Yes, as part of the German Resistance, though AFAIK wasn't actively involved in the actual assassination attempt. He was linked to the Resistance through Ludwig Beck and Co, who were supposed to take over the government after Hitler had been killed. After the failed attempt Hitler purged anyone who was in any way even remotely linked to the Resistance and Planck was executed as well.
History questions not worth their own thread II
- Thread starter Plotinus
- Start date
- Status
Yes, as part of the German Resistance, though AFAIK wasn't actively involved in the actual assassination attempt. He was linked to the Resistance through Ludwig Beck and Co, who were supposed to take over the government after Hitler had been killed. After the failed attempt Hitler purged anyone who was in any way even remotely linked to the Resistance and Planck was executed as well.
TheBladeRoden
Deity
How come when Europeans came to the Americas they had diseases that wiped out a bunch of the natives, but the natives didn't have any diseases that wiped out a bunch of the settlers? Just luck?
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Not really. It had to do with domestic animals. Small Pox, for example, comes from Cows, iirc. Peoples from Eurasia were the first to domesticate animals and domesticated the greatest varieties of animals (that in itself is a long story, but it's possible that the Native Americans killed off all domesticatable large animals in North and South America with the exception of the Llama). Then, because of overcrowding due to agriculture, the diseases spread rapidly throughout Eurasia.
Basically, the proximity between man and animals in the old world led to an easy transfer of diseases and, through natural selection, people began to get some immunities to them. The new world never got that chance due to a late start on agriculture (less crowding) and only isolated cases of domestication (Turkey, Guinea Pig, Llama, am I forgetting any?). Therefore, they were easy victims to Europeans who spread them.
Basically, the proximity between man and animals in the old world led to an easy transfer of diseases and, through natural selection, people began to get some immunities to them. The new world never got that chance due to a late start on agriculture (less crowding) and only isolated cases of domestication (Turkey, Guinea Pig, Llama, am I forgetting any?). Therefore, they were easy victims to Europeans who spread them.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
The natives were kind enough to give the Europeans syphilis. I seem to think Dengue Fever is native to the Americas, but I may be wrong.
Fabian socialism definitely isn't communism, and I'm assuming you meant the Indian economy was trying to be a command economy. (Economically speaking "command economy" ofcourse doesn't work, simply because it ignores demand - as the Eastern European and Chinese experiments have shown historically; Eastern Europe collapsed and China 'voluntarily' allowed free market economy.) And I already mentioned the extent of commuist influence on independent India, I believe.
AFAIK not being able to produce children is/was a valid pretext to annull a marriage, as the Catholic church deemed (deems?) the repoductive function to be an essential part of marriage. However, since marriage is a sacred institution, dispensation is still necessary. In the case of royalty I think this would indeed be given by the pope (or denied in the case of Henry VIII of England), not by a hierarchically lower situated priest, like a cardinal or bishop. So, applying for divorce in the case of a pope election would be a case of extremely bad timing, IMHO.
Ok thanks. In my alternate history timeline the King of Jerusalem is wedded to the sister of the King of Cyprus, but the Cypriots and their allies are real buddy-buddy with the Pope so he gets the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem to grant him a divorce in the middle of this four year Papal conclave, which results in a war between the Cypriots, Antioch, and Charles of Anjou against Jerusalem.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
This deserves its own thread as an argument, so I will content myself with saying merely that you are wrong.
Command economy does not ignore demand, it simply lacks ability to adequately react to it.
Final result is the same, however.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
It bears no lacking that a corporation does not also have. What command economies have lacked, like bad corporations, is adequate management, and the leadership to know when and how to let management do what it needs to to make the firm function.
Except that market economy is not just one corporation, but essentially infinite number of corporations. Some of them are guaranteed to make right decisions. The process is also self-correcting, as corporations which fail to react to demand fail, while others replace them.
It does not obviously work like this with governments (well, it does, but the process is much more lengthy and painful).
Blaming everything on "poor management" is tried excuse of socialists, but in reality you'd need superhumans with powers of divination in government, if you want them to run a command economy and react remotely as well to demands of populace as market economies do.
It is like selling that if you found some bright enough people, they could run the whole evolution and preserve ecological balance while they are at it - without this natural selection thing...
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
The problem stems from socialists thinking essentially as you just said: treating it as one giant corporation instead of myriad smaller ones. Just as capitalists have necessarily yielded power to their corporate technostructure, so should the socialists have yielded power to theirs.
If you go into it expecting all decisions to be made at the top, then yes. But mature corporations do not function this way, and Soviet firms were never allowed to fully "mature" with regards to the origins of power within themselves.
But the runners of Western corporations are not geniuses, they are normal individuals with areas of specialization that compliment one another to allow complex decisions to be made. It seems all to common to assume that Western and socialist firms operated differently, when in fact they were structured in a nearly-identical manner. I hinted before at the parallel between Soviet firms and certain underperforming Western firms: to use Ford Motor Co. as an example, Henry Ford insisted on maintaining absolute control over all aspects of his corporation, right up to his death. He fought tooth and nail against the turning over of any meaningful decision-making to committes, and his company suffered for it. Upon his death, the technostructure reclaimed its decision-making power, and the company rebounded. Likewise, the Soviet firm was essentially denied the level of decision-making that only committees of specialists can make adequately, and so it suffered in kind, just like FMC did. It is, therefore, appropriate to assume that if the power in Soviet firms were deferred to the technostructure, then they would have performed much better, since this is the trend seen in mature Western corporations. But that would mean overturning the doctrine that the state and party, who rules on behalf the people and claims its Command Economy prerogative from such, which would have essentially destroyed the last vestige of socialism, actual soviets only appearing intermittently in Comintern history.
None of this applies, however, to what would normally be a small, private business, like a local restaurant, general store, supermarket, or farm, since those operate outside this paradigm, and all of which were also included (to my knowledge) in socialist economic planning.
And now we're doing just what I was hoping we wouldn't.
...in which case it would have stopped being "command economy"...
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
Yes. Which should begin to hint at how the Soviet system was a convergence of command economies and socialist systems and which was actually the problem.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
I've got an offbeat question.
Does anyone know of any German Language Newspapers printed in the United States between 1875 and 1878, specifically local papers in the coal region of Pennsylvania?
Does anyone know of any German Language Newspapers printed in the United States between 1875 and 1878, specifically local papers in the coal region of Pennsylvania?
LightSpectra
me autem minui
FDR. I can't find the source for the quote, but feel free to not take my word for it; after viewing a presentation by John Maynard Keynes about the New Deal, Roosevelt said something along the lines of "this man knows nothing of politics, does he?" He also said to his economic adviser Leon Henderson, "Are you laboring under the impression that I read these memoranda of yours?"
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
I'm going to guess and say Bill Clinton after campaigning against Ross Perot twice.
Shekwan
Kim Chi Quaffing Celt
So I'm reading an article by Moravscik about the often alleged democratic deficit in the European Union, and he says there isn't one. However he says that the ECB is too independent and that;
What is he referring to? Its probably quite obvious but I am an historical innocent so there you go.
What is he referring to? Its probably quite obvious but I am an historical innocent so there you go.
- Status
Similar threads
