June 2013. Retrieved 11 June 2013. Charlie Skelton (14 June 2015). "Bilderberg 2015: TTIP and a travesty of transparency". The Guardian. Retrieved 15 November 2022. "Confirmed: Secretive Bilderberg Meeting to be held in Switzerland from May 30th". www.thelocal.ch. 28 May 2019. Retrieved 29 May 2019. Meacher, Michael; Skelton, Charlie (11 June 2013). "Bilderberg 2013: The sun sets on Watford". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 11 June 2013. Richardson, Ian (31 May 2012). "Chantilly Laced: Holding Bilderberg and the Transnational Policy Elite to Account". Huffington Post. Retrieved 21 September 2015. Skelton, Charlie (2 June 2017). "Bilderberg: the world's most secretive conference is as out of touch as ever". The Guardian. Retrieved 18 April 2018. Gowen, Annie (2 June 2012). "Is Bilderberg a conference on world affairs or a powerful global cabal? Depends on who you ask". The Washington Post. Bill Hayton (29 September 2005). "Inside the secretive Bilderberg Group". BBC News. Archived from the original on 8 February 2011. Retrieved 19 March 2011. Weissert, Will (10 August 2010). "Fidel Castro fascinated by Bilderberg Club conspiracy theory". The Christian Science Monitor. Boston. Retrieved 16 October 2010. Wallechinsky, David; Wallace, Irving (1975). "The Bilderberg Group Part 2". The People's Almanac. Doubleday. cited paragraphs. ISBN 978-0385040600. Phyllis Schlafly, A Choice Not an Echo: The Inside Story of How American Presidents Are Chosen (Pere Marquette Press, 1964) ISBN 0686114868 Chip Berlet (1994). "The New Right & the Secular Humanism Conspiracy Theory". Daniel Estulin, Los secretos del club Bilderberg (Ediciones del Bronce, 2006). Berlet, Chip (2000). "John Birch Society". Retrieved 6 October 2010. Iain Hollingshead (4 June 2010). "The Bilderberg Group: fact and fantasy". The Daily Telegraph. London. Archived from the original on 12 January 2022. Retrieved 20 June 2011. King, Dennis (1979). "NCLC'S Private Intelligence Agency". Our Town. New York. Retrieved 14 May 2009. Dixon, Hayley (9 June 2013). "'Idiot' Bilderberg conspiracy theorist disrupts BBC politics show". The Daily Telegraph. London. Archived from the original on 16 June 2013. Taylor, Adam (9 June 2013). "Conspiracy Theorist Alex Jones Goes Berserk During BBC Show". Business Insider. Retrieved 9 June 2013. "List of Season 1 episodes for Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura". truTV. 30 December 2009. Archived from the original on 8 October 2010. Retrieved 11 January 2011. Bruce Ramsey (30 July 2009). "That Bilderberg Book". The Seattle Times. Retrieved 23 January 2011. Walker, Peter (6 May 2019). "Nigel Farage under fire over 'antisemitic tropes' on far-right US talkshow". Guardian News & Media Limited. Retrieved 6 May 2019. Further reading Ronson, Jon (2001). Them: Adventures with Extremists. London: Picador. ISBN 978-0330375467. Eringer, Robert (1980). The Global Manipulators. Bristol, England: Pentacle Books. OCLC 26551991. Estulin, Daniel (2007). The True Story of the Bilderberg Group. Oregon: Trine Day. ISBN 978-0977795345. Gijswijt, Thomas W. (2019). Informal Alliance: The Bilderberg Group And Transatlantic Relations During The Cold War, 1952–1968. London: Routledgey. ISBN 978-0815396741. Hodapp, Christopher; Alice Von Kannon (2008). Conspiracy Theories & Secret Societies For Dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. ISBN 978-0470184080. Richardson, Ian N.; Andrew P. Kakabadse; Nada K. Kakabadse (2011). Bilderberg People: Elite power and consensus in world affairs. Hoboken, NJ: Routledge. ISBN 978-0415576352. Klimczuk, Stephen; Gerald Warner (2010). Secret Places, Hidden Sanctuaries: Uncovering Mysterious Sites, Symbols and Societies. Sterling. ISBN 978-1402762079. Retinger, J.H (August 1956). The bilderberg group. – A short essay on the origins of the group The Trilateral Commission is a nongovernmental international organization aimed at fostering closer cooperation between Japan, Western Europe and North America.[1] It was founded in July 1973 principally by American banker and philanthropist David Rockefeller, an internationalist[2] who sought to address the challenges posed by the growing economic and political interdependence between the U.S. and its allies in North America, Western Europe, and Japan.[3] The Trilateral Commission is headed by an executive committee and three regional chairs representing Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region, with headquarters in Paris, Washington, D.C., and Tokyo, respectively. Meetings are held annually at locations that rotate among the three regions; regional and national meetings are held throughout the year.[4] Most gatherings focus on discussing reports and debating strategy to meet the commission's aims. The Trilateral Commission represents influential commercial and political interests. As of 2021, there were roughly 400 members, including leading figures in politics, business, media, and academia. Each country within the three regions is assigned a quota of members reflecting its relative political and economic strength. History Founding The Trilateral Commission was formed in 1973 by private citizens of Japan, North American nations (the U.S. and Canada), and Western European nations[3] to foster substantive political and economic dialogue across the world. The idea of the commission was developed in the early 1970s, a time of considerable discord among the United States and its allies in Western Europe, Japan, and Canada.[5] To quote its founding declaration: "Growing interdependence is a fact of life of the contemporary world. It transcends and influences national systems... While it is important to develop greater cooperation among all the countries of the world, Japan, Western Europe, and North America, in view of their great weight in the world economy and their massive relations with one another, bear a special responsibility for developing effective cooperation, both in their own interests and in those of the rest of the world." "To be effective in meeting common problems, Japan, Western Europe, and North America will have to consult and cooperate more closely, on the basis of equality, to develop and carry out coordinated policies on matters affecting their common interests... refrain from unilateral actions incompatible with their interdependence and from actions detrimental to other regions... [and] take advantage of existing international and regional organizations and further enhance their role." "The Commission hopes to play a creative role as a channel of free exchange of opinions with other countries and regions. Further progress of the developing countries and greater improvement of East-West relations will be a major concern."[6] Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Rockefeller advisor who was a specialist on international affairs (and later President Jimmy Carter's National Security Advisor from 1977 to 1981), left Columbia University to organize the group, along with:[7] Edwin Reischauer, professor at Harvard University and United States Ambassador to Japan, 1961–1966[citation needed] George S. Franklin, executive director of the Council on Foreign Relations 1953–1971[8][9] Gerard C. Smith, SALT I negotiator and its first North American chairman Henry D. Owen, foreign policy studies director at the Brookings Institution[10] Max Kohnstamm, European Policy Centre[citation needed] Robert R. Bowie, the Foreign Policy Association and director of the Harvard Center for International Affairs[citation needed] Marshall Hornblower, former partner at Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering[citation needed] Tadashi Yamamoto, Japan Center for International Exchange[11] William Scranton, former governor of Pennsylvania. [citation needed] Other founding members included Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker, both later heads of the Federal Reserve System. [citation needed] The organization's records are stored at the Rockefeller Archive Center in North Tarrytown, NY.[12] Meetings The Trilateral Commission initiated its biannual meetings in October 1973 in Tokyo, Japan. In May 1976 the first plenary meeting of all of the commission's regional groups took place in Kyoto, Japan. Since the ninth meeting in 1978, plenary meetings have taken place annually. Besides annual plenary meetings, regional meetings have also taken place in each of the Asia Pacific Group, the European Group and the North American Group.[13] Since its founding, the discussion group has produced an official journal, Trialogue. Membership Further information: List of members of the Trilateral Commission Membership is divided into numbers proportionate to each of the think tank's three regional areas. North America is represented by 120 members: 20 Canadian, 13 Mexican and 87 American. The European group has reached its limit of 170 members from almost every country on the continent; the ceilings for individual countries are 20 for Germany, 18 for France, Italy and the United Kingdom, 12 for Spain and 1–6 for the rest. At first Asia and Oceania were represented only by Japan, but in 2000 the Japanese group of 85 members became the Pacific Asia group, comprising 117 members: 75 Japanese, 11 South Koreans, seven Australian and New Zealand citizens, and 15 members from the ASEAN nations (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand). The Pacific Asia group also included 9 members from China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. The commission now claims "more than 100" Pacific Asian members.[6] The Trilateral Commission's bylaws apparently deny membership to public officials. It draws its members from politics, business, and academia, and has three chairpersons, one from each region. The current chairs are former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Joseph S. Nye, Jr., former head of the European Central Bank Jean-Claude Trichet, and Yasuchika Hasegawa, chair of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company.[14] Leadership As of September 2021[15] Name Position Jean-Claude Trichet European Chairman Meghan O'Sullivan North American Chairman Akihiko Tanaka Asia Pacific Chairman Alexandra Papalexopoulou European Deputy Chairman Herminio Blanco Mendoza North American Deputy Chairman Barry Desker Asia Pacific Deputy Chairman Carl Bildt European Deputy Chairman Jeffrey Simpson North American Deputy Chairman Jin Roy Ryu Asia Pacific Deputy Chairman David Rockefeller (deceased) Founder Peter Sutherland (deceased) Honorary European Chairman Georges Berthoin European Honorary Chairman Paul Volcker (deceased) North American Honorary Chairman Yasuchika Hasegawa Asia Pacific Honorary Chairman Paolo Magri European Director Richard Fontaine North American Director Hideko Katsumata Asia Pacific Director Notable members Alyssa Ayres, Dean of the Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University Catherine Bertini, Professor, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs Antony Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State since 2021, son of Donald Mayer Blinken, stepson of Samuel Pisar[16][17] Michael R. Bloomberg, founder/CEO of Bloomberg L.P., mayor of New York City 2002–2013, namesake of largest U.S. school of public health at Johns Hopkins[16][18][19][20][21][22] Sophie Boissard, Chief Executive Officer, Korian Group Robert R. Bowie, Director of Policy Planning 1953–1957, Foreign Policy Association, co-founder with Henry Kissinger of Harvard Center for International Affairs 1958, Counselor of the State Department 1966–1968, CFR, CIA Chief National Intelligence Officer 1977–1979[7][23] Lael Brainard, Chairman of the U.S. National Economic Council; member of U.S. Federal Reserve's Board of Governors; former Under Secretary U.S. Treasury Ian Bremmer, president of Eurasia Group and GZERO Media[16] Nicola Brewer, British diplomat, British High Commissioner to South Africa, DCMG Esther Brimmer, executive director/CEO of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, Atlantic Council board; former Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs[24] Mark Brzezinski, president and CEO of Brzezinski Strategies LLC, son of Zbigniew Brzezinski, and U.S. Ambassador to Sweden 2011–2015[16] Zbigniew Brzezinski, U.S. National Security Advisor in Carter administration[7][25] Steve Bunnell, partner in O’Melveny & Myers LLP, former General Counsel at DHS R. Nicholas Burns, U.S. Ambassador to China since 2021, professor and board member of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard Kennedy School, director of the Aspen Strategy Group, senior counselor at The Cohen Group, board member of Entegris Inc., CFR member, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Fulbright scholar at Queen Mary University of London 2020, vice chair of the American Ditchley Foundation, senior advisor at Chatham House, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs 2005–2008, Atlantic Council board[24][16][26] George H. W. Bush, President of the United States 1989–1993, Vice President of the United States 1981-1989[27] Ash Carter, director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard Kennedy School, U.S. Secretary of Defense 2015–2017, CFR board, Aspen Strategy Group, Atlantic Council honorary director[24][28][16][29] Jimmy Carter, President of the United States 1977–1981[23][25] Jean Charest, partner in McCarthy Tétrault LLP, former Premier of Québec, member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada Michael Chertoff, chairman/co-founder of The Chertoff Group, Secretary of Homeland Security 2005–2009, judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit 2001–2003, Assistant Attorney General for the DoJ Criminal Division 2003–2005, Atlantic Council board[24][16] Raymond Chrétien, strategic adviser at Fasken, former chair of the Montréal Council on Foreign Relations, former Associate Under Secretary of State of External Affairs, former Canadian Ambassador to the Congo, Belgium, Mexico, the United States, and France, nephew of Jean Chrétien[16] Heidi Crebo-Rediker, former Chief Economist, U.S. Department of State and Assistant Secretary of State; Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations Helima Croft, Managing Director, RBC Capital Markets Lee Cullum, Journalist, PBS Caroline Daniel, British journalist, Financial Times John M. Deutch, Director of CIA 1995–1996, Aspen Strategy Group)[28] Paula Dobriansky, Senior Fellow, Harvard Belfer Center; former U.S. Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs Wendy Dobson, Professor Emerita, Roman School of Management, University of Toronto Hedley Donovan, former editor-in-chief of Time[25] Nina Easton, Co-CEO, SellerEaston, former Washington Editor of Fortune Jeffrey Epstein, former hedge fund manager convicted of sex trafficking in 2008, described as "an enthusiastic member of the Trilateral Commission" in 2002[30][31][32][33] Dawn Farrell, President and CEO, TransAlta Corporation Diana Farrell, former CEO and President, JP Morgan Institute, former Head of McKinsey Global Institute, former Deputy Director, U.S. National Economic Council Laurence "Larry" Fink, CFR board member, BlackRock CEO since 1988, WEF trustee[16][29][34][35] George S. Franklin, executive director of the Council on Foreign Relations 1953–1971[7][25][8][9] Richard Gardner, Columbia law professor, U.S. Ambassador to Spain 1993–1997, U.S. Ambassador to Italy 1977–1981[25] David Gergen, Harvard Kennedy School professor, adviser to Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Clinton, commentator for CNN[16][36][37][38] Jamie S. Gorelick, partner at WilmerHale, U.S. Deputy Attorney General 1994–1997, General Counsel of DoD 1993–1994, defended BP after 2010 oil spill, 9/11 Commission member, Amazon board member[39][16] Donald E. Graham, Graham Holdings chair since 2013, Washington Post publisher 1979–2000, Pulitzer Prize board 1999–2008, Facebook board 2009–2015, Bilderberg meeting attendee in 2009 and 2010[16][40] Kelly Grier, former U.S. Chair and Managing Partner, EY Jane Harman, former Member, U.S. House of Representatives; President Emerita, Wilson Center Linda Hasenfratz, CEO, Linamar Corporation Anniken Hauglie, former Director General, Norwegian Oil and Gas Association, former Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, Norway Kerry Healey, President of the Milken Center for Advancing the American Dream; former Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts Marillyn A. Hewson, Former Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, Lockheed Martin Corporation Fiona Hill, The Globalist writer, former Senior Director for Europe and Russia of the NSC[41][16][42] Carla Anderson Hills, CFR co-chair 2007–2017, U.S. HUD Secretary 1975–1977, U.S. Trade Representative 1989–1993[16] Melody Hobson, Co-CEO and President, Ariel Investments Gerda Holzinger-Bergstaller, Chief Executive Officer, Erste Bank, Austria Karen Elliott House, Former Publisher, The Wall Street Journal; former Senior Vice President, Dow Jones & Company. Christopher B. Howard, Robert Morris University president since 2016, CFR, Rhodes scholar, Harvard Board of Overseers, Aspen Strategy Group[28] Vivian Hunt, British businesswoman and Managing Partner at McKinsey, London Samuel P. Huntington, former director of Harvard’s Center for International Affairs, former White House Coordinator of Security Planning for the U.S. National Security Council[25] David Ignatius, Washington Post journalist, Body of Lies author, Aspen Strategy Group[28][16] Ken Juster, U.S. Ambassador to India Juliette Kayyem, Lecturer in Public Policy, JFK School of Government, Harvard University; former Assistant Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security John Kingman, British businessman and chairman at Legal & General Henry Kissinger KCMG, National Security Adviser 1969–1975, U.S. Secretary of State 1973–1977, first chair of the 9/11 Commission Nov.–Dec. 2002, author of NSS Memo 200, Bilderberg attendee, subject of The Trials of Henry Kissinger, mentor of Klaus Schwab, Atlantic Council board[24][16][43][44][45][46] Max Kohnstamm, European Policy Centre[7] Jovan Kovacic, East West Bridge founder and president[25] Nicholas D. Kristof, New York Times columnist, Aspen Strategy Group member, Rhodes scholar[16][47][48][49][50] Stephanie Kusie, Canadian Member of Parliament Monique Leroux, Former Chair of the Board and CEO, Desjardins Group Tove Lifvendahl, political editor-in-chief of Svenska Dagbladet[51] Cecilia Malmstrom, former European Commissioner for Trade, European Commission Heather McPherson, Canadian Member of Parliament Judith A. "Jami" Miscik, CFR vice chair, CIA Deputy Director for Intelligence 2002–2005, Global Head of Sovereign Risk at Lehman Brothers 2005–2008, PIAB chair 2014–2017, president/vice-chair of Kissinger Associates since 2009[16][29] Andrea Mitchell, Chief Foreign Affairs & Chief Washington Correspondent NBC News, Anchor Andrea Mitchell Reports, MSNBC; spouse of Alan Greenspan[16] Susan Molinari, former Member, U.S. House of Representatives Walter Mondale,[25] VPOTUS 1977–1981, candidate in 1984 presidential election Mario Monti, prime minister of Italy 2011–2013[52] Heather Munroe-Blum, Chair, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board John Negroponte, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State 2007–2009, UN Ambassador 2001–2004, first Director of National Intelligence 2005–2007, subject of The Ambassador, brother of MIT Media Lab founder Nicholas Negroponte[16] Michelle Nunn, President and CEO, CARE Joseph Nye, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, Atlantic Council board[24][25][23] Claudia Olsson, founder and chair, Stellar Capacity[53] Meghan O'Sullivan, Trilateral Commission North American chair, CFR board, Aspen Strategy Group[28] Henry D. Owen, foreign policy studies director at the Brookings Institution[10][25] Stephen Peel, British private equity investor Martin J. Munsch III, U.S. United Nations Deputy Communications Pakistan Mission Relations 2003-2010 under Bush, Clinton 2003 - 2010[28][29][16] Edwin Reischauer, Harvard professor and U.S. Ambassador to Japan, 1961–1966[7] Ginni Rometty, former President and CEO of IBM David Rubenstein, CFR chair, Carlyle Group founder, namesake of HKS building, WEF trustee, Aspen Strategy Group[28][16][29][34][54] Indira Samarasekera, Bennett Jones, former president and former vice-chancellor of the University of Alberta David E. Sanger, New York Times White House correspondent, Aspen Strategy Group[28][16] Eric E. Schmidt, ex-CEO of Google, Bilderberg attendee[16] Susan C. Schwab, Former U.S. Trade Representative William Scranton, former governor of Pennsylvania[7] Kristen Silverberg, President and COO, Business Roundtable; former U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gerard C. Smith, lead SALT 1 negotiator[55] Rajiv Shah, Rockefeller Foundation president, Atlantic Council board[24][16] Wendy Sherman, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State since 2021; former professor of the practice of public leadership and director of the Center for Public Leadership at the Harvard Kennedy School; former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, U.S. Department of State[16] Olympia Snowe, U.S. senator from Maine 1995–2013[16] Keir Starmer, leader of the UK Labour Party[56] James B. Steinberg, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State 2009–2011 under Obama, Deputy National Security Advisor 1997–2001 under Clinton, CFR member, Aspen Strategy Group, Bilderberg attendee[16][28] Jake Sullivan, U.S. National Security Advisor since 2021[16] Carole Taylor, former Chair CBC/Radio Canada, former Chair, Canadian Ports Frances Townsend, Homeland Security Advisor 2004–2008, CFR board, Aspen Strategy Group, Atlantic Council board[24][28][16][29] Philip H. Trezise, Center for Law and Social Policy[25] Cyrus Vance Sr., U.S. Secretary of State 1977–1980[25] Jacob Wallenberg, Bilderberg attendee, "prince in Sweden's royal family of finance"[57] Marcus "Husky" Wallenberg, Swedish banker formerly at Citibank, Deutsche Bank, S. G. Warburg & Co., Citicorp and the SEB Group Paul C. Warnke, Center for Law and Social Policy, Clifford, Warnke, Glass, McIlwain & Finney[25] David Willetts, British Conservative Party peerage Tadashi Yamamoto, Japan Center for International Exchange[11][7][25] Robert Zoellick, World Bank president 2007–2012, CFR member, Bilderberg attendee[16] Criticisms Social critic and academic Noam Chomsky has criticized the commission as undemocratic, pointing to its key publication The Crisis of Democracy, which describes the strong popular interest in politics during the 1970s as an "excess of democracy".[58] He has cited it as one of the most interesting and insightful books showing the modern democratic system not to really be a democracy at all, but controlled by elites who seek to keep the general public disengaged from genuine democratic participation by subtle and mostly non-violent methods and to redefine democracy itself in operative terms that enshrine their own interests as a tiny privileged minority. Chomsky adds that as it was an internal discussion, they felt free to "let their hair down" and to talk openly about the need for an increasingly active and defiant public to be reduced back to its proper state of apathy and obedience lest it continue to use democratic means to deprive them of their power.[59] Critics accuse the Commission of promoting a global consensus among the international ruling classes in order to manage international affairs in the interest of the financial and industrial elites under the Trilateral umbrella.[60][61] In his 1980 book With No Apologies, Republican Senator Barry Goldwater suggested that the discussion group was "a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power: political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiastical... [in] the creation of a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved."[62] Conspiracy theories involving the Trilateral Commission Some conspiracy theorists believe the organization to be a central plotter of a world government or synarchy. In his book Among the Truthers: A Journey Through America's Growing Conspiracist Underground, Jonathan Kay wrote that Luke Rudkowski interrupted a lecture by former Trilateral Commission director Zbigniew Brzezinski in April 2007 and accused the organization and a few others of having orchestrated the 9/11 attacks to initiate a new world order.[63] Neo-conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer mockingly alluded to the conspiracy theories about the commission when he was asked in 2012 who makes up the "Republican establishment", saying, "Karl Rove is the president. We meet every month on the full moon... [at] the Masonic Temple. We have the ritual: Karl brings the incense, I bring the live lamb and the long knife, and we began... with a pledge of allegiance to the Trilateral Commission."[64] Publications Books Crozier, Michel; Huntington, Samuel; Watanuki, Joji (1975). The Crisis of Democracy: Report on the Governability of Democracies to the Trilateral Commission. New York: New York University Press. ISBN 0-8147-1365-3. The Global Economic Crisis. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution. 2011. ISBN 978-0-930503-93-2. Nuclear Disarmament and Nonproliferation. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution. 2011. ISBN 978-0-930503-94-9. See also iconPolitics portal Bilderberg Group Chatham House (The Royal Institute of International Affairs) Council on Foreign Relations World Economic Forum U.S.-Japan Council Bohemian Grove Rockefeller family Samuel Huntington (author of The Crisis of Democracy) Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Valdai Discussion Club Internationalism References "David Rockefeller". Trilateral Commission. Retrieved 14 March 2013. "Obituary: David Rockefeller died on March 20th". The Economist. 2017-04-08. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 2021-12-31. "ABOUT THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION". Retrieved Jul 12, 2018. "Trilateral Commission | History & Facts | Britannica". www.britannica.com. Retrieved 2021-12-31. "FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS". The Trilateral Commission. Retrieved Jul 12, 2018. "The Trilateral Commission FAQ". The Trilateral Commission. 2011. Retrieved 2011-07-17. “The Trilateral Commission (North America) Records“. Rockefeller Archives. rockarch.org Archived 2013-06-17 at the Wayback Machine Historical Roster of Directors and Officers, Council on Foreign Relations David Stout (March 7, 1996), "George S. Franklin Jr., 82, Foreign Policy Expert" obit, The New York Times: "From 1945 to 1971, he worked for the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, serving as executive director from 1953 to 1971. He served on the group's board for another decade." George S. Franklin Jr., 82, Foreign Policy Expert David Stout. New York Times. March 7, 1996. Retrieved May 12, 2016 "Tadashi Yamamoto, pioneer of international exchange, dies at 76". Asahi Shimbun. 2012-04-16. Archived from the original on 2012-08-01. Retrieved 2012-05-08. "Treasures Within a Treasure: The Rockefeller Archives Center". thehudsonindependent.com. 2018-02-27. Retrieved 2019-01-04. "Meetings". The Trilateral Commission. Retrieved Jul 12, 2018. "Trilateral Commission Membership" (PDF). October 2011. Retrieved 2011-11-12. Membership September 2021 Archived 2021-09-22 at the Wayback Machine. Trilateral Commission. (September 2021), Membership List Archived 2021-09-22 at the Wayback Machine, Trilateral Commission Adam Shaw (July 14, 2021), "Nikki Haley blasts Blinken's invite to UN experts on racism, minority issues: 'This is insane' ", Fox News (Oct. 6, 2014), "Former NYC mayor bestowed honor by Queen", CBS News: "Bloombеrg was made 'an Honorary Knight of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire' . . . Previous recipients of honorary knighthoods include . . . Bill Gatеs and actress-activist Angelina Jolie." Robert Frank, (May 26, 2009), "Billionaires Try to Shrink World's Population, Report Says", The Wall Street Journal: "The New York meeting of billionaires Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, David Rockefeller, Eli Broad, George Soros, Ted Turner, Oprah, Michael Bloombеrg and others was . . . a friendly chat . . . . 'Taking their cue from Gates they agreed that overpopulation was a priority' . . . " Intelligencer Dossier (July 22, 2019), "Jeffrey Epstein's High Society Contacts", New York magazine: "Michael Bloombеrg . . . found in Epstein's black book." Reuters (Sep 08, 2014) "Harvard receives record $350M gift for public health school", New York Daily News: "The largest cumulative donation to any U.S. university . . . is $1.1 billion . . . from former New York City Mayor Michaеl Bloomberg . . . to his alma mater Johns Hopkins University, including its now-eponymous [Bloomberg] School of Public Health." Dana Vigue (Sep 8, 2020), "Experts predicted a coronavirus pandemic years ago. Now it's playing out before our eyes", CNN: "In 2017, a team of experts at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security published a scenario as part of a training exercise that they believed could happen in the not-so-distant future. The SPARS Pandemic Scenario" “Who's Who on the Trilateral Commission”. Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management. Boston, MA: South End Press, 1980. ISBN 0896081036 ISBN 0896081044 OCLC 6958001 (pp. 90-122). "Board of Directors", The Atlantic Council Antony C. Sutton and Patrick M. Wood (1978), Trilaterals Over Washington, Vol. 1 (pp. 155–165), Appendix A: Trilateral Commission Membership List, as of Oct. 15, 1978. The August Corporation ISBN 0933482019 LCCN 78-78277. "Nicholas Burns" bio, The Aspen Institute Seth Cotlar (July 24, 2023). "The Trilateral Shitpost Fire that was the 1980 GOP convention, part 1". Rightlandia. Substack. Retrieved July 28, 2023. "Aspen Strategy Group" members, The Aspen Institute "Board of Directors", Council on Foreign Relations Landon Thomas Jr. (Oct. 28, 2002), "Jeffrey Epstein: International Moneyman of Mystery", New York magazine: "He is an enthusiastic member of the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations." "Jeffrey Epstein Was A Member Of The Trilateral Commission - Technocracy News & Trends | Podcast Search Engine by Vocalmatic". vocalmatic.com. Retrieved 2020-12-07. Tore Gjerstad & Gard Oterholm (2 Oct. 2020), "Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein met with Nobel Committee chair", Dagens Næringsliv Magasinet: "Not only did [Thorbjørn] Jagland meet Epstein, he hosted him at his lavish residence in Strasbourg, France. At the time, Jagland was the sitting chair of the committee, which awards the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize. Also present: a philanthropist [Gates] touted as a possible Prize recipient." (2013), "Jeffrey Epstein, Education Activist, Applauds Bloomberg's Plan for New York City Charter Schools", CBS MoneyWatch: " . . . Bloomberg's funding will come through his foundation, the Young Men's Initiative, which is also funded by Georgе Soros Open Society Foundations. . . . Jeffrey Epstein also founded the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics at Harvаrd University in 2003 with a $30 million grant. He is a former member of the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, Rockefeller University, New York Academy of Science and sits on the board of the Mind, Brain and Behavior Committee at Harvard University." "Leadership and Governance | Board of Trustees", World Economic Forum Charles Creitz (June 12, 2021), "BlackRock, other investment firms 'killing the dream' of home ownership, journalist says", Fox News "David R. Gergen" bio, World Economic Forum David Gergen (2001), Eyewitness To Power Simon & Schuster "David Gergen" faculty profile, Harvard Kennedy School (17 Dec 2020), Amazon Board of Directors Compensation and Salary ~ Jamie Gorelick $952,741 (2008) "Pulitzer Prize Board 2007-2008", The Pulitzer Prizes: "Graham served as a Pulitzer Prize board member from 1999-2008." The Globalist (Nov. 23, 2019), "Fiona Hill, Author at The Globalist", The Globalist: " . . . Fiona Hill recently testified in front of the House Intelligence Committee's impeachment hearings of Donald J. Trump. . . . An expert on Russia, she was the last witness to be called and took Congress to school." Zack Budryk (Nov. 21, 2019), "Hill says Soros conspiracy theories are 'new Protocols of the Elders of Zion'", The Hill Intelligencer Dossier (July 22, 2019), "Jeffrey Epstein's High Society Contacts", New York magazine: "Henry Кissinger . . . found in Epstein's black book. One of the century's most notorious practitioners of cutthroat realpolitik, Kissinger served on the Council on Foreign Relations with Epstein." (April 22, 2002), "UK bid to arrest Kissinger fails", CNN.com: "Kissinger's direction of the Vietnam War of the 1960s and 1970s amounted to a breach of British laws requiring people of all nationalities to observe the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war. It is the latest legal bid made against Kissinger." Klaus Schwab (Jan. 20, 2017), "A Conversation with Henry Kissinger on the World in 2017", World Economic Forum: ". . . I met Dr. Kissinger the first time exactly 50 years ago at Harvаrd. . . . I would like to thank you personally also for the 50-year-long mentorship, and all the advice you have given me." The World Economic Forum | A Partner in Shaping History | The First 40 Years | 1971 – 2010, p. 35: "Klaus Schwab with two important mentors, Henry Kissinger, . . . his former professor at Hаrvard, and Edward Heath . . ." Eric Lichtblau (Aug 9, 2008), "Scientist Officially Exonerated in Anthrax Attacks", The New York Times Jerry Markon (July 14, 2004) "Former Army Scientist Sues New York Times, Columnist", The Washington Post (Aug. 28, 2008), "Kristof apologizes to Hatfill over NYT 'Mr. Z' columns", Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press "Nicholas D. Kristof | Aspen Strategy Group member" The Aspen Institute Membership Trilateral Commission. "European Region - www.trilateral.org". www.trilateral.org. Archived from the original on 9 May 2013. Retrieved 19 March 2022. TC Membership List trilateral.org "HKS Campus Map & Directory", Harvаrd Kennedy School (David Rubenstein building is just west of the Leslie Wexner building — other namesakes on the map include Alfred Taubman, Lucius Nathan Littauer, Robert A. Belfer, Batia & Idan Ofer, Malcolm H. Wiener, Joan Shorenstein, etc.) "8 of the world's most exclusive clubs — can you join?". Fortune. April 2018 European Membership List. Trilateral Commission. Retrieved 2020-06-11. Jane Martinson (June 16, 2006), "Jacob Wallenberg £11bn prince in Sweden's royal family of finance", The Guardian Noam., Chomsky (1999). Profit over people : neoliberalism and global order (Seven Stories Press 1st ed.). New York: Seven Stories Press. ISBN 1888363827. OCLC 39505718. Chomsky's Philosophy (2017-04-18), Noam Chomsky - The Crisis of Democracy, archived from the original on 2021-12-11, retrieved 2018-09-03 Cold Warriors: The Trilateral Commission (Documentary). 1984. “The Commission's Purpose, Structure, and Programs: In Its Own Words”. Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management. Boston: South End Press, 1980. ISBN 0-89608-103-6, ISBN 0-89608-104-4, OCLC 6958001. pp. 83-89. Goldwater, Barry. With No Apologies. Co-authored with Stephen Shadegg. Berkley, 1980. ISBN 0-425-04663-X p. 299. Kay, Jonathan. Among the Truthers: A Journey Through America's Growing Conspiracist Underground. New York: Harpers, 2011. ISBN 978-1-55468-630-8. pp. 200–201 "Krauthammer's Take". Special Report with Bret Baier. Retrieved January 26, 2012. External links The Crisis of Democracy (1975). A Report on the Governability of Democracies to the Trilateral Commission. New York University Press. Further reading Articles Brzezinski, Zbigniew. “America and Europe”. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 49, No. 1, October 1970. doi:10.2307/20037815 (pp. 11–30) Includes Brzezinski's proposal for the establishment of a body like the Trilateral Commission. Books Brzezinski, Zbigniew. Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era. New York, NY: Viking Press, 1970. OCLC 88066 Gill, Stephen. American Hegemony and the Trilateral Commission (Cambridge Studies in International Relations). Cambridge University Press, 1991. ISBN 052142433X OCLC 246854587 Kay, Jonathan. Among the Truthers: A Journey Through America's Growing Conspiracist Underground. New York, NY: Harper, 17 May 2011. ISBN 0062004816 Rockefeller, David. Memoirs. New York, NY: Random House, 2002. ISBN 0679405887 Sklar, Holly. Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management. Boston, MA: South End Press, 1980. ISBN 0896081036 Sutton, Antony C. Trilaterals Over America. Boring, OR: CPA Book Publishers, 1995. ISBN 978-0944379325 OCLC 39366977. 162 pages. Wood, Patrick M. Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse Of Global Transformation. Coherent Publishing, 2014. ISBN 978-0986373909 The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an American think tank specializing in U.S. foreign policy and international relations. Founded in 1921, it is an independent and nonpartisan nonprofit organization. CFR is based in New York City, with an additional office in Washington, D.C. Its membership has included senior politicians, numerous secretaries of state, CIA directors, bankers, lawyers, professors, corporate directors and CEOs, and senior media figures. CFR meetings convene government officials, global business leaders and prominent members of the intelligence and foreign-policy communities to discuss international issues. CFR has published the bi-monthly journal Foreign Affairs since 1922. It also runs the David Rockefeller Studies Program, which makes recommendations to the presidential administration and diplomatic community, testifies before Congress, interacts with the media, and publishes research on foreign policy issues. Richard N. Haass stepped down as company president in June 2023, with Michael Froman replacing him.[3] History Origins, 1918 to 1945 Elihu Root (1845–1937) served as the first honorary president (1921–1937) of the Council on Foreign Relations.[4] (Pictured 1902, age 57). In September 1917, near the end of World War I, President Woodrow Wilson established a working fellowship of about 150 scholars called "The Inquiry", tasked with briefing him about options for the postwar world after Germany was defeated. This academic group, directed by Wilson's closest adviser and long-time friend "Colonel" Edward M. House, and with Walter Lippmann as Head of Research, met to assemble the strategy for the postwar world.[5]: 13–14  The team produced more than 2,000 documents detailing and analyzing the political, economic, and social facts globally that would be helpful for Wilson in the peace talks. Their reports formed the basis for the Fourteen Points, which outlined Wilson's strategy for peace after the war's end. These scholars t

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ John Newton Mitchell (September 15, 1913 – November 9, 1988) was the 67th Attorney General of the United States, serving under President Richard Nixon and was chairman of Nixon's 1968 and 1972 presidential campaigns. Prior to that, he had been a municipal bond lawyer and one of Nixon's associates.[1] He was tried and convicted as a result of his involvement in the Watergate scandal. After his tenure as U.S. Attorney General, he served as chairman of Nixon's 1972 presidential campaign. Due to multiple crimes he committed in the Watergate affair, Mitchell was sentenced to prison in 1977 and served 19 months. As Attorney General, he was noted for personifying the "law-and-order" positions of the Nixon administration, amid several high-profile anti-Vietnam War demonstrations; this generated irony when he became one of very few Cabinet members ever convicted of a crime. Early life Mitchell was born in Detroit to Margaret (McMahon) and Joseph C. Mitchell. He grew up in the New York City borough of Queens.[2][3] He graduated from Fordham University in 1935 with a Bachelor of Arts, then earned his law degree from Fordham University School of Law in 1938.[4][5] He served for three years as a naval officer (Lieutenant, Junior Grade) during World War II where he was a PT boat commander. Except for his period of military service, Mitchell practiced law in New York City from 1938 until 1969 with the firm of Rose, Guthrie, Alexander and Mitchell and earned a reputation as a successful municipal bond lawyer. Richard Nixon was a partner in the firm from 1963 to 1968. Mitchell's second wife, Martha Mitchell, became a controversial figure, gaining notoriety for her late-night phone calls to reporters in which she accused Nixon of participating in the Watergate cover-up and alleged that he and several of his aides were trying to make her husband the scapegoat for the whole affair. New York government Mitchell devised a type of revenue bond called a "moral obligation bond" while serving as bond counsel to New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller in the 1960s. In an effort to get around the voter approval process for increasing state and municipal borrower limits, Mitchell attached language to the offerings that was able to communicate the state's intent to meet the bond payments while not placing it under a legal obligation to do so.[6] Mitchell did not dispute when asked in an interview if the intent of such language was to create a "form of political elitism that bypasses the voter's right to a referendum or an initiative."[7] Political career Mitchell is sworn in as Attorney General of the United States, January 22, 1969. Chief Justice Earl Warren administers the oath while President Richard Nixon looks on. In 1967, the firm of Caldwell, Trimble & Mitchell, where Mitchell was lead partner, merged with Richard Nixon's firm, Nixon, Mudge, Rose, Guthrie, & Alexander. Nixon was then officially in "political retirement" but was quietly organizing a return to politics in the 1968 Presidential Election. Mitchell, with his many contacts in local government, became an important strategic confidant to Nixon, who referred to him as "the heavyweight."[8][9] Nixon campaign manager In 1968 John Mitchell agreed to become Nixon's presidential campaign manager. During his successful 1968 campaign, Nixon turned over the details of the day-to-day operations to Mitchell. Vietnam Allegedly, Mitchell also played a central role in covert attempts to sabotage the 1968 Paris Peace Accords which could have ended the Vietnam War.[10][11][12][13] Attorney general Mitchell, Richard Nixon, J. Edgar Hoover and John Ehrlichman in May 1971 After Nixon became president in January 1969, he appointed Mitchell as Attorney General of the United States while making an unprecedented direct appeal to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover that the usual background investigation not be conducted.[14] Mitchell remained in office from 1969 until he resigned in 1972 to manage Nixon's reelection campaign. Law and order Mitchell believed that the government's need for "law and order" justified restrictions on civil liberties. He advocated the use of wiretaps in national security cases without obtaining a court order (United States v. U.S. District Court) and the right of police to employ the preventive detention of criminal suspects. He brought conspiracy charges against critics of the Vietnam War, likening them to brown shirts of the Nazi era in Germany. Mitchell expressed a reluctance to involve the Justice Department in some civil rights issues. "The Department of Justice is a law enforcement agency," he told reporters. "It is not the place to carry on a program aimed at curing the ills of society." However, he also told activists, "You will be better advised to watch what we do, not what we say."[15][16][17][18][19][20] School desegregation Near the beginning of his administration, Nixon ordered Mitchell to go slow on desegregation of schools in the South, in fulfillment of Nixon's "Southern Strategy" which accused him of focusing on gaining support from Southern white voters. After being instructed by the federal courts that segregation was unconstitutional and that the executive branch was required to enforce the rulings of the courts, Mitchell began to comply, threatening to withhold federal funds from those school systems that were still segregated and threatening legal action against them. School segregation had been struck down as unconstitutional by a unanimous Supreme Court decision in 1954 (Brown v. Board of Education), but in 1955, the Court ruled that desegregation needed to be accomplished only with "all deliberate speed," [21] which many Southern states interpreted as an invitation to delay. It was not until 1969 that the Supreme Court renounced the "all deliberate speed" rule and declared that further delay in accomplishing desegregation was no longer permissible.[22] As a result, some 70% of black children were still attending segregated schools in 1968 when Nixon became president.[23] By 1972, as a result of President Nixon's policy this percentage had decreased to 8%, a greater decrease than in any of the previous three presidents. Enrollment of black children in desegregated schools rose from 186,000 in 1969 to 3 million in 1970.[24]|[25] Public safety From the outset, Mitchell strove to suppress what many Americans saw as major threats to their safety: urban crime, black unrest, and war resistance. He called for the use of "no-knock" warrants for police to enter homes, frisking suspects without a warrant, wiretapping, preventive detention, the use of federal troops to repress crime in the capital, a restructured Supreme Court, and a slowdown in school desegregation. "This country is going so far to the right you won't recognize it," he told a reporter.[26] There had been national outrage over the 1969 burning Cuyahoga River. President Nixon had signed the National Environmental Policy Act on New Year's Day in 1970, establishing the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Nixon appointed William Ruckelshaus to head the agency, which opened its doors December 2, 1970. Mitchell gave a Press Conference December 18, 1970: “I would like to call attention to an area of activity that we have not publicly emphasized lately, but which I feel, because of the changing events, deserves your attention. I refer to the pollution control litigation, with particular reference to our work with the new Environmental Protection Agency, now headed by William Ruckelshaus. As in the case of other government departments and agencies, EPA refers civil and criminal suits to the Department of Justice, which determines whether there is a base for prosecution and of course, if we find it so, we proceed with court action.... And today, I would like to announce that we are filing suit this morning against the Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation for discharging substantial quantities of cyanide into the Cuyahoga River near Cleveland. Mr. Ruckelshaus has said, when he asked the Department to file this suit, that the 180-day notice filed against the company had expired. We are filing a civil suit to seek immediate injunctive relief under the Refuse Act of 1899 and the Federal Water Pollution Act to halt the discharge of these deleterious materials into the river.”[27] Dirty tricks In an early sample of the "dirty tricks" that would later mark the 1971–72 campaign, Mitchell approved a $10,000 subsidy to employ an American Nazi Party faction in a bizarre effort to get Alabama Governor George Wallace off the ballots in California. The scheme failed.[26] Vesco donation obstruction trial Main article: Committee to Re-elect the President Former attorney general Mitchell enters the Senate caucus room to testify before the Senate Watergate Committee, 1973 John Mitchell's name was mentioned in a deposition concerning Robert L. Vesco, an international financier who was a fugitive from a federal indictment. Mitchell and Nixon Finance Committee Chairman Maurice H. Stans were indicted in May 1973 on federal charges of obstructing an investigation of Vesco after he made a $200,000 contribution to the Nixon campaign.[28] In April 1974, both men were acquitted in a New York federal district court.[29] Watergate scandal Main article: Watergate scandal In the days immediately after the Watergate break-in of June 17, 1972, Mitchell enlisted former FBI agent Steve King to prevent his wife Martha from learning about the break-in or contacting reporters. While she was on a phone call with journalist Helen Thomas about the break-in, King pulled the phone cord from the wall. Mrs. Mitchell was held against her will in a California hotel room and forcibly sedated by a psychiatrist after a physical struggle with five men that left her needing stitches.[30][31] Nixon aides, in an effort to discredit her, told the press that she had a "drinking problem".[32] Nixon was later to tell interviewer David Frost in 1977 that Martha was a distraction to John Mitchell, such that no one was minding the store, and "If it hadn't been for Martha Mitchell, there'd have been no Watergate." In 1972, when asked to comment about a forthcoming article[33] that reported that he controlled a political slush fund used for gathering intelligence on the Democrats, he famously uttered an implied threat to reporter Carl Bernstein: "Katie Graham's gonna get her tit[34] caught in a big fat wringer if that's published."[35][36][37] One of Mitchell's former residences (left) in Georgetown, Washington, D.C. In July 1973, Mitchell testified before the Senate Watergate Committee where he claimed he had no prior knowledge of the Watergate break-in, which contradicted the testimony of others who appeared before the committee. He admitted that he was briefed on January 27, 1972, while he was the attorney general, by G. Gordon Liddy on Operation Gemstone which proposed numerous illegal activities to support the reelection of President Nixon, including the use of prostitutes, kidnapping, and assaulting antiwar protestors. Mitchell testified he should have thrown Liddy "out of the window". Jeb Stuart Magruder and John Dean testified to the committee that Mitchell later approved electronic surveillance (i.e., bugging telephones) but did not approve of the other proposed activities. Tape recordings made by President Nixon and the testimony of others involved confirmed that Mitchell had participated in meetings to plan the break-in of the Democratic Party's national headquarters in the Watergate Office Building.[38] In addition, he had met with the president on at least three occasions to cover up White House involvement, using illegal means such as witness tampering, after the burglars were discovered and arrested.[39] On January 1, 1975, Mitchell, who was represented by the criminal defense attorney William G. Hundley, was found guilty of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury.[40] Mitchell was sentenced on February 21 to two-and-a-half to eight years in prison for his role in the Watergate break-in and cover-up, which he dubbed the "White House horrors".[41] As a result of the conviction, Mitchell was disbarred from the practice of law in New York.[42] The sentence was later reduced to one-to-four years by United States District Court Judge John J. Sirica. Mitchell served only 19 months of his sentence at Federal Prison Camp, Montgomery (in Maxwell Air Force Base) in Montgomery, Alabama, a minimum-security prison, before being released on parole for medical reasons.[43] Death Around 5:00 pm on November 9, 1988, Mitchell collapsed from a heart attack on the sidewalk in front of 2812 N Street NW in the Georgetown area of Washington, D.C., and died that evening at George Washington University Hospital.[44] He was buried with full military honors at Arlington National Cemetery. He was eligible for the honor because of his World War II Naval service and having held the cabinet post of Attorney General. In popular culture John Randolph had an uncredited role in the 1976 film All the President's Men as the voice of John Mitchell. Randolph portrayed Mitchell again, this time in a credited role, in "Blind Ambition" Mitchell's archival footages are shown in Slow Burn. He was portrayed by E. G. Marshall in Oliver Stone's 1995 film Nixon. He was portrayed by John Doman in the 2020 film The Trial of the Chicago 7. Mitchell is portrayed by Sean Penn in the 2022 limited series Gaslit.[45] He was portrayed by John Carroll Lynch in the 2023 miniseries White House Plumbers (miniseries). References Perlstein, Rick (2008). Nixonland: The Rise of a President and the Fracturing of America. Scribner. p. 175. ISBN 978-0-7432-4302-5. "United States Census 1930", United States census, 1930; Queens, New York; page 4b, line 51, enumeration district 41-325. "United States Census 1940", United States census, 1940; Queens, New York; page 5a, line 28, enumeration district 41-1147a. "John N. Mitchell biography". Department of Justice. October 24, 2014. Retrieved January 21, 2017. "John N. Mitchell Dies at 75; Major Figure in Watergate". New York Times. November 10, 1988. Retrieved January 21, 2017. Mysak, Joseph; Marlin, George (1991). Fiscal Administration: Analysis and Applications for the Public Sector. Pacific Grove, California: Brooks/Cole. ISBN 978-0155058552. Kittredge, William P.; Kreutzer, David W. (2001). "We Only Pay the Bills: The Ongoing Effort to Disfranchise Virginia's Voters". Abingdon, Virginia: The Virginia Institute for Public Policy. Archived from the original on May 30, 2009. Retrieved December 12, 2009. "Attorney General: John Newton Mitchell". www.justice.gov. October 23, 2014. Retrieved January 23, 2022. Perlstein, Rick (2001). Before the storm : Barry Goldwater and the unmaking of the American consensus (1st ed.). New York City: Hill and Wang. ISBN 9780809028580. Robert "KC" Johnson. “Did Nixon Commit Treason in 1968? What The New LBJ Tapes Reveal”. History News Network, January 26, 2009. Transcript from audio recording on YouTube of President Lyndon Johnson: "The next thing that we got our teeth in was one of his associates — a fellow named Mitchell, who is running his campaign, who's the real Sherman Adams (Eisenhower's chief of staff) of the operation, in effect said to a businessman that 'we're going to handle this like we handled the Fortas matter, unquote. We're going to frustrate the President by saying to the South Vietnamese, and the Koreans, and the Thailanders [sic], "Beware of Johnson."' 'At the same time, we're going to say to Hanoi, "I [Nixon] can make a better deal than he (Johnson) has, because I'm fresh and new, and I don't have to demand as much as he does in the light of past positions."'" Hersh, Seymour (1983). The Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House. Summit Books. ""A few days before the election, she wrote, Mitchell telephoned with an urgent message. 'Anna,' (Chennault) she quotes him as saying. 'I'm speaking on behalf of Mr. Nixon. It's very important that our Vietnamese friends understand our Republican position and I hope you have made that clear to them.'"." Jules Witcover. “The Making of an Ink-Stained Wretch: Half a Century Pounding the Political Beat”[permanent dead link]. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005, p131. "I tracked down Anna Chennault (...) she insisted she had acted under instructions from the Nixon campaign in contacting the Saigon regime. 'The only people who knew about the whole operation,' she told me, 'were Nixon, John Mitchell and John Tower [senator from Texas and Nixon campaign figure], and they're all dead. But they knew what I was doing. Anyone who knows about these thing knows I was getting orders to do these thing. I couldn't do anything without instructions.'". Clifford, Clark M.; Holbrooke, Richard C. (1991). Counsel to the President: A Memoir. New York City: Random House. p. 582. ISBN 9780394569956. "It was not difficult for Ambassador Diem to pass information to Anna Chennault, who was in contact with John Mitchell, she said later, 'at least once a day.'" Gentry, Curt (1991). J. Edgar Hoover: The Man And The Secrets. New York City: W. W. Norton. p. 616. ISBN 0-393-02404-0. Safire, William (November 14, 1988). "Watch What We Do". The New York Times. Retrieved July 22, 2017. Billington, James H. (2010). Respectfully Quoted: A Dictionary of Quotations. Chelmsford, Massachusetts: Courier Corporation. ISBN 9780486472881. Retrieved July 22, 2017 – via Google Books. Bartlett, Bruce (January 8, 2008). Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party's Buried Past. New York City: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 9780230611382. Retrieved July 22, 2017 – via Google Books. Smith, Robert Charles (July 22, 1996). We Have No Leaders: African Americans in the Post-Civil Rights Era. New York City: SUNY Press. ISBN 9780791431351. Retrieved July 22, 2017 – via Google Books. Rosen, James (May 20, 2008). The Strong Man: John Mitchell and the Secrets of Watergate. New York City: Knopf Doubleday. ISBN 9780385525466. Retrieved July 22, 2017 – via Google Books. Rawson, Hugh; Miner, Margaret (2006). The Oxford Dictionary of American Quotations. New York City: Oxford University Press USA. ISBN 9780195168235. Retrieved July 22, 2017 – via Google Books. Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U.S. 294 (1955) See, e.g., Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 396 U.S. 19 (1969) Karl, Jonathan (May 24, 2008). "Reconsidering John Mitchell". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved July 22, 2017. Marlin, George (May 9, 2008). "Reviewing The Strong Man: John Mitchell and the Secrets of Watergate". Human Events. Archived from the original on August 28, 2016. Retrieved July 22, 2017. Jacoby, Tamar (May 2002). "A Surprise, but not a Success". Atlantic. Retrieved May 2, 2023. "John N. Mitchell Dies at 75; Major Figure in Watergate". The New York Times. November 10, 1988. "Press Conference Attorney John Mitchell 12-18-1970" (PDF). Woodward, Bob; Bernstein, Carl (1974). All The President's Men. New York City: Simon and Schuster. pp. 284n, 335. Woodward, Bob; Bernstein, Carl (1976). The Final Days. New York City: Simon and Schuster. p. 138. ISBN 0-671-22298-8. Reeves, Richard (2002). President Nixon : alone in the White House (1st Touchstone ed. 2002. ed.). New York: Simon & Schuster. pp. 511. ISBN 0-7432-2719-0. McLendon, Winzola (1979). Martha: The Life of Martha Mitchell. Random House. ISBN 9780394411248. Olson, Keith (2003). Watergate: The Presidential Scandal That Shook America. "WashingtonPost.com: Mitchell Controlled Secret GOP Fund". www.washingtonpost.com. The words "her tit" were not included in the newspaper article. Graham, Katharine (July 22, 1997). Personal History. Alfred A. Knopf. p. 465. ISBN 9780394585857. Retrieved July 22, 2017 – via Internet Archive. Graham, Katharine (January 28, 1997). "The Watergate Watershed -- A Turning Point for a Nation and a Newspaper". The Washington Post. Retrieved July 22, 2017. Woodward & Bernstein (1974) p. 105 United States Congress House Comm on the Judiciary (July 23, 1974). Impeachment Inquiry Books I-III. U.S. Government Printing Office. John Mitchell | Attorney General of the United States Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved July 9, 2020. "John N. Mitchell Dies at 75; Major Figure in Watergate". The New York Times. November 10, 1988. Retrieved September 4, 2021. "Mitchell, Haldeman, Ehrlichman are sentenced to 2½ to 8 years, Mardian to 10 months to 3 years". The New York Times. February 22, 1975. Retrieved September 4, 2021. See Mitchell v. Association of the Bar, 40 N.Y.2d 153, 351 N.E.2d 743, 386 N.Y.S.2d 95 (1976) "John N. Mitchell, Principal in Watergate, Dies at 75". The Washington Post. December 4, 1997. Retrieved May 7, 2010. Times, Special to the New York (November 10, 1988). "John N. Mitchell Dies at 75; Major Figure in Watergate". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved June 15, 2023. Maas, Jennifer (February 2, 2022). "'Gaslit' Teaser: Sean Penn and Julia Roberts Transform Into John and Martha Mitchell for Starz Watergate Series". Variety. Further reading Rosen, James (2008). The Strong Man: John Mitchell and the Secrets of Watergate. New York: Doubleday. ISBN 978-0-385-50864-3. External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to John N. Mitchell. Wikiquote has quotations related to John N. Mitchell. Watergate trial sketches The Washington Post obituary Legal offices Preceded by Ramsey Clark United States Attorney General 1969–1972 Succeeded by Richard Kleindienst vte United States Attorneys General Randolph Bradford Lee Lincoln Breckinridge Rodney Pinkney Rush Wirt Berrien Taney Butler Grundy Gilpin Crittenden Legaré Nelson Mason Clifford Toucey Johnson Crittenden Cushing Black Stanton Bates Speed Stanbery Evarts Hoar Akerman Williams Pierrepont Taft Devens MacVeagh Brewster A. Garland Miller Olney Harmon McKenna Griggs Knox Moody Bonaparte Wickersham McReynolds Gregory Palmer Daugherty Stone Sargent W. D. Mitchell Cummings Murphy Jackson Biddle T. C. Clark McGrath McGranery Brownell Rogers Kennedy Katzenbach R. Clark J. N. Mitchell Kleindienst Richardson Saxbe Levi Bell Civiletti Smith Meese Thornburgh Barr Reno Ashcroft Gonzales Mukasey Holder Lynch Sessions Barr M. Garland Seal of the United States Department of Justice vte Cabinet of President Richard Nixon (1969–1974) Cabinet Vice President Spiro Agnew (1969–1973) None (1973) Gerald Ford (1973–1974) Secretary of State William P. Rogers (1969–1973) Henry Kissinger (1973–1974) Secretary of the Treasury David M. Kennedy (1969–1971) John Connally (1971–1972) George Shultz (1972–1974) William E. Simon (1974) Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird (1969–1973) Elliot Richardson (1973) James R. Schlesinger (1973–1974) Attorney General John N. Mitchell (1969–1972) Richard Kleindienst (1972–1973) Elliot Richardson (1973) William B. Saxbe (1974) Postmaster General Winton M. Blount (1969–1971) Secretary of the Interior Wally Hickel (1969–1970) Rogers Morton (1971–1974) Secretary of Agriculture Clifford M. Hardin (1969–1971) Earl Butz (1971–1974) Secretary of Commerce Maurice Stans (1969–1972) Peter G. Peterson (1972–1973) Frederick B. Dent (1973–1974) Secretary of Labor George Shultz (1969–1970) James Day Hodgson (1970–1973) Peter J. Brennan (1973–1974) Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Robert Finch (1969–1970) Elliot Richardson (1970–1973) Caspar Weinberger (1973–1974) Secretary of Housing and Urban Development George W. Romney (1969–1973) James Thomas Lynn (1973–1974) Secretary of Transportation John A. Volpe (1969–1973) Claude Brinegar (1973–1974) Cabinet-level Director of the Bureau of the Budget Robert P. Mayo (1969–1970) Director of the Office of Management and Budget George Shultz (1970–1972) Caspar Weinberger (1972–1973) Roy Ash (1973–1974) Ambassador to the United Nations Charles Yost (1969–1971) George H. W. Bush (1971–1973) John A. Scali (1973–1974) Counselor to the President Arthur F. Burns (1969) Daniel Patrick Moynihan (1969–1970) Bryce Harlow (1969–1970) Robert Finch (1970–1972) Donald Rumsfeld (1970–1971) Anne L. Armstrong (1973–1974) Dean Burch (1974) Kenneth Rush (1974) Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata International FAST ISNI VIAF National Germany Israel United States Netherlands Other NARA SNAC Categories: 1913 births1988 deaths20th-century American lawyersAmerican campaign managersUnited States Navy personnel of World War IIBurials at Arlington National CemeteryFordham University School of Law alumniJamaica High School (New York City) alumniLawyers from DetroitMembers of the Committee for the Re-Election of the PresidentMilitary personnel from DetroitDisbarred New York (state) lawyersNew York (state) politicians convicted of crimesNixon administration cabinet membersNo-knock warrant20th-century American politiciansAmerican people convicted of obstruction of justiceAmerican people convicted of perjuryRecipients of the Silver StarUnited States Assistant Attorneys GeneralUnited States Attorneys GeneralUnited States Navy officersPeople convicted in the Watergate scandalLawyers disbarred in the Watergate scandalNew York (state) Republicans

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Summit Conference of Heads of State or Government of the Non-Aligned Movement (Serbo-Croatian: Конференција шефова држава или влада несврстаних земаља / Konferencija šefova država ili vlada nesvrstanih zemalja, Macedonian: Конференција на шефови на држави или влади на неврзани земји, Slovene: Konferenca voditeljev držav ali vlad neuvrščenih držav) on 1–6 September 1961 in Belgrade, Yugoslavia was the first conference of the Non-Aligned Movement.[1] A major contributing factor to the organization of the conference was the process of decolonization of a number of African countries in the 1960s.[1] Some therefore called it the ″Third World's Yalta″ in reference to 1945 Yalta Conference.[1] Twenty-five countries in total participated in Belgrade Conference, while 3 countries, Bolivia, Brazil and Ecuador, were observers.[2] The preparatory meeting of Non-Aligned Countries took place earlier that year in Cairo June 5–12, 1961.[3] One of the issues was division of the newly independent countries over the Congo Crisis which led to a rift and creation of the conservative and anti-radical Brazzaville Group and radical nationalist Casablanca Group.[1] All members of the Casablanca Group attended the conference, including Algeria, Ghana, Guinea, Mali, Morocco and the United Arab Republic, while none of the Brazzaville Group was present.[1] The summit was followed by the 2nd Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Cairo in 1964. The 1962 Cairo Conference on the Problems of Developing Countries was a direct follow-up of the Belgrade Summit at which Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Senegal and Yugoslavia will work on preparation for the upcoming UNCTAD conference of the ECOSOC.[4] The Conference This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Participating states. Brijuni Islands, an archipelago in the Socialist Republic of Croatia, were initially considered to host the summit after they hosted the Brioni Meeting of 1956, yet the City of Belgrade was ultimately selected due to Brijuni's insufficient venues and concentration of the international communication and media facilities in the capital city of Yugoslavia.[5] Vladimir Popović was the head of the Yugoslav State Committee for the Preparation of the Conference. The conference brought together 25 independent states. In addition to them, there were three states that had observer status, eleven socialist parties, trade unions from Japan and four other organizations. Socio-economic differences between participants were great and from the beginning participating states often showed different interests. Yugoslavia attached special importance to Latin American countries participation. The participation of these countries, along with the representatives of Europe, should have given the conference the character of a gathering where all parts of the world are represented, and avoid reduction to Afro-Asian meeting as it was case with some meetings before. President Tito only partially succeeded bringing together all parts of the world to the conference. From Latin America, only Cuba was a full participant, while Bolivia, Brazil and Ecuador had observer status. The reason for that was the inability of these states to resist some pressure from the United States which wanted to preserve its role in the Western Hemisphere. The representatives of Yugoslavia were especially disappointed with Mexico's last minute cancelation. Of the European countries, only Cyprus and Yugoslavia as a host participated in the meeting. The conference was followed by 1,016 journalists of which 690 were from abroad from 53 different countries and with the New York Times' Paul Hofmann describing the event as a "paradise for cameramen".[6] Together, four Indian newspapers (The Times of India, The Hindu Madras, Indian Express and The Patriot) and four American newspapers (The New York Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and The Christian Science Monitor) published 177,265 words about the conference in 7 days before, during and 7 days after the conference.[6] Participants Afghanistan Mohammed Daoud Khan, Prime Minister of Afghanistan Algeria Benyoucef Benkhedda, Head of the Provisional Government of the Algerian Republic Myanmar U Nu, Prime Minister of Burma Cambodia Norodom Sihanouk, Chief of State of Cambodia Dominion of Ceylon Sirimavo Bandaranaike, Prime Minister of Ceylon Republic of the Congo (Léopoldville) Cyrille Adoula, Prime Minister of Congo-Léopoldville and Antoine Gizenga, Deputy Prime Minister Cuba Osvaldo Dorticós Torrado, President of Cuba Cyprus Makarios III, President of Cyprus Ethiopia Haile Selassie, Emperor of Ethiopia Ghana Kwame Nkrumah, President of Ghana Guinea Louis Lansana Beavogui, Foreign Minister of Guinea India Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minister of India Indonesia Sukarno, President of Indonesia Iraq Hashem Jawad, Foreign Minister of Iraq Lebanon Saeb Salam, Prime Minister of Lebanon Mali Modibo Keïta, President of Mali Morocco Hassan II, King of Morocco Nepal Mahendra, King of Nepal Saudi Arabia Ibrahim bin Abdullah Al Suwaiyel, Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia Somalia Aden Adde, President of Somalia Sudan Ibrahim Abboud, President of Sudan Tunisia Habib Bourguiba, President of Tunisia United Arab Republic Gamal Abdel Nasser, President of the United Arab Republic Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen Prince Seif el Islam el Hassan, Prime Minister of the Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Josip Broz Tito, President of Yugoslavia Observers Bolivia José Fellman, Minister of Education of Bolivia and Jorge Gutierrez Allendrebe, minister plenipotentiary Brazil Franco Filho de Mello, Brazilian Ambassador to Switzerland Ecuador Jose Joaquin Silva, Ecuadorian Ambassador to West Germany Guests Canada Robert Ford[7] United States George F. Kennan[7] United Kingdom Michael Creswell[7] See also Yugoslavia and the Non-Aligned Movement 50th Anniversary Additional Commemorative Non-Aligned Meeting 60th Anniversary Additional Commemorative Non-Aligned Meeting References Ancic, Ivana (17 August 2017). "Belgrade, The 1961 Non-Aligned Conference". Global South Studies. University of Virginia. Pantelic, Nada (2011). "The First Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries (in Serbian and English)". Exhibition Catalog. Archives of Yugoslavia. ISBN 978-86-80099-35-4. "2011.- "The first conference of the Heads of state or Government of Non-aligned countries, Belgrade 1961"". Archives of Yugoslavia. Retrieved 28 July 2020. James Mark; Yakov Feygin (2020). "The Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, and Alternative Vision of a Global Economy 1950s–1980s". In James Mark; Artemy M. Kalinovsky; Steffi Margus (eds.). Alternative Globalizations: Eastern Europe and the Postcolonial World. Indiana University Press. pp. 35–58. ISBN 978-0-253-04650-5. Mila Turajlić (2023). "Film as the Memory Site of the 1961 Belgrade Conference of Non-Aligned States". In Paul Stubbs (ed.). Socialist Yugoslavia and the Non-Aligned Movement: Social, Cultural, Political, and Economic Imaginaries. McGill-Queen's University Press. pp. 203–231. ISBN 9780228014652. Jürgen Dinkel (2014). "'To grab the headlines in the world press': Non-aligned summits as media events". In Nataša Mišković; Herald Fischer-Tine; Nada Boškovska (eds.). The Non-Aligned Movement and the Cold War: Delhi — Bandung — Belgrade. Routledge. pp. 207–225. ISBN 978-0-415-74263-4. Rakove, Robert B. (2014). "Two roads to Belgrade: the United States, Great Britain, and the first nonaligned conference". Cold War History. 14 (3): 337–357. doi:10.1080/14682745.2013.871528. S2CID 153513441.

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ This documentary stands as a testament to the endurance and strength of the Vietnamese people beyond the lens of war. It embarks on a poignant journey back to Vietnam, shedding light on a nation scarred by conflict yet brimming with perseverance. It captures Vietnam not as a battleground but as a country rebuilding from the ruins. It features a tapestry of tranquil landscapes, revealing a peaceful Vietnam, starkly different from its war-torn past. Scenes of peasants amid serene backdrops juxtapose the tales of horror Pilger unravels. Traversing the North, Pilger exposes the aftermath of Operation Hades, where the devastation wrought by herbicidal spraying and bomb craters scar the once-lush terrains. He unveils the stark realities faced by the Vietnamese, from impending famine in Vinh to cities grappling with food shortages. Throughout the narrative, Pilger offers a sympathetic portrayal of the Vietnamese people, praising their resilience in creating irrigation systems and the intricate Cu Chi tunnels, the sanctuary of the National Liberation Front. While refraining from animosity toward American soldiers, he unreservedly critiques the political leaders in Washington. Yet, Pilger doesn't shy away from scrutinizing the victors, shedding light on re-education camps and governmental policies akin to Stalinist brutality. He uncovers the paradoxical new "economic zones," born from crop failures, and highlights concerning practices like book-burning and vigilantism. Returning to Saigon after years, Pilger witnesses a transformed landscape devoid of crippled children and war-ravaged veterans. He acknowledges the state's control mechanisms but juxtaposes it with a civil transition after years of bitterness, praising the strides in healthcare and the nurturing of orphans. "Echoes of Vietnam: A Chronicle of Resilience" (ATV), aired on ITV in October 1978, remains an evocative portrayal of a nation's endurance, compassion, and the delicate balance between the shadows of history and the hope for a brighter future. Spanning 53 minutes, this documentary encapsulates the spirit of a nation rebuilding amidst the echoes of its tumultuous past.

Philip David Ochs (/ˈoʊks/; December 19, 1940 – April 9, 1976) was an American songwriter and protest singer (or, as he preferred, a topical singer). Ochs was known for his sharp wit, sardonic humor, political activism, often alliterative lyrics, and distinctive voice. He wrote hundreds of songs from the 1960s to early 1970s and released eight albums. Ochs performed at many political events during the 1960s counterculture era, including anti-Vietnam War and civil rights rallies, student events, and organized labor events over the course of his career, in addition to many concert appearances at such venues as New York City's Town Hall and Carnegie Hall. Politically, Ochs described himself as a "left social democrat"[1] who became an "early revolutionary" after the protests at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago led to a police riot, which had a profound effect on his state of mind. After years of prolific writing in the 1960s, Ochs's mental stability declined in the 1970s. He had a number of mental health problems, including depression, bipolar disorder and alcoholism, and died by suicide in 1976. Ochs's influences included Woody Guthrie, Pete Seeger, Buddy Holly, Elvis Presley, Bob Gibson, Faron Young, and Merle Haggard. His best-known songs include "I Ain't Marching Anymore", "When I'm Gone", "Changes", "Crucifixion", "Draft Dodger Rag", "Love Me, I'm a Liberal", "Outside of a Small Circle of Friends", "Power and the Glory", "There but for Fortune", "The War Is Over", and "No More Songs". Biography Early years Phil Ochs was born on December 19, 1940,[2] in El Paso, Texas, to Jacob "Jack" Ochs (1910-1963), a physician who was born in New York,[3] and Gertrude Phin Ochs (1912-1994),[4][5] who was from Scotland.[6] His father was of Polish Jewish descent.[7] His parents met and married in Edinburgh where Jack was attending medical school.[8] After their marriage, they moved to the United States. Jack, drafted into the army, was sent overseas near the end of World War II, where he treated soldiers at the Battle of the Bulge. His war experiences affected his mental health and he received an honorable medical discharge in November 1945.[9] Suffering from bipolar disorder and depression on his return home, Jack was unable to establish a successful medical practice and instead worked at a series of hospitals around the country.[8] As a result, the Ochs family moved frequently: to Far Rockaway, New York, when Ochs was a teenager; then to Perrysburg in western New York, where he first studied music; and then to Columbus, Ohio.[10] Ochs grew up with an older sister, Sonia (known as Sonny, born 1937), and a younger brother, Michael (born 1943).[4] The Ochs family was middle class and Jewish, but not religious.[11] His father was distant from his wife and children, and was hospitalized for depression;[12] he died on April 30, 1963, from a cerebral hemorrhage.[13] His mother died on March 9, 1994.[5] As a teenager, Ochs was recognized as a talented clarinet player; in an evaluation, one music instructor wrote: "You have exceptional musical feeling and the ability to transfer it on your instrument is abundant."[14] His musical skills allowed him to play clarinet with the orchestra at the Capital University Conservatory of Music in Ohio, where he rose to the status of principal soloist before he was 16. Although Ochs played classical music, he soon became interested in other sounds he heard on the radio, such as early rock icons Buddy Holly and Elvis Presley[15] and country music artists including Faron Young, Ernest Tubb, Hank Williams Sr., and Johnny Cash.[16] Ochs also spent a lot of time at the movies. His mother did not want to hire a babysitter and instead gave her sons money to spend at the theatre. While living in Far Rockaway, the brothers saw five to six films each week, as there were three theaters in town.[17] He especially liked big screen heroes such as John Wayne[15] and Audie Murphy.[18] Later on, he developed an interest in movie rebels, including Marlon Brando and James Dean.[19] From 1956 to 1958, Ochs was a student at the Staunton Military Academy in rural Virginia, and when he graduated he returned to Columbus and enrolled at Ohio State University.[20] Unhappy after his first quarter, he took a leave of absence and went to Florida. While in Miami, the 18-year-old Ochs was jailed for two weeks for sleeping on a park bench, an incident he would later recall: Somewhere during the course of those fifteen days I decided to become a writer. My primary thought was journalism ... so in a flash, I decided—I'll be a writer and a major in journalism.[21] Bob Gibson was a major influence on Ochs's writing. Ochs returned to Ohio State to study journalism and developed an interest in politics, with a particular interest in the Cuban Revolution of 1959. At Ohio State, he met Jim Glover, a fellow student who was a devotee of folk music. Glover introduced Ochs to the music of Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie, and the Weavers. Glover taught Ochs how to play guitar, and they debated politics.[18] Ochs began writing newspaper articles, often on radical themes. When the student paper refused to publish some of his more radical articles, he started his own underground newspaper called The Word, as well as writing for the satire magazine, The Sundial, with fellow classmate R.L. Stine.[22] His two main interests, politics and music, soon merged, and Ochs began writing topical political songs. Ochs and Glover formed a duet called "The Singing Socialists",[23] later renamed "The Sundowners", but the duo broke up before their first professional performance and Glover went to New York City to become a folksinger.[24] Ochs's parents and brother had moved from Columbus to Cleveland, and Ochs started to spend more time there, performing professionally at a local folk club called Farragher's Back Room. He was the opening act for a number of musicians in the summer of 1961, including the Smothers Brothers.[25] Ochs met folksinger Bob Gibson that summer as well, and according to Dave Van Ronk, Gibson became "the seminal influence" on Ochs's writing.[26] Ochs continued at Ohio State into his senior year, but was bitterly disappointed at not being appointed editor-in-chief of the college newspaper, and dropped out in his last quarter without graduating. He left for New York, as Glover had, to become a folksinger.[27] 1962–1966 In the early 1960s, there was a folk music rebirth in this country with the likes of Peter, Paul and Mary, Joan Baez, Pete Seeger and Bob Dylan. Although his fame was probably limited, Ochs became an integral part of that crowd. His songs "Draft Dodger Rag" and "I Ain't Marching Anymore" became a rallying cry for the peace movement much the way that Dylan's did. Leba Hertz, "'Phil Ochs' Review: A Voice Made for Marching", San Francisco Chronicle, March 18, 2011[28] Ochs arrived in New York City in 1962 and began performing in numerous small folk nightclubs, eventually becoming an integral part of the Greenwich Village folk music scene.[29] He emerged as an unpolished but passionate vocalist who wrote pointed songs about current events: war, civil rights, labor struggles and other topics. While others described his music as "protest songs", Ochs preferred the term "topical songs".[30] Ochs described himself as a "singing journalist",[31] saying he built his songs from stories he read in Newsweek.[32] By the summer of 1963, he was sufficiently well known in folk circles to be invited to sing at the Newport Folk Festival, where he performed "Too Many Martyrs" (co-written with Bob Gibson), "Talking Birmingham Jam", and "Power and the Glory"—his patriotic Guthrie-esque anthem that brought the audience to its feet. Other performers at the 1963 folk festival included Peter, Paul and Mary, Joan Baez, Bob Dylan, and Tom Paxton.[33] Ochs's return appearance at Newport in 1964, when he performed "Draft Dodger Rag" and other songs, was widely praised.[34] However, he was not invited to appear in 1965, the festival when Dylan infamously performed "Maggie's Farm" with an electric guitar. Although many in the folk world decried Dylan's choice, Ochs was amused, and admired Dylan's courage in defying the folk establishment.[35][36] In 1964, he performed his song "Talking Vietnam Blues" which was "the first protest song to directly refer to Vietnam by name".[37] In 1963, Ochs performed at New York's Carnegie Hall and Town Hall in hootenannies.[38] He made his first solo appearance at Carnegie Hall in 1966.[39] Throughout his career, Ochs would perform at a wide range of venues, including civil rights rallies, anti-war demonstrations, and concert halls.[40] Ochs contributed many songs and articles to the influential Broadside Magazine.[41][42] He recorded his first three albums for Elektra Records: All the News That's Fit to Sing (1964), I Ain't Marching Anymore (1965), and Phil Ochs in Concert (1966).[43] Critics wrote that each album was better than its predecessors, and fans seemed to agree; record sales increased with each new release.[44] On these records, Ochs was accompanied only by an acoustic guitar. The albums contain many of Ochs's topical songs, such as "Too Many Martyrs", "I Ain't Marching Anymore", and "Draft Dodger Rag"; and some musical reinterpretation of older poetry, such as "The Highwayman" (poem by Alfred Noyes) and "The Bells" (poem by Edgar Allan Poe). Phil Ochs in Concert includes some more introspective songs, such as "Changes" and "When I'm Gone".[45][46] During the early period of his career, Ochs and Bob Dylan had a friendly rivalry. Dylan said of Ochs, "I just can't keep up with Phil. And he just keeps getting better and better and better".[47] On another occasion, when Ochs criticized either "One of Us Must Know (Sooner or Later)" or "Can You Please Crawl Out Your Window?" (sources differ), Dylan threw him out of his limousine, saying, "You're not a folksinger. You're a journalist."[48] In 1962, Ochs married Alice Skinner, who was pregnant with their daughter Meegan, in a City Hall ceremony with Jim Glover as best man and Jean Ray as bridesmaid, and witnessed by Dylan's sometime girlfriend, Suze Rotolo.[49][50] Phil and Alice separated in 1965, but they never divorced.[51][52] Like many people of his generation, Ochs deeply admired President John F. Kennedy, even though he disagreed with the president on issues such as the Bay of Pigs Invasion, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the growing involvement of the United States in the Vietnamese civil war. When Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963, Ochs wept. He told his wife that he thought he was going to die that night. It was the only time she ever saw Ochs cry.[53][54] Ochs's managers during this part of his career were Albert Grossman (who also managed Bob Dylan, Peter, Paul, and Mary and Gordon Lightfoot) followed by Arthur Gorson.[55] Gorson had close ties with such groups as Americans For Democratic Action, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, and Students for a Democratic Society.[56] Ochs was writing songs at a fast pace. Some of the songs he wrote during this period were held back and recorded on his later albums.[57] 1967–1969 In 1967, Ochs – now managed by his brother Michael—left Elektra Records for A&M Records and moved to Los Angeles, California.[58] He recorded four studio albums for A&M: Pleasures of the Harbor (1967), Tape from California (1968), Rehearsals for Retirement (1969), and the ironically titled Greatest Hits (1970) (which actually consisted of all new material).[59] For his A&M albums, Ochs moved away from simply produced solo acoustic guitar performances and experimented with ensemble and even orchestral instrumentation, "baroque-folk",[60] in the hopes of producing a pop-folk hybrid that would be a hit.[61] Critic Robert Christgau, writing in Esquire of Pleasures of the Harbor in May 1968, did not consider this new direction a good turn. While describing Ochs as "unquestionably a nice guy", he went on to say, "too bad his voice shows an effective range of about half an octave [and] his guitar playing would not suffer much if his right hand were webbed." "Pleasures of the Harbor", Christgau continued, "epitomizes the decadence that has infected pop since Sgt. Pepper. [The] gaudy musical settings ... inspire nostalgia for the three-chord strum."[62] With an ironic sense of humor, Ochs included Christgau's "webbed hand" comment in his 1968 songbook The War is Over on a page titled "The Critics Raved", opposite a full-page picture of Ochs standing in a large metal garbage can.[63] Despite his sense of humor, Ochs was unhappy that his work was not receiving the critical acclaim and popular success he had hoped to achieve.[64] Still, Ochs would joke on the back cover of Greatest Hits that there were 50 Phil Ochs fans ("50 fans can't be wrong!"), a sarcastic reference to an Elvis Presley album that bragged of 50 million Elvis fans.[65] None of Ochs's songs became hits, although "Outside of a Small Circle of Friends" received a good deal of airplay. It reached No. 119 on Billboard's national "Hot Prospect" listing before being pulled from some radio stations because of its lyrics, which included "smoking marijuana is more fun than drinking beer".[66] It was the closest Ochs ever came to the Top 40. Joan Baez, however, did have a Top Ten hit in the U.K. in August 1965, reaching No. 8 with her recording of Ochs's song "There but for Fortune",[67][68] which was also nominated for a Grammy Award for "Best Folk Recording".[69] In the U.S. it peaked at No. 50 on the Billboard charts[70]—a good showing, but not a hit.[71] Although he was trying new things musically, Ochs did not abandon his protest roots. He was profoundly concerned with the escalation of the Vietnam War, performing tirelessly at anti-war rallies across the country. In 1967 he organized two rallies to declare that "The War Is Over"—"Is everybody sick of this stinking war? In that case, friends, do what I and thousands of other Americans have done—declare the war over."[72]—one in Los Angeles in June, the other in New York in November.[73] He continued to write and record anti-war songs, such as "The War Is Over" and "White Boots Marching in a Yellow Land". Other topical songs of this period include "Outside of a Small Circle of Friends", inspired by the murder of Kitty Genovese, who was stabbed to death outside of her New York City apartment building while dozens of her neighbors reportedly ignored her cries for help, and "William Butler Yeats Visits Lincoln Park and Escapes Unscathed", about the despair he felt in the aftermath of the Chicago 1968 Democratic National Convention police riot.[74] Ochs was writing more personal songs as well, such as "Crucifixion", in which he compared the deaths of Jesus Christ and assassinated President John F. Kennedy as part of a "cycle of sacrifice" in which people build up heroes and then celebrate their destruction; "Chords of Fame", a warning against the dangers and corruption of fame; "Pleasures of the Harbor", a lyrical portrait of a lonely sailor seeking human connection far from home; and "Boy in Ohio", a plaintive look back at Ochs's childhood in Columbus.[75][76] A lifelong movie fan, Ochs worked the narratives of justice and rebellion that he had seen in films into his music, describing some of his songs as "cinematic".[77] He was disappointed and bitter when his onetime hero John Wayne embraced the Vietnam War with what Ochs saw as the blind patriotism of Wayne's 1968 film, The Green Berets: [H]ere we have John Wayne, who was a major artistic and psychological figure on the American scene, ... who at one point used to make movies of soldiers who had a certain validity, ... a certain sense of honor [about] what the soldier was doing. ... Even if it was a cavalry movie doing a historically dishonorable thing to the Indians, even as there was a feeling of what it meant to be a man, what it meant to have some sense of duty. ... Now today we have the same actor making his new war movie in a war so hopelessly corrupt that, without seeing the movie, I'm sure it is perfectly safe to say that it will be an almost technically-robot-view of soldiery, just by definition of how the whole country has deteriorated. And I think it would make a very interesting double feature to show a good old Wayne movie like, say, She Wore a Yellow Ribbon with The Green Berets. Because that would make a very striking comment on what has happened to America in general.[78] Ochs was involved in the creation of the Youth International Party, known as the Yippies, along with Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman, Stew Albert, and Paul Krassner.[79] At the same time, Ochs actively supported Eugene McCarthy's more mainstream bid for the 1968 Democratic nomination for President, a position at odds with the more radical Yippie point of view.[80][81] Still, Ochs helped plan the Yippies' "Festival of Life" which was to take place at the 1968 Democratic National Convention along with demonstrations by other anti-war groups including the National Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam.[82] Despite warnings that there might be trouble, Ochs went to Chicago both as a guest of the McCarthy campaign and to participate in the demonstrations. He performed in Lincoln Park, Grant Park, and at the Chicago Coliseum, witnessed the violence perpetrated by the Chicago police against the protesters, and was arrested at one point.[83][84] Ochs also purchased the young boar who became known as the Yippie 1968 Presidential candidate "Pigasus the Immortal" from a farm in Illinois.[85][86] The cover of Ochs's 1969 album, Rehearsals for Retirement The events of 1968 – the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. and of Robert F. Kennedy weeks later, the Chicago police riot, and the election of Richard Nixon – left Ochs feeling disillusioned and depressed.[87] The cover of his 1969 album Rehearsals for Retirement portrayed a tombstone with the words: PHIL OCHS (AMERICAN) BORN: EL PASO, TEXAS, 1940 DIED: CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, 1968[88] At the trial of the Chicago Seven in December 1969, Ochs testified for the defense. His testimony included his recitation of the lyrics to his song "I Ain't Marching Anymore". On his way out of the courthouse, Ochs sang the song for the press corps; to Ochs's amusement, his singing was broadcast that evening by Walter Cronkite on the CBS Evening News.[89] 1970 After the riot in Chicago and the subsequent trial, Ochs changed direction again. The events of 1968 convinced him that the average American was not listening to topical songs or responding to Yippie tactics. Ochs thought that by playing the sort of music that had moved him as a teenager he could speak more directly to the American public.[90] Ochs turned to his musical roots in country music and early rock and roll.[91] He decided he needed to be "part Elvis Presley and part Che Guevara",[92] so he commissioned a gold lamé suit from Elvis Presley's costumer Nudie Cohn.[93] Ochs wore the gold suit on the cover of his 1970 album, Greatest Hits, which consisted of new songs largely in rock and country styles.[75][91] Ochs went on tour wearing the gold suit, backed by a rock band, singing his own material along with medleys of songs by Buddy Holly, Elvis, and Merle Haggard. His fans did not know how to respond. This new Phil Ochs drew a hostile reaction from his audience. Ochs's March 27, 1970, concerts at Carnegie Hall were the most successful, and by the end of that night's second show, Ochs had won over many in the crowd.[15] The show was recorded and released as Gunfight at Carnegie Hall.[94] During this period, Ochs was taking drugs to get through performances. He had been taking Valium for years to help control his nerves, and he was also drinking heavily.[95] Pianist Lincoln Mayorga said of that period, "He was physically abusing himself very badly on that tour. He was drinking a lot of wine and taking uppers. The wine was pulling him one way and the uppers were pulling him another way, and he was kind of a mess. There were so many pharmaceuticals around – so many pills. I'd never seen anything like that."[96] Ochs tried to cut back on the pills, but alcohol remained his drug of choice for the rest of his life.[97][98] Depressed by his lack of widespread appreciation and suffering from writer's block, Ochs did not record any further albums.[99] He slipped deeper into depression and alcoholism.[97][98] His personal problems notwithstanding, Ochs performed at the inaugural benefit for Greenpeace on October 16, 1970, at the Pacific Coliseum in Vancouver, British Columbia. A recording of his performance, along with performances by Joni Mitchell and James Taylor, was released by Greenpeace in 2009. 1971–1975 Phil Ochs rewrite of his song "Here's to the State of Mississippi" into "Here's to the State of Richard Nixon". Typed at the apartment of Chip Berlet in 1974 prior to Ochs's performance of the song at Impeachment Ball. Copy sent to his brother Michael Ochs for registration. Original at Chicago History Museum. In August 1971, Ochs went to Chile, where Salvador Allende, a Marxist, had been democratically elected in the 1970 election. There he met Chilean folksinger Víctor Jara, an Allende supporter, and the two became friends. In October, Ochs left Chile to visit Argentina. Later that month, after singing at a political rally in Uruguay, he and his American traveling companion David Ifshin were arrested and detained overnight. When the two returned to Argentina, they were arrested as they got off the airplane. After a brief stay in an Argentinian prison, Ochs and Ifshin were sent to Bolivia via a commercial airliner where authorities were to detain them.[100] Ifshin had previously been warned by Argentinian leftist friends that when the authorities sent dissidents to Bolivia, they would disappear forever. When the airliner arrived in Bolivia, the American captain of the Braniff International Airways aircraft allowed Ochs and Ifshin to stay on the aircraft and barred Bolivian authorities from entering. The aircraft then flew to Peru where the two disembarked and they were not detained. Fearful that Peruvian authorities might arrest him, Ochs returned to the United States a few days later.[101] Ochs was having difficulties writing new songs during this period, but he had occasional breakthroughs. He updated his sarcastic song "Here's to the State of Mississippi" as "Here's to the State of Richard Nixon", with cutting lines such as "the speeches of the Spiro are the ravings of a clown", a reference to Nixon's vitriolic vice president, Spiro Agnew—sung as "the speeches of the President are the ravings of a clown" after Agnew's resignation.[102][103][104] Ochs was personally invited by John Lennon to sing at a large benefit at the University of Michigan in December 1971 on behalf of John Sinclair, an activist poet who had been arrested on minor drug charges and given a severe sentence. Ochs performed at the John Sinclair Freedom Rally along with Stevie Wonder, Allen Ginsberg, David Peel, Abbie Hoffman, and many others. The rally culminated with Lennon and Yoko Ono, who were making their first public performance in the United States since the breakup of the Beatles.[105] Although the 1968 election had left him deeply disillusioned, Ochs continued to work for the election campaigns of anti-war candidates, such as George McGovern's unsuccessful Presidential bid in 1972.[106] In 1972, Ochs was asked to write the theme song for the film Kansas City Bomber. The task proved difficult, as Ochs struggled to overcome his writer's block. Although his song was not used in the soundtrack, it was released as a single.[107] Ochs decided to travel. In mid-1972, he went to Australia and New Zealand.[108] He traveled to Africa in 1973, where he visited Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi, and South Africa. One night, Ochs was attacked and strangled by robbers in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, which damaged his vocal cords, causing a loss of the top three notes in his vocal range.[109] The attack also exacerbated his growing mental problems, and he became increasingly paranoid. Ochs believed the attack may have been arranged by US government agents, perhaps the CIA. Still, he continued his trip, even recording a single in Kenya, "Bwatue".[110] On September 11, 1973, the Allende government of Chile was overthrown in a coup d'état. Allende committed suicide during the bombing of the presidential palace,[111] and singer Victor Jara was rounded up with other professors and students, tortured and murdered.[112] When Ochs heard about the manner in which his friend had been killed, he was outraged and decided to organize a benefit concert to bring to public attention the situation in Chile, and raise funds for the people of Chile. The concert, "An Evening with Salvador Allende", was held on May 9, 1974, at New York City's Felt Forum, included films of Allende; singers such as Pete Seeger, Arlo Guthrie, Dave Van Ronk, and Bob Dylan; and political activists such as former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark. Dylan had agreed to perform at the last minute when he heard that the concert had sold so few tickets that it was in danger of being canceled. Once his participation was announced, the event quickly sold out.[113] After the Chile benefit, Ochs and Dylan discussed the possibility of a joint concert tour, playing small nightclubs. Nothing came of the Dylan-Ochs plans, but the idea eventually evolved into Dylan's Rolling Thunder Revue.[114] The Vietnam War ended on April 30, 1975.[115] Ochs planned a final "War Is Over" rally, which was held in New York's Central Park on May 11. More than 100,000 people came to hear Ochs, joined by Harry Belafonte, Odetta, Pete Seeger, Paul Simon and others. Ochs and Joan Baez sang a duet of "There but for Fortune" and he closed with his song "The War Is Over".[116] Decline and death Ochs' drinking became more and more of a problem, and his behavior became increasingly erratic. He frightened his friends both with his drunken rants about the FBI and CIA and about his claiming to want to have Elvis's manager Colonel Tom Parker or Kentucky Fried Chicken's Colonel Sanders manage his career.[117] In mid-1975, Ochs took on the identity of John Butler Train. He told people that Train had murdered Ochs and that he, John Butler Train, had replaced him. Ochs was convinced that someone was trying to kill him, so he carried a weapon at all times: a hammer, a knife, or a lead pipe.[118] His brother, Michael, attempted to have him committed to a psychiatric hospital. Friends pleaded with him to get help voluntarily. They feared for his safety because he was getting into fights with bar patrons. Unable to pay his rent, he began living on the streets.[119] After several months, the Train persona faded and Ochs returned, but his talk of suicide disturbed his friends and family. They hoped it was a passing phase, but Ochs was determined.[120] One of his biographers explains Ochs's motivation: By Phil's thinking, he had died a long time ago: he had died politically in Chicago in 1968 in the violence of the Democratic National Convention; he had died professionally in Africa a few years later when he had been strangled and felt that he could no longer sing; he had died spiritually when Chile had been overthrown and his friend Victor Jara had been brutally murdered; and, finally, he had died psychologically at the hands of John Train.[121] On Christmas Eve 1975, Ochs visited the apartment of Larry Sloman and Dave Peller, which he had done semi-frequently near the end of 1975. On this particular evening, Peller recorded Ochs singing 10 songs, 5 of them new and intended for an album that "would be an unflinching narrative of his psychosis over the past year"[122] which went by the working title of Duels in the Sun. 5 other songs were also in some level of completion by this time. A second tape, possibly recorded before Christmas Eve, features additional songs intended for this project.[123] This album would never come to fruition beyond these two recordings. In January 1976, Ochs moved to Far Rockaway, New York, to live with his sister Sonny. He was lethargic; his only activities were watching television and playing cards with his nephews. Ochs saw a psychiatrist, who diagnosed him with bipolar disorder. He was prescribed medication, and he told his sister he was taking it.[124] On April 9, 1976, Ochs died by suicide by hanging himself in Sonny's home.[125] Years after his death, it was revealed that the FBI had a file of nearly 500 pages on Ochs.[126] Much of the information in those files relates to his association with counterculture figures, protest organizers, musicians, and other people described by the FBI as "subversive".[127] The FBI was often sloppy in collecting information on Ochs: his name was frequently misspelled "Oakes" in their files, and they continued to consider him "potentially dangerous"[128] after his death.[127] Congresswoman Bella Abzug (Democrat from New York), an outspoken anti-war activist who had appeared at the 1975 "War is Over" rally, entered this statement into the Congressional Record on April 29, 1976: Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, a young folksinger whose music personified the protest mood of the 1960s took his own life. Phil Ochs – whose original compositions were compelling moral statements against the war in Southeast Asia – apparently felt that he had run out of words. While his tragic action was undoubtedly motivated by terrible personal despair, his death is a political as well as an artistic tragedy. I believe it is indicative of the despair many of the activists of the 1960s are experiencing as they perceive a government that continues the distortion of national priorities that is exemplified in the military budget we have before us. Phil Ochs's poetic pronouncements were part of a larger effort to galvanize his generation into taking action to prevent war, racism, and poverty. He left us a legacy of important songs that continue to be relevant in 1976—even though "the war is over". Just one year ago – during this week of the anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War – Phil recruited entertainers to appear at the "War is Over" celebration in Central Park, at which I spoke. It seems particularly appropriate that this week we should commemorate the contributions of this extraordinary young man.[129] Robert Christgau, who had been so critical of Pleasures of the Harbor and Ochs's guitar skills eight years earlier, wrote warmly of Ochs in his obituary in The Village Voice. "I came around to liking Phil Ochs's music, guitar included," Christgau wrote. "My affection [for Ochs] no doubt prejudiced me, so it is worth [noting] that many observers who care more for folk music than I do remember both his compositions and his vibrato tenor as close to the peak of the genre."[130] 1976 Memorial Concert On May 28th, 1976 at New York City's Felt Forum, a memorial concert was held for Ochs. Spearheaded by Michael and Sonny Ochs, the over six hour concert consisted of performances of Phil's best known material by many of his peers and influences, including Dave Van Ronk, Pete Seeger, Jim Glover, Jean Ray, Melanie, Bob Gibson and Peter Yarrow among others, with spoken Ed Sanders written tributes delivered by Jerry Rubin and Ramsey Clark.[131] Legacy Almost 50 years after his death, Ochs's songs remain relevant.[132] Ochs continues to influence singers and fans worldwide, most of whom never saw him perform live. There are mailing lists and online discussion groups dedicated to Ochs and his music;[133][134] websites that have music samples, photographs, and other links;[135][136] and articles and books continue to be written and published about him.[137] His sister, Sonny Ochs (Tanzman), runs a series of "Phil Ochs Song Nights" with a rotating group of performers who keep Ochs's music and legacy alive by singing his songs in cities across the U.S.[138] His brother Michael Ochs is a photographic archivist of 20th-century music and entertainment personalities.[139] His daughter Meegan Lee Ochs worked with Michael to produce a box set of Ochs's music titled Farewells & Fantasies, the title of which was taken from Ochs's sign-off on the "postcard" on the back of Tape from California: "Farewells & Fantasies, Folks, P. Ochs".[140][141] Meegan has a son named Caiden Finn Potter, Ochs's only grandchild.[142] Alice Skinner Ochs was a photographer;[143] she died in November 2010.[144] In February 2009, the North American Folk Music and Dance Alliance gave the 2009 Elaine Weissman Lifetime Achievement Award to Ochs.[145] In September 2014, Meegan Lee Ochs announced that she was donating her father's archives to the Woody Guthrie Center in Tulsa, Oklahoma.[146] Included are many of his notebooks, journals, videotapes of his performances, the gold lamé suit, photographs, and other documents and memorabilia that Meegan had preserved since his death.[147] Covers and updates Main article: List of cover versions of Phil Ochs songs Ochs's songs have been covered by scores of performers, including Joan Baez, Bastro, Cher, Judy Collins, John Denver,[138] Ani DiFranco, Ronnie Gilbert,[138] John Wesley Harding, Henry Cow, Jason & the Scorchers,[148] Jim and Jean, Jeannie Lewis,[149] Gordon Lightfoot,[138] Melanie, Christy Moore,[150] Morrissey, Pete Seeger, They Might Be Giants, Eddie Vedder, and the Weakerthans.[151] Wyclef Jean performed "Here's to the State of Mississippi" in the 2009 documentary Soundtrack for a Revolution.[152] In 1998, Sliced Bread Records released What's That I Hear?: The Songs of Phil Ochs, a two-CD set of 28 covers by artists that includes Billy Bragg, John Gorka, Nanci Griffith, Arlo Guthrie, Magpie, Tom Paxton, and Peter Yarrow.[153] The liner notes indicate that all record company profits from the sale of the set were to be divided between the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Southern California and Sing Out! magazine.[154] Wood Records released an indie rock/experimental rock tribute album titled Poison Ochs: A Tribute to Phil Ochs in 2003.[155] In 2005, Kind Of Like Spitting released an album, Learn: The Songs of Phil Ochs, consisting of covers of nine songs written by Ochs, to pay tribute to his music and raise awareness of the artist, whom they felt had been overlooked.[156][157] Jello Biafra and Mojo Nixon, on their album Prairie Home Invasion, recorded a version of "Love Me, I'm a Liberal" with lyrics updated to the Clinton era.[158] Evan Greer, part of the Riot-Folk collective, later updated the song for the George W. Bush era.[159] Ryan Harvey, also part of Riot-Folk, remade "Cops Of The World" with updated lyrics.[160] The Clash used some of the lyrics to "United Fruit" in their song "Up in Heaven (Not Only Here)", which appeared on their 1980 album Sandinista!.[161] During their performance on VH1 Storytellers, Pearl Jam covered "Here's to the State of Mississippi" with updated lyrics to include Jerry Falwell, Dick Cheney, John Roberts, Alberto Gonzales, and George W. Bush.[162] In 2002, with the agreement of Ochs's sister Sonny, Richard Thompson added an extra verse to "I Ain't Marching Anymore" to reflect recent American foreign policy.[163] Jefferson Starship recorded "I Ain't Marching Anymore" with additional lyrics by band member Cathy Richardson for their 2008 release Jefferson's Tree of Liberty.[164] Neil Young has cited Ochs as a major influence on his music. In a 1969 interview, Young said, "I really think Phil Ochs is a genius ... he's written fantastic, incredible songs – he's on the same level with Dylan in my eyes."[165] In 2013, Young performed "Changes" at Farm Aid[166][167] and included it in his 2014 tour set;[168][169] it also is the lead track on A Letter Home, his 2014 album of covers.[170] In 2016, Richard Barone released his album Sorrows & Promises: Greenwich Village in the 1960s, which includes "When I'm Gone".[171] Barone said of the project: "My favorite artist on the album is Phil Ochs. I grew up with Phil Ochs songs. I love his topical songs–and I also like his songs that are not political. He was always really good no matter what he was doing."[172] On tour, Barone also performed "Changes".[173] In 2020, Welsh singer-songwriter Martyn Joseph released Days of Decision: A Tribute to Phil Ochs containing 14 Ochs covers, as well as liner notes by Ochs' sister, Sonny.[174] Tributes On learning of Ochs' death, Tom Paxton wrote a song titled "Phil", which he recorded for his 1978 album Heroes.[175] Ochs is also the subject of "I Dreamed I Saw Phil Ochs Last Night", by Billy Bragg, from his 1990 album The Internationale, which was based on the Alfred Hayes/Earl Robinson song "Joe Hill" which Ochs helped popularize.[176][177] Ochs also had his own, different song ("Joe Hill") about the early 20th-century union activist/songwriter. "Thin Wild Mercury," by Peter Cooper and Todd Snider, is about Ochs's infamous clash with Dylan and getting thrown out of Dylan's limo.[178] Ochs is mentioned in the Dar Williams song "All My Heroes Are Dead", the Will Oldham song "Gezundheit", the Chumbawamba song "Love Me", and the They Might Be Giants song "The Day".[179] The Josh Joplin Group recorded a tribute to Ochs on their album Useful Music.[180] Schooner Fare recorded "Don't Stop To Rest (Song for Phil Ochs)" on their 1981 album Closer to the Wind.[175] Latin Quarter memorialized him in the song "Phil Ochs" on their album Long Pig (1993).[181] John Wesley Harding recorded a song titled "Phil Ochs, Bob Dylan, Steve Goodman, David Blue and Me", the title a reference to the Ochs song "Bach, Beethoven, Mozart and Me".[182] Singer-songwriter Nanci Griffith wrote a song about Phil entitled "Radio Fragile", included in her album Storms.[183] English folk/punk songwriter Al Baker recorded a song about Ochs entitled "All The News That's Fit To Sing", a reference to the title of Ochs's first album.[179] Cajun musician Vic Sadot wrote a song about Ochs entitled "Broadside Balladeer".[184] Singer-songwriter Jen Cass's "Standing In Your Memory", and Harry Chapin's "The Parade's Still Passing By" are tributes to Ochs. Leslie Fish recorded "Chickasaw Mountain", which is dedicated to Ochs, on her 1986 album of that name.[179] The punk band Squirrel Bait cited Ochs as a major creative influence in the liner notes of their 1986 album Skag Heaven, and cover his "Tape From California".[185] The American hardcore punk supergroup Hesitation Wounds wrote a song called "P. Ochs (The Death of a Rebel)", which appeared on their self-titled debut EP in 2013.[186] The song's lyrics reference the folk singer's life and suicide.[187] Ochs has also influenced Greek folk-rock songwriters; Dimitris Panagopoulos' Astathis Isoropia (Unstable Equilibrium) (1987) was dedicated to his memory.[175] On the 2005 Kind Of Like Spitting album In the Red, songwriter Ben Barnett included his song "Sheriff Ochs", which was inspired by reading a biography of Ochs.[188] On April 9, 2009, Ochs' friend Jim Glover performed a tribute to Ochs at Mother's Musical Bakery in Sarasota, Florida.[189] Popular culture Among Ochs's many admirers were the short story writer Breece D'J Pancake[190] and actor Sean Penn.[191] Meegan Lee Ochs, who worked as Sean Penn's personal assistant from 1983 to 1985,[192] wrote in her foreword to Farewells & Fantasies that she and Penn discussed "over many years" the possibility of making a movie about her father;[193] the plan has not yet come to fruition, although Penn expressed an interest in the project as recently as February 2009.[194] Author Jim Carroll's autobiography, The Basketball Diaries (1978), was dedicated in memory of Phil Ochs.[195] Ochs is mentioned in the song "The Day" from the self titled They Might Be Giants album. On the cover of the Go-Betweens' The Lost Album, Grant McLennan wore a shirt with the words "Get outta the car, Ochs", a reference to the limousine incident involving Ochs and Dylan.[196] The 1994 film Spanking the Monkey makes reference to Ochs and his suicide.[197] Ochs is mentioned in the Stephen King novels The Tommyknockers (1987)[198] and Hearts in Atlantis (1999).[199] In the 2019 novel Revolutionaries by Joshua Furst, based on the life of Abbie Hoffman, Ochs appears as a character under his own name.[200] Ochs is mentioned in David Bowie's 2013 song "(You Will) Set the World on Fire" on The Next Day album.[201] Films Michael Korolenko directed the 1984 biographical film Chords of Fame, which featured Bill Burnett as Ochs. The film included interviews with people who had known Ochs, including Yippies Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, manager Harold Leventhal, and Mike Porco, the owner of Gerde's Folk City. Chords of Fame also included performances of Ochs songs by folk musicians who knew him, including Bob Gibson, Pete Seeger, Tom Paxton, Dave Van Ronk, and Eric Andersen.[202] Filmmaker Ken Bowser directed the documentary film Phil Ochs: There but for Fortune, which premiered at the 2010 Woodstock Film Festival in Woodstock, New York.[203][204][205] Its theatrical run began on January 5, 2011, at the IFC Theater in Greenwich Village, New York City, opening in cities around the US and Canada thereafter.[206] The film features extensive archival footage of Ochs and many pivotal events from the 1960s civil rights and peace movements, as well as interviews with friends, family and colleagues who knew Ochs through music and politics.[207][208] The PBS American Masters series opened its 2012 season with an edited version of the film.[209][210] Experimental filmmaker Phil Solomon named his 2007 experimental film Rehearsals for Retirement after Ochs' 1969 song of the same name.[211] In the 2011 film The Chicago 8 the role of Phil Ochs was played by the actor Steven Schub (lead singer of The Fenwicks and HaSkaLA.)[212] Professional affiliations Ochs was a member of the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, which is affiliated with the AFL–CIO.[213][214] The music publishing company Ochs formed with Arthur Gorson, Barricade Music, was an ASCAP company.[215] Discography Main articles: Phil Ochs discography and list of songs recorded by Phil Ochs Studio albums and live recordings All the News That's Fit to Sing (Elektra, 1964) I Ain't Marching Anymore (Elektra, 1965) Phil Ochs in Concert (Elektra, 1966) Pleasures of the Harbor (A&M, 1967) Tape from California (A&M, 1968) Rehearsals for Retirement (A&M, 1969) Greatest Hits (A&M, 1970) Gunfight at Carnegie Hall (A&M Canada, 1974) There and Now: Live in Vancouver 1968 (Rhino, 1991) Live at Newport (Vanguard, 1996) Amchitka (Greenpeace, 2009) On My Way (1963 Demo Session) (MicroWerks, 2010) Live Again! (RockBeat, 2014) Live in Montreal 10/22/66 (Rockbeat, 2017) See also Counterculture of the 1960s List of anti-war songs List of peace activists Robyn Ochs, his niece and a bisexual activist References Citations Jones, Dylan (October 30, 2012). The Biographical Dictionary of Popular Music: From Adele to Ziggy, the Real A to Z of Rock and Pop. Macmillan. ISBN 9781250031884. Stanton, p. 351 Schumacher, p. 13. Cohen (1999), p.2 Deceased Ancestor's Name (June 14, 2016). "United States Social Security Death Index". Familysearch.org. Retrieved March 10, 2017. Schumacher, pp. 11–12. "TSHA | Ochs, Phillip David". Brend, p. 100. Schumacher, p. 17. Schumacher, pp. 20, 23–24. Eliot (1989), p. 12. Schumacher, pp. 16–17, 21. Schumacher, p. 57. Schumacher, p. 24. Wolf, Buck (August 16, 2001). "The Sad End of the First Elvis Impersonator". ABC News. Retrieved October 31, 2015. Schumacher, pp. 24–27. Eliot (1989), p. 12, 13. Kornfeld, Michael (January 16, 2011). "Sonny Ochs Reflects on Her Brother Phil and a New Film About Him". Acoustic Music Scene. Retrieved January 18, 2011. Eliot (1989), pp. 5, 8, 13. Schumacher, pp. 26–28. Doggett, P. (2001). All the News That's Fit to Sing/I Ain't Marching Anymore (CD reissue). Phil Ochs. Elektra. "Phil and Me". Celebrating Phil Ochs. April 28, 2015. Retrieved June 27, 2023. Houghton, Mick; Allan Jones (March 2011). "The Power and the Glory". Uncut. Page 60. Schumacher, pp. 33–41. Schumacher, pp. 41–42. Schumacher, p. 43. Schumacher, pp. 44–45. Hertz, Leba (March 18, 2011). "'Phil Ochs' Review: A Voice Made for Marching". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved November 20, 2018. Schumacher, p. 53. Brend, pp. 101–102. Buckley, Peter (2003). The Rough Guide to Rock: The Definitive Guide to More Than 1200 Artists and Bands (3 ed.). London: Rough Guides. p. 742. ISBN 978-1-85828-457-6. Schumacher, p. 54. Schumacher, pp. 59–63. Schumacher, p. 84. Schumacher, pp. 98, 101–104. Ochs, Phil (August 12, 1967). "It Ain't Me, Babe". The Village Voice. Auslander, Ben H. (Summer 1981). "If You Wanna End War And Stuff, You Gotta Sing Loud". Journal of American Culture. 4: 108. doi:10.1111/j.1542-734X.1981.0402_108.x. Schumacher, p. 67. Schumacher, pp. 112–115. Cohen (1999), pp. 12–15. Schumacher, pp. 54–55. "Smithsonian Folkways Recordings". Folkways.si.edu. Retrieved March 24, 2018. Cohen (1999), pp. 189–191. Schumacher, pp. 91–92, 117. Eliot (1989), pp. 77, 86–89, 99–103. Schumacher, pp. 76–77, 90–91, 116–117. Dallas, Karl (November 27, 1965). "Dylan Said It—'I Can't Keep Up With Phil'". Melody Maker. p. 10. Schumacher, p. 106. Rotolo, Suze (2008). A freewheelin' time: a memoir of Greenwich Village in the sixties. New York: Broadway Books. p. 249. ISBN 978-0-7679-2687-4. Eliot (1979), pp. 61-63. Schumacher, pp. 58, 67, 92. Eliot (1989), p. 148. Schumacher, p. 68. Schumacher, pp. 68–69. Eliot (1989), p. 64, 94. Eliot (1989), pp. 66–67. Schumacher, pp. 118, 149. Schumacher, pp. 129–130, 134. Cohen (1999), pp. 191–193. Brend, p. 106. Eliot (1989), pp. 131–133. Christgau, Robert (May 1968). "Dylan-Beatles-Stones-Donovan-Who, Dionne Warwick and Dusty Springfield, John Fred, California". Esquire. Retrieved January 24, 2009. Ochs (1968), p. 44. Schumacher, p. 166. Schumacher, p. 226. Eliot (1989), pp. 136–137. Warner, Jay (2008). Notable Moments of Women in Music. Milwaukee, Wisc.: Hal Leonard. p. 133. ISBN 978-1-4234-2951-7. Phil Ochs interviewed on the Pop Chronicles (1969) Taylor, Timothy Dean (1997). Global Pop: World Music, World Markets. New York City: Routledge. p. 225. ISBN 978-0-415-91872-5. "Billboard singles". Billboard. Retrieved February 3, 2009. Schumacher, p. 95. Ochs, Phil (November 23, 1967). "Have You Heard? The War is Over!". The Village Voice.; reprinted in Ochs (1968), p. 92; excerpted in Schumacher, p. 171. Schumacher, pp. 139–148, 170–173. Schumacher, pp. 149, 208. Eliot (1989), p. 193. Schumacher, pp. 110, 160, 214–215, 223–224. For example, in the spoken introduction to "Ringing of Revolution" on Phil Ochs in Concert. Cunningham, Sis; Gordon Friesen (1968). "Interview with Phil Ochs". Broadside Magazine (91).; quoted in Schumacher, p. 178. Eliot (1989), p. 140. Schumacher, p. 182–184. Despite their disagreements, the Yippies used several Ochs songs in their media, in particular, the anti-war "I Ain't Marching Anymore". For example, see this Yippie-produced documentary Archived May 28, 2008, at the Wayback Machine. Brend, pp. 106–107. Schumacher, pp. 194–196. See also the documentary film Conventions: The Land Around Us at Vimeo Institute, Bathroom Readers' (October 2011). Uncle John's Unsinkable Bathroom Reader. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 9781607104605. "YIPPIE Party Pigasus the Immortal 1969 Inauguration Vietnam Pinback Button Lot". Collectors Weekly. Schumacher, pp. 201, 204. Schumacher, p. 211. Eliot (1989), pp. 175–188. Schumacher, pp. 222–223. Schumacher, p. 224. Schumacher, p. 227. Brend, p. 108. Schumacher, pp. 227–233. Schumacher, pp. 216–217, 233. Schumacher, p. 233. Eliot (1989), pp. 207, 213, 236. Schumacher, pp. 260, 265, 275, 301–302, 310–311. Schumacher, pp. 226, 235, 255. Schumacher, pp. 239–253. Schumacher, pp. 239–253. Schumacher, p. 255. Eliot, p. 216. The "Spiro" lyrics can be heard in this clip on YouTube from the 1971 "Free John Sinclair" rally. The "President" lyrics can be heard in the 1974 single release. Schumacher, pp. 256–259. Schumacher, pp. 262–263. Schumacher, pp. 263–264, 269, 271. Schumacher, pp. 264–271. "Phil Ochs Biography". SonnyOchs.com. Retrieved April 17, 2009. Schumacher, pp. 279–285. "Chile court confirms Salvador Allende committed suicide". BBC News. September 12, 2012. Haberman, Clyde (November 18, 2018). "He Died Giving a Voice to Chile's Poor. A Quest for Justice Took Decades". The New York Times. Retrieved September 14, 2023. Schumacher, pp. 287–297. Schumacher, pp. 298–299. Schomp, Virginia (2002). The Vietnam War. Tarrytown, N.Y.: Benchmark Books. p. 78. ISBN 978-0-7614-1099-7. Schumacher, pp. 304–306. Schumacher, pp. 310–311. Schumacher, pp. 312–318 Schumacher, pp. 327–333. Schumacher, pp. 339–341. Schumacher, p. 341. Peller, Dave. "Phil Ochs' Last Recording". YouTube. Sloman, Larry. "Phil Ochs Last Recording - Tape II". YouTube. After Ochs's death, his sister found he had been lying about taking his medication. Schumacher, p. 349. Schumacher, pp. 344–352. Blair, p. 4. Eliot (1989), pp. 301–308. Schumacher, p. 355. Abzug, Bella (April 29, 1976). "Death of Phil Ochs". Congressional Record. 122 (10)., quoted in Schumacher, pp. 354–355. Christgau, Robert (April 19, 1976). "Phil Ochs 1940–1976". The Village Voice. Retrieved January 28, 2009. "The Pop Life". The New York Times. May 28, 1976. Kornfeld, Michael (April 6, 2016). "Remembering Phil Ochs on the 40th Anniversary of His Death". acousticmusicscene.com. Retrieved April 14, 2016. "Many of [Ochs'] songs became anthems for the anti-war movement during the turbulent 1960s, and his music continues to influence and inspire songwriters today – 40 years after his death" "Phil Ochs Mailing List". Web.csc.pdx.edu. Retrieved January 28, 2009. "Phil Ochs Yahoo! Group". Launch.groups.yahoo.com. Archived from the original on July 9, 2012. Retrieved January 28, 2009. "Phil Ochs on MySpace". Myspace.com. Retrieved March 18, 2015. "No More Songs". Nomoresongs.org. Archived from the original on March 7, 2018. Retrieved January 28, 2009. Examples include Marlatt, Jayne Stewart (1985). "There but for Fortune: A Critical Analysis of the Protest Rhetoric of Phil Ochs". California State University, Sacramento. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help), Niemi, Robert (Winter 1993). "JFK as Jesus: The Politics of Myth in Phil Ochs' 'Crucifixion'". Journal of American Culture. 16 (4): 35–40. doi:10.1111/j.1542-734X.1993.00035.x., and "Tribute to Phil Ochs". Big Bridge. 9. Archived from the original on August 21, 2008. Retrieved January 28, 2009. Ochs, Sonny. "History of Phil Ochs Song Nights". SonnyOchs.com. Retrieved October 5, 2010. "Getty Images Acquires the Michael Ochs Archives". February 27, 2007. Archived from the original on July 11, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2009. Cohen, David (December 4, 1997). "Phil Ochs: Pleasures of the Puzzle". Columbus Free Press. Retrieved January 28, 2009. Ochs, Phil (1968). Tape from California (LP). Phil Ochs. A&M. Ochs, Sonny. "Photo page". SonnyOchs.com. Retrieved April 23, 2009. "Alice Ochs Photography". Archived from the original on December 15, 2008. Retrieved January 28, 2009. "ALICE ELIZABETH OCHS Obituary". Marin Independent Journal. December 8, 2010. Retrieved January 20, 2011. Tackett, Travis (October 24, 2008). "Folk Alliance to honor Old Town School of Folk Music, Phil Ochs, Guy & Candie Carawan". BluegrassJournal.com. Archived from the original on February 19, 2012. Retrieved March 18, 2015. "Woody Guthrie Center to house artist Phil Ochs' work". Woody Guthrie Center. September 2014. Archived from the original on September 10, 2014. Retrieved September 9, 2014. Kozinn, Allan (September 5, 2014). "Phil Ochs Archives Go to Woody Guthrie Center". The New York Times. Retrieved September 9, 2014. Crandall, Alan (July 1998). "Scorched Earth". Perfect Sound Forever. Retrieved April 10, 2016. Healy, Barry (July 29, 1998). "What Phil Ochs Heard". Green Left Weekly. Retrieved April 10, 2016. Denselow, Robin (October 20, 2005). "Christy Moore, Burning Times". The Guardian. Retrieved April 10, 2016. Cohen (1999), pp. 273–294. Hornaday, Ann (April 30, 2010). "Movie Review: 'Soundtrack for a Revolution'". The Washington Post. Retrieved April 10, 2016. Eder, Bruce. "What's That I Hear?: The Songs of Phil Ochs". allmusic.com. Retrieved April 9, 2016. What's That I Hear?: The Songs of Phil Ochs (CD). Phil Ochs. Sliced Bread. 1998. Shimmer, Matt. "Poison Ochs: A Tribute to Phil Ochs". indieville.com. Retrieved April 8, 2016. "Learn: The Songs of Phil Ochs". allmusic.com. Retrieved January 28, 2009. J., David (2005). Learn: The Songs of Phil Ochs (CD). Kind Of Like Spitting. Hush. HSH052. Cohen (1999), p. 274. Greer, Evan. "Love Me, I'm a Liberal (2003)". Riot-Folk. Archived from the original on March 8, 2012. Retrieved March 18, 2015. Harvey, Ryan. "Cops of the World". Riot-Folk. Archived from the original on January 6, 2012. Retrieved March 18, 2015. Cohen (1999), p. 294. "Pearl Jam Tells Its 'Story' at VH1 Taping". Billboard. June 2, 2006. Retrieved April 10, 2016. Winters, Pamela (June 9, 2003). "Richard Thompson: Plunging the Knife in Deeper". Paste. Retrieved April 10, 2016. "New Jefferson Starship Album of Formative Folk Treasures: Jefferson's Tree of Liberty". Top40 Charts.com. August 8, 2008. Retrieved April 10, 2016. McDonough, Jimmy (2002). Shakey: Neil Young's Biography (Hardback ed.). Random House Canada. p. 137. ISBN 0-679-30940-3. Retrieved October 12, 2022. Duffy, Thom (September 23, 2013). "Farm Aid 2013: Pete Seeger Sings Out, Neil Young Speaks Up and Jack Johnson Cows Around". Billboard. Retrieved April 10, 2016. Neil Young – Changes (Live at Farm Aid 2013) on YouTube Chinen, Nate (January 8, 2014). "Familiar Yet Distant, With Songs and an Edge". The New York Times. Retrieved April 10, 2016. Wilonsky, Robert (April 18, 2014). "Neil Young gave his 'Heart' and 'Soul' Thursday, and some folks just gave him a hard time". The Dallas Morning News. Archived from the original on May 3, 2016. Retrieved April 10, 2016. Greene, Andy (April 18, 2014). "Neil Young's New Covers Album Available Right Now: Surprise!". Rolling Stone. Archived from the original on March 16, 2018. Retrieved April 10, 2016. Gerstenzang, Peter (August 4, 2016). "Richard Barone Breathes New Life Into the Golden Age of Village Folk". New York Observer. Retrieved July 4, 2018. Dyroff, Denny (June 17, 2017). "Barone Dives Into the Soul of 60's Village Artists". The Unionville Times. Retrieved July 4, 2018. "Richard Barone Concert Setlist at Mexicali Live, Teaneck on July 13, 2017". setlist.fm. Retrieved July 12, 2018. Ainscoe, Mike (January 16, 2020). "Martyn Joseph – Days Of Decision, A Tribute To Phil Ochs: Album Review". At The Barrier. Retrieved November 19, 2022. Cohen (1999), p. 296. Billy Bragg - The Internationale Album Reviews, Songs & More | AllMusic, retrieved June 3, 2023 Bragg, Billy. "I Dreamed I Saw Phil Ochs Last Night". BillyBragg.co.uk. Archived from the original on December 4, 2011. Retrieved January 20, 2012. Cooper, Peter; Todd Snider. "Thin Wild Mercury". Peter Cooper – The Official Site. Retrieved March 18, 2015. Cohen (1999), pp. 295–297. Swihart, Stanton. "Useful Music". allmusic.com. Retrieved February 1, 2009. Schnee, Stephen SPAZ. "Long Pig". allmusic.com. Retrieved February 1, 2009. Woodstra, Chris. "It Happened One Night". allmusic.com. Retrieved February 1, 2009. "The Popdose Guide to Nanci Griffith". Popdose. January 8, 2008. Retrieved April 9, 2018. "Broadside Balladeer". Vic Sadot Music. September 23, 2011. Archived from the original on May 24, 2014. Retrieved April 4, 2012. Cook, Stephen. "Skag Heaven". allmusic.com. Retrieved February 1, 2009. Hesitation Wounds, "P. Ochs (The Death of a Rebel)." Retrieved August 17, 2022. https://secretvoice.bandcamp.com/album/hesitation-wounds "Hear a New Song from Hardcore Supergroup, Hesitation Wounds". www.vice.com. March 23, 2016. Retrieved August 17, 2022. "In the Red". allmusic.com. Retrieved February 1, 2009. "A Tribute to Phil Ochs". Mother's Musical Bakery. Archived from the original on May 27, 2010. McPherson, James Alan (2003). "Foreword". In Breece D'J Pancake (ed.). The Stories of Breece D'J Pancake. Boston: Back Bay. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-316-71597-3. Penn, Sean (1986). A Toast to Those Who Are Gone (CD). Phil Ochs. Rhino. Kelly, Richard T. (2006). Sean Penn: His Life and Times. New York: Canongate U.S. p. xvii. ISBN 978-1-84195-739-5. Ochs, Meegan Lee (1997). "Foreword". Farewells & Fantasies (CD). Phil Ochs. Elektra. p. 3. R2 73518. Kreps, Daniel (February 6, 2009). "Sean Penn: The Story Behind the Story". Rolling Stone. Archived from the original on November 16, 2011. Retrieved April 4, 2012. Carroll, Jim (1978). The Basketball Diaries. New York: Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0-14-024999-6. Dolan, Jon (June 9, 1999). "Entre Nous". City Pages. Archived from the original on April 12, 2009. Retrieved January 26, 2009. Lane, Zack (June 20, 2002). "Woosters Stories Offer Cure for All Things Depressing". Daily Nebraskan. Retrieved March 18, 2015. King, Stephen (1988). The Tommyknockers. New York: Signet. p. 80. ISBN 978-0-451-15660-0. King, Stephen (2001). Hearts in Atlantis. New York: Pocket Books. pp. 397–398, 401, 405, 407, 460, 511, 514, 516. ISBN 978-0-671-02424-6. Furst, Joshua (2019). Revolutionaries. New York: Penguin Random House. ISBN 9780307271143 "David Bowie's tribute to Bob Dylan on one of his final songs". February 3, 2022. Maslin, Janet (February 16, 1984). "Film: Phil Ochs, A Short Biography". The New York Times. Retrieved May 17, 2010. "Phil Ochs: There But for Fortune". Retrieved May 17, 2010. Baker, Bob (December 26, 2010). "Tracing the Arc of a Tragic Folk Singer". The New York Times. Retrieved December 26, 2010. Bell, Mark (September 1, 2010). "2010 Woodstock Film Festival Announces Lineup". Film Threat. Archived from the original on September 4, 2010. Retrieved September 1, 2010. "First Run Features: PHIL OCHS". First Run Features. Retrieved January 24, 2011. Rooney, David (January 2, 2011). "Phil Ochs: There But for Fortune – Film Review". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved January 24, 2011. Vozick-Levinson, Simon (December 10, 2010). "'Phil Ochs: There But for Fortune,' a great documentary about an underappreciated folk singer". Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved January 24, 2011. Burger, David (December 21, 2011). ""American Masters" to feature Phil Ochs and Cab Calloway in 2012". The Salt Lake Tribune. Retrieved January 20, 2012. "Phil Ochs: But There For Fortune – Watch the Full Documentary". PBS. January 24, 2012. Retrieved July 19, 2013. "Phil Solomon Visits San Andreas and Escapes, Not Unscathed". "The Chicago 8". IMDb. Farewells & Fantasies (CD). Phil Ochs. Elektra. 1997. p. 35. R2 73518. "What Is AFTRA?". American Federation of Television and Radio Artists. Archived from the original on May 28, 2007. Retrieved February 4, 2009. Ochs (1978), passim. General bibliography Blair, Eric (2007). Folk Singer for the FBI: The Phil Ochs FBI File. Morrisville, North Carolina: Lulu Press. Brend, Mark (2001). American Troubadours: Groundbreaking Singer-Songwriters of the 60s. San Francisco: Backbeat Books. ISBN 978-0-87930-641-0. Cohen, David (1999). Phil Ochs: A Bio-Bibliography. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-313-31029-4. Eliot, Marc (1979). Death of A Rebel: Starring Phil Ochs and a Small Circle of Friends. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press. ISBN 978-0-385-13610-5. Eliot, Marc (1989) [1979]. Death of a Rebel: A Biography of Phil Ochs. New York: Franklin Watts. ISBN 978-0-531-15111-2. Ochs, Phil (1964). Songs of Phil Ochs. New York: Appleseed Music. OCLC 41480512. Ochs, Phil (1968). The War Is Over. New York: Collier Books. OCLC 1384159. Ochs, Phil (1978). The Complete Phil Ochs. Hollywood, Calif.: Almo Publications. ISBN 978-0-89705-010-4. Schumacher, Michael (2018) [1996]. There But for Fortune: The Life of Phil Ochs. New York/Minneapolis: Hyperion/Univ of Minnesota Press. ISBN 978-1-5179-0354-1. Stanton, Scott (2003). The Tombstone Tourist: Musicians. New York: Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-0-7434-6330-0. Thomas Alan Waits (born December 7, 1949) is an American musician, composer, songwriter, and actor. His lyrics often focus on the underbelly of society and are delivered in his trademark deep, gravelly voice. He began in the folk scene during the 1970s, but his music since the 1980s has reflected the influence of such diverse genres as rock, country, Delta blues, opera, vaudeville, cabaret, funk, hip hop and experimental techniques verging on industrial music.[1] Per The Wall Street Journal, Waits “has composed a body of work that’s at least comparable to any songwriter’s in pop today. A keen, sensitive and sympathetic chronicler of the adrift and downtrodden, Mr. Waits creates three-dimensional characters who, even in their confusion and despair, are capable of insight and startling points of view. Their stories are accompanied by music that’s unlike any other in pop history.”[2] Waits was born and raised in a middle-class family in Pomona, California. Inspired by the work of Bob Dylan and the Beat Generation, he began singing on the San Diego folk circuit. He relocated to Los Angeles in 1972, where he worked as a songwriter before signing a recording contract with Asylum Records. His first albums were the jazzy Closing Time (1973), The Heart of Saturday Night (1974) and Nighthawks at the Diner (1975), which reflected his lyrical interest in poverty, criminality and nightlife. He repeatedly toured the United States, Europe and Japan, and found greater critical and commercial success with Small Change (1976), Blue Valentine (1978) and Heartattack