Suggested Discussion Outline

[johnkarls]

.

The following outline is respectfully suggested –


**********************
A. Comments About Specific Chapters of Victor Davis Hanson’s “The End of Everything” and Niall Ferguson’s “Law” Regarding Interest on the National Debt Exceeding Defense Spending – 60 minutes

Our tradition is to devote the first portion of each monthly meeting to going through the focus book, chapter by chapter, to invite important comments that are specific to a particular chapter. After all, each participant (except, perhaps, “first timers”) have taken the time to read the focus book and her/his opportunity to opine on anything in the focus book should NOT be denied.

HOWEVER, our total meeting time of 120 minutes should prove a SEVERE constraint, so please be sure your comments really are important.


Introduction – How Civilizations Disappear

Chapter 1 – Hope, Danger’s Comforter: The Obliteration of Classical Thebes (December 335 BC)

Chapter 2 – The Wages of Vengeance: The Destruction of Carthage and Punic Civilization in Africa (149-146 BC)

Chapter 3 – Deadly Delusions: The Fall of Constantinople and the End of the Byzantines (Spring 1453)

Chapter 4 – Imperial Hubris: The Annihilation of the Aztec Empire (Summer 1521)

Epilogue – How the Unimaginable Becomes the Inevitable

Niall Ferguson’s “Law” Regarding Interest on National Debt Exceeding Defense Spending – please see viewtopic.php?f=811&t=2532&sid=a1aa05b3 ... f95cbdd1ff.


**********************
B. Further Discussion – 30 minutes

A special discussion is respectfully suggested because Yours Truly said in Q&A-1 and Q&A-12 of the Short Quiz that –

(1) our author, Victor Davis Hanson, is IMHO widely recognized as the foremost MILITARY historian in the nation, if not the world, and

(2) Niall Ferguson is IMHO widely recognized as the foremost ECONOMICS historian in the nation, if not the world.

HOPEFULLY, NOBODY WAS INTIMIDATED AND, INSTEAD, EVERYONE READ THE MATERIALS WITH ONE OF OUR TYPICALLY-INQUIRING MINDS.

For example, to stimulate your critical-thought process, the following questions are respectfully suggested re the first chapter of “The End of Everything” re Classical Thebes –

*****
A-1 – Alexander the Great for 3 days before attacking Thebes (p. 18) offered Thebes forgiveness if the firebrands would just turn over the two “ring leaders” – but did 21-year-old Alexander have a reputation for honest dealing??? And BTW was there readily available the equivalent of a modern-day United Nations Peace-Keeping Force to police the deal???

A-2 – Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to suppose that if the Thebans were stupid enough to turn over their two top leaders to Alexander, that Alexander would have seized the even-greater military advantage??? After all, couldn’t the Thebans have countered that they would be willing to forgive Alexander’s Macedonians if they would turn over Alexander and his right-hand man, and then presumably have put the Macedonians to rout without their top two leaders???

A-3 – Re whether Alexander was trustworthy, didn’t Victor Davis Hanson report that Alexander approved of a Theban female aristocrat killing one of Alexander’s top generals after the general had raped her??? In considering your answer, weren’t “rape and pillage” the traditional “spoils of war” that motivated ancient (and not-so-ancient) armies???

A-4 - BTW, looking ahead to Chapter 2 (The Destruction of Carthage), isn't Victor Davis Hanson being inconsistent with his criticism of the Thebans for not acceding to Alexander's demands, by condemning Carthage for acceding to Roman demands???

*****
B-1 – Since most armies throughout history “lived off the land,” how egregious do you think Alexander’s Macedonians might have been in invading Greece in general and Theban lands in particular???

B-2 – If you do not have a lot of background re armies “living off the land,” please consider Tchaikovsky’s famous “1812 Overture” which commemorates Russia’s 1812 defeat of Napoleon at Moscow which featured –

• Napoleon’s army stealing whatever food and drink (and sex) it needed from German***/Polish***/Russian peasants on its way to Moscow,
• Napoleon famously saying when he realized that the Muscovites had retreated to their country homes – “An abandoned city is not a supplied city” (i.e., a city re which an occupying army could act as a parasite on its supplies), and
• Upon a virtually-immediate head-long retreat from the abandoned Moscow, Napoleon’s army disastrously re-traced its invasion route WHICH HAD ALREADY BEEN DEVASTATED!!!

*****
Footnote *** - modern-day Germany and Poland were, at the time the "French Hitler" (i.e., Napoleon) ravaged a narrow path through them on his way to Moscow, part of the Holy Roman Empire.

BTW, American Historians who want to pretend that America did NOT fight the Holy Roman Empire during World War I (by calling it, instead, the Habsburg Empire or the Austro-Hungarian Empire), hang their hats on an alleged statement of Napoleon as his army ravaged a narrow path through the Holy Roman Empire on its way to Moscow that the Holy Roman Empire no longer existed. What those American Historians find so embarrassing is that World War I began with a Bosnian Serb assassinating Archduke Ferdinand, the Heir Apparent (i.e., the equivalent of our Vice President) of the Holy Roman Empire, and when the Holy Roman Emperor decided to lean on Bosnia to surrender the assassin, The Russian Czar declared war on the Holy Roman Empire. And as they say "the rest is history" because England and France were allies of Russia and honored their obligations.

So a few additional questions to test your understanding of Victor Davis Hanson’s “The End of Everything” by applying his principles to the claim by Napoleon that he had “destroyed” The Holy Roman Empire -

(1) At the time of Napoleon’s 1812 claim, did The Holy Roman Empire stretch in a north-south direction all the way from The North Sea to The Mediterranean Sea???

(2) Accordingly, why did Napoleon have the gall to claim he had “destroyed” The Holy Roman Empire by ravaging a narrow path through The HRE which was so huge???

(3) Especially when his army beat a hasty, headlong retreat along the same narrow path ONLY A FEW WEEKS AFTER ITS INVASION???

(4) How does Victor Davis Hanson’s definition of “destroyed” differ from Napoleon’s???

(5) Accordingly, would Victor Davis Hanson agree with his fellow American historians who are/were so desperate to convince the American public that they were not fighting The Holy Roman Empire during World War I???

(6) BTW, do some of the Wikipedia articles (we have always recognized Wikipedia articles as only as good, or bad, as their footnotes) falsely claim that the title of “Holy Roman Emperor” was bestowed by the Pope???

(7) Isn’t, instead, it true that The Holy Roman Empire throughout its history was a group of kingdoms/fiefdoms/whatevers that, upon the death of an HRE Emperor, elected a new one – following which some dissenting HRE components might leave the HRE and other kingdoms/whatevers might join???

(8) Indeed, wasn’t this a point re which Yours Truly teased his wife who was the Co-Author of the America’s best-selling high-school world history textbook (McGraw Hill with National Geographic Illustrations) vis-à-vis which Yours Truly, in addition to his day job as an attorney, read ANNUALLY 12-15 thick biographies and historical tomes to unearth overlooked nuggets for possible inclusion in the next edition of which there were six during our 33 years of marriage??? [And since “old dogs don’t learn new tricks” and Yours Truly retired shortly after “the gavel went down” 23 years ago affording more reading time, the total of bios/tomes is now well over 1,500.]

(9) Was the teasing referenced in Q-8 based in Yours Truly’s claim that the Holy Roman Empire was a “democracy” because each Holy Roman Emperor was elected by the HRE components with some dissenting components leaving and outside components joining??? And did my wife each time “spit fire” that an entity is NOT a “democracy” just because the kingdoms/fiefdoms/whatevers vote on an Emperor to govern them – that a true “democracy” means the populace gets to vote??? But did that prevent Yours Truly from persisting on this point because a "democracy" such as the United Nations can exist on an organizational level even though many of its component countries are not democracies???

(10) And for extra credit, do you think Napoleon made his fatuous claim about “destroying” the HRE as a publicity stunt because of Marie “Let Them Eat Cake” Antoinnette???

(11) After all, didn’t Napoleon come to power in the wake of the French Revolution???

(12) And wasn’t a rallying cry of the French Revolution that Queen Marie Antoinette (who was guillotined 10/16/1793 as was her husband, King Louis XVI, earlier on 1/21/1793), THAT WHEN INFORMED THAT THE FRENCH POPULATION HAD NO BREAD TO EAT, IMPERIOUSLY SAID “LET THEM EAT CAKE”???

(13) BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, wasn’t French Queen Marie Antoinette a daughter of HRE Empress Maria Theresa and HRE Emperor Francis I???

(14) BTW, wasn’t this a common practice of HRE Emperors to marry their daughters to important leaders, both within and outside the HRE???

(15) Also BTW, the intro to these questions mentioned that World War I was caused by the assassination by a Bosnian Serb of the Archduke Ferdinand, “heir apparent to the Holy Roman Empire” – so how does this square with each HRE Emperor being elected???

[Hint – Archduke Ferdinand was always described as “heir apparent” in the sense that he was most likely to be elected upon the death of the-then Holy Roman Emperor.]


**********************
C. Yet Further Discussion – 30 minutes

The Suggested Answers to the following questions of this month’s Second Short Quiz were “What Do You Think??? Let’s Discuss!!!”

[Please see the Suggested Answers at viewtopic.php?f=812&t=2534&sid=a1aa05b3 ... f95cbdd1ff.]

Q&A-3
Q&A-5
Q&A-6
Q&A-16
Q&A-17


**********************
D. Possible Public-Policy Campaigns Directed At Decision Makers – Flexible minutes, if needed, from Sections B and C

*****
From Yours Truly – None

*****
Additional Campaigns???

If anyone has any additional proposals, please post them in this “Discussion Outline” section of our website - hopefully, 24 hours in advance so that participants can give them proper consideration.

THOUGH, OF COURSE, CAMPAIGNS THAT ARE CONCEIVED SPONTANEOUSLY DURING A MEETING ARE NOT PROHIBITED.