Ted Goes To Korea

April 30, 1952. Ted Williams' last game before rejoining the Marine Corps.  In his final at bat hits a two run homer in bottom of the 7th to win the game.  Williams missed the 1943, 1944 and 1945 seasons while serving as a Marine pilot during WW2, first learning to fly and then serving as a pilot instructor.

Upon reentering the service in 1952, Williams was trained as a jet fighter pilot and sent to Korea where he served as wingman for John Glenn, flying 37 combat missions.  On February 19, 1953, after his F9 Panther Jet was damaged by enemy anti-aircraft fire, Ted managed to return to his airfield and crash landed, escaping without injury.

Glenn later recounted:

“(During his crash) he was on fire and had to belly land the plane back in. He slid it in on the belly. It came up the runway about 1,500 feet before he was able to jump out and run off the wingtip.

“Much as I appreciate baseball, Ted to me will always be a Marine fighter pilot.”

Williams was discharged on July 28, 1953.  In his first appearance with the Red Sox on August 6 he popped out as a pinch hitter.  Three days in his second at bat, also as a pinch hitter, Ted hit a home run to deep right field.  In 37 games that season, Williams would hit .407. 

Ted Williams missed most of five seasons due to military service during his prime years, ages 24 through 34.  His first full season back in 1954 he was 35 years old.  Over the next four years he batted .345, .356., .345 and .388. and hit a home run in his last at bat in 1960.

Risk

I spent my working career involved with risk assessment, relative risk and risk cost/benefit matters.  Covid-19 presents all of those issues.  Here's an example.

The FDA recently put a temporary hold on the J&J vaccine due to several reports of serious blood clots in the brain.  According to news reports this was about a 1 in a million occurrence or about once in every million vaccinations.

When trying to assess my own personal risk to covid I made my own calculations.  Maricopa County, where I live, has been reporting its covid data daily and separately reporting hospitalization and mortality data for those in long-term care (LTC).  Maricopa also reports data on these metrics for those 65+, though it provides no further breakdown of subcategories above that age.  Because Maricopa has a population of 4.5 million (which would make it the 26th largest state) its data is statistically significant.

Being 70 places me in a higher risk category though I am in relatively good health while having some other controlled risk factors.

To calculate my risk I did several things:

Made a simplifying assumption that all the LTC data represents those 65+.  It actually does not though the vast majority of those in LTC are 65 and up.  In any event, this assumption probably leads to slightly understating my risk once the assessment is complete.

Maricopa data reveals that for those 65+, and not in LTC, the mortality rate if one contracts covid is 9% and the hospitalization rate 25%.

Next is a little more simplifying.  Since Maricopa does not report mortality and hospitalization for 65-74, 75-84 and 85+ unlike some jurisdictions, and because mortality and hospitalization rates increase significantly for each of these subcategories, I looked at available data from other states and medical research reports.

Doing so, I concluded that my mortality risk in the event of contracting covid was about 3% or 30,000 in a million and that of hospitalization about 9% or 90,000 in a million.  Remember, this compares to 0.001% or 1 in a million risk of a blood clot from J&J.  In other words, my mortality risk if I were to get covid while being unvaccinated is 30,000 times higher than of getting a blood clot from J&J.

Based upon that I concluded that it was reasonable for me to take steps in minimize exposure and to get vaccinated (which I have been) in order to avoid contracting covid since a 3% chance of dying and 9% of ending up in a hospital seemed significant to me.  

It also means that there would have to be a very large potential risk attached to a vaccination to have prompted me to decline the vaccine.  To date, I've seen nothing anywhere near such a risk from vaccine side effects.

Having been vaccinated does not make me invulnerable.  However, my risk factors are greatly reduced.  Post-vaccination my risk of contracting covid from an interaction that pre-vaccination would have led to my infection has now been reduced more than 95%.  Further if I were to get covid my risk of hospitalization has decreased by 90% and that of dying by more than 95%.  I sure hope my calculations are correct!

The bottom line is that having been vaccinated I am willing to put myself in more situations where I might have a potential exposure because the likelihood of infection is very small and the likelihood of a bad outcome even smaller.  The benefit to me of more interaction with people now outweighs the risk of contracting the disease.

This Really Is Your Future

 I've been paying closer attention to events in China over the past year, primarily because of the convergence between what is happening there with events in the United States - see, for instance Biden And Xi Agree About America; Reading For Pleasure; The New Leninists; Destroy The Four Olds; and the recent remark of progressive Georgetown Law School professor Lama Abu Odeh about events at that formerly respected institution; "If this echoes a Maoist take-over, that’s because it is. It passes the sniff test".

It's a neck and neck race between China and the U.S. as to which will be first to institute a social credit test for its citizens and which will prove the more successful in quashing dissent.

Surviving will require mental dexterity, situational flexibility, and an ability to manage language, all of which struck me reading an article today from Radio Television Hong Kong, the public broadcasting service in that formerly semi-independent territory.  It reports an interview with Elsie Leung, former justice secretary of Hong Kong.  Follow the twists and turns:

Calls for an end to one-party rule in China could be illegal – or they might not be – but in any case there is no one-party rule, a former justice secretary told Hongkongers on Wednesday.

She then stressed that China has a multi-party system, which is led by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). At the same time, the CCP is the ruling party, and this is set out in the constitution, she said.

People should respect the constitution, and they should not say anything that challenges it, she added.  

Watch and learn, folks.  You'll need to know how to toe the line even though the line will be constantly moving.  Remember, once you take the knee you will never be allowed to stand on your own two feet again.

For Michael Collins

I'm left behind when I should have been there
Walking with you

Michael Collins, one of the three Apollo 11 astronauts, has passed at the age of 90.  Collins remained alone in the Apollo Command Module for 21 hours while Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin descended and returned from the lunar surface in the Lunar Exploration Module (L.E.M.).  Of that time the mission log reads, "Not since Adam has any human known such solitude as Mike Collins".   Buzz Aldrin is now the lone mission survivor.

(Armstrong, Collins, Aldrin)

 

The lyrics are from For Michael Collins, Jeffrey and Me by Jethro Tull. 

First Time

First appearance by Steven Wright, one of my favorite comedians in the 80s, on the Tonight Show on August 6, 1982.  I remember watching this.  Johnny Carson provided such a great platform for young comedians and if, after doing your bit, you got invited to actually sit in the chair next to Johnny, as Steven did, it was a really big deal.

Eddie, Allie & Vic

I am not a Yankees fan, yet it impossible not to be impressed by their record of success, peaking in the five seasons from 1949 through 1953 when the Bronx team won five AL pennants and five World Series, a stretch never matched before or after.

That team was anchored by three remarkable starting pitchers, none of them a member of the Hall of Fame, Allie Reynolds (182-107), Eddie Lopat (166-112) and Vic Raschi (132-66).  Reynolds and Raschi were noted for their fastballs, with Vic's nickname, The Springfield Rifle, reflecting this skill (Vic was born in Springfield, MA, home of the famous government arsenal).  Allie's nickname was Superchief, born in Oklahoma and 3/16 Creek Indian.  Lopat was known as The Junkman for his variety of offspeed deliveries (Ted Williams called him one of the five toughest pitchers he ever faced; "Lopat had as fine a collection of junk as you'll ever see.").

All three came to the Yankees (Reynolds and Lopat via trade) as experienced and mature, Reynolds and Lopat were 30, Raschi 27.  Each pitched eight seasons with the squad, Raschi (1946-53), Reynolds (1947-54) and Lopat (1948-55) and for six seasons they formed the core of the team's rotation.

I took a closer look at the five World Champion seasons.  During those years, the threesome went 255-117 and breaking down their record compared to the rest of the Yankee staff reveals they were substantially better than the others each season.

1949     53-26   .671       44-31   .587

1950     55-28   .663       43-28   .606

1951     59-27   .687       39-29   .574

1952     46-19   .708       49-40   .551

1953     42-17   .712       57-35   .620

The trio also won 15 of the 20 World Series victories by the Yankees, and their ERA's show it was not just because of the offense - Lopat at 2.60, Reynolds 2.79 and Raschi 2.24.

Manager Casey Stengel was known for not having a regular rotation and he certainly did not overwork the three starters; Reynolds and Lopat never pitched as many as 250 innings a year and the most starts either had was 32.  Raschi worked a bit harder, three times exceeding 250 innings and starting 37 times one year and 34 another.

In 1949 and 1950 the fourth starter was Tommy Byrnes who started 61 games but no other Yankee started more than 12 in either year.

In 1951 and 1952 no one started more than 16 games except Lopat, Reynolds, and Raschi.

In their final year together Whitey Ford was fourth starter (30) and Johnny Sain made 19 starts.

There were also three Yankee regular starting position players throughout those five seasons, Yogi Berra, Phil Rizzuto, and Hank Bauer.

During their playing days, Lopat, Reynolds, Raschi and their wives became close friends, a friendship they maintained over the decades.  All three passed away between 1988 and 1994.

Thinking Big Thoughts

 Yeah, that's me.

Perfect Lyric

A perfect lyric should create images in your mind and convey a meaningful sentiment.  This is the lyric for Green River, a hit for Creedence Clearwater Revival in 1969.  Composed by lead guitarist and vocalist John Fogarty.  The first two verses create the vivid images (the fact my childhood did not align completely makes no difference if the lyric is right) and the final verse is both touching, comforting and a forewarning of the travails of adulthood.

Well, take me back down where cool water flows
Let me remember things I love,
Stoppin' at the log where catfish bite,
Walkin' along the river road at night,
Barefoot girls dancin' in the moonlight.

I can hear the bullfrog callin' me.
Wonder if my rope's still hangin' to the tree.
Love to kick my feet 'way down the shallow water.
Shoefly, dragonfly, get back t'your mother.
Pick up a flat rock, skip it across Green River.

Up at Cody's camp I spent my days, oh,
With flat car riders and cross-tie walkers.
Old Cody, Junior took me over,
Said, "You're gonna find the world is smould'rin'.
And if you get lost come on home to Green River."

 

COVID + 13

I wouldn't call the past month in the U.S. a good one, but it has definitely been better as vaccines have kicked in and the death rate dropped.  Globally, it was a bad month as Europe and South America still are being hit hard while India is trying to cope with a terrible phase of the pandemic.

A Pandemic of Three Continents

Europe, North America and South America account for 20% of the world's population but 77% of Covid deaths to date.  The average mortality rate for the combined continents is about 1,400 per million with very little variation among them .  Africa and Asia, while 80% of the global population, are only 23% of deaths with an average mortality rate of 110 per million though, as mentioned above, India is now suffering greatly. 

As always, this is just a snapshot in time.  No one can predict when the pandemic will end globally or if countries relatively unaffected so far will be next in line.  During the Influenze Pandemic of 1918-19 the first two waves left Australia unaffected; the third, more than a year after the start of the pandemic took a terrible toll on that country.

Until recently, three large countries in South America had been spared the worst; Venezuela, Paraguay and Uruguay.  Venezuela still looks good but no one has any real idea what is going on in that country, and certainly no one trusts any claims by its government.  In Paraguay and Uruguay things have deteriorated recently.  Paraguay's death rate recently shot up to 782 but it is Uruguay that is most concerning.  A well-governed country of 3.5 million with a modern infrastructure and wedged between Argentina and Brazil, until mid-December Uruguay had a mortality rate of less than 50 and been considered a model for how a country could contain covid.  Today its rate stands at 620 and is rising quickly with more than 90% of the country's covid deaths occurring since the beginning of March.  It's a lesson for all of us.  There is so much we still do not understand about this disease and its spread.

The Toll

Reported below are all countries with population of more than one million which have reported death rates in excess of 1,000 per million.  

Only three countries (Latvia, Ecuador, and Lebanon) passed the 1,000 mark in the past month, but many of those already in the group saw double digit increases in deaths over the past 30 days.

As of last month, only one country (Czech Republic) had a death rate in excess of 2,000 or 0.2% of population.  As of today, there are eight countries, all in Europe, which have passed that grim milestone, and it is likely that at least one will exceed 0.3% by next month.

The list below shows the death rate per million, along with the % increase since last month.  New countries are in BOLD.

Europe

Hungary (2697/41%), Czech Republic (2684/16%), Bosnia & Herzogovinia (2501/38%), Bulgaria (2261/28%), North Macedonia (2206/31%), Slovakia (2079/25%), Belgium (2052/5%), Slovenia (2014/5%)

Italy (1960/12%), UK (1868/1%), Poland (1697/30%), Portugal (1667/1%), Spain (1657/6%), Croatia (1650/17%), France (1562/10%), Lithuania (1419/10%), Romania (1408/21%), Moldova (1408/24%), Sweden (1368/5%), Switzerland (1212/3%), Latvia (1117), Austria (1108/10%)

Unofficially, Russia has exceeded 1,500.

North America 

USA (1757/5%), Mexico (1643/8%), Panama (1419/2%)

South America

Brazil (1795/30%), Peru (1758/16%), Colombia (1365/13%), Argentina (1331/11%), Chile (1326/15%), Bolivia (1079/5%), Ecuador (1006)

Africa

None

Unofficially, South Africa is probably above 1,500

Asia

Armenia (1337/18%), Lebanon (1038)

Seven countries are between 1,000 and 900; Georgia (999), Netherlands (990), Ireland (977), Germany (973), Ukraine (948), Greece (943), South Africa (901)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The dismissal and censoring of dissenting viewpoints by the media continues.

One of the techniques used in dismissing claims is the media to mischaracterize them.  Last year, when Senator Tom Cotton and this year when former CDC Director Redfield raised issues about the origin of Covid-19 it was dismissed as a crazy theory that China had deliberately developed and released the virus.  That is not what Cotton and Redfield claimed - they posited an accidental release from the Wuhan biological testing lab which is a very plausible hypothesis.  In fact, at this point I believe it the most likely hypothesis, though we will never know as the Chinese government has no interest in a legitimate investigation and, I suspect, any of the researchers who might know the answer are now permanently unavailable.

YouTube removed a discussion between Governor DeSantis and several experts on the value of masking for children because it contradicts what the CDC says.  However, what DeSantis and those experts said was also consistent with what European scientists and policy makers concluded about masking for children.  

I simply do not understand the strategy behind the administration's pronouncements on masking.  Why, if you are trying to get people vaccinated do you insist on telling them that doing so will not allow themselves to change their behavior?

I'm so old I began masking back when Fauci and the CDC told us we were fools to do so.  I'd read the literature and decided masks had some marginal protective value if, (1) they were not plain cloth, (2) you put them on and off very carefully, and (3) didn't shove them in your pocket when you took the mask off.  But it was clearly not the cure-all some people seem to think it is.  

And I did not mask outdoors, unless I was going to be in a very crowded situation which I tried to avoid in any case.  Again, I do not understand why someone walking outside by themselves would wear a mask.  We knew by late spring last year that outdoor exposure risk was tiny.  More recently I've read of cases in New Mexico and Oregon where high school runners collapsed because they were required to wear masks while running!!  That is insane.

The truth is I don't think even a lot of the masking crowd truly believed this about mask wearing outdoors.  Last May, when public health officials told us that if you were protesting or rioting in support of the right causes a magic Covid immunity shield would descend from the outstretched arms of the newly risen George Floyd, all credibility was lost on this issue.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Early in 2020 the White House started weekly Covid calls with all Governors in which medical, logistical and health experts participated.  During the Trump Administration 40 such calls were held, with 39 chaired by VP Pence and President Trump participating in eight.  The weekly calls have continued in the Biden Administration.  However, President Biden has not participated in any, and VP Harris showed up at one, staying for five minutes.  Governor Andrew Cuomo has taken over chairing the calls to the consternation of some governors.

A Note On Emissions

Today's Wall Street Journal carries an article stating that President Biden is expected to call for reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) by 50% as of 2030 from a 2005 baseline.  It was accompanied by a chart labeled "2018 CO2 Emissions" which shows the U.S. as contributing 15.3% of global GHGs while China accounted for 29.7%.

I suspect most Americans would overestimate our current contribution to GHG emissions and would be unfamiliar with the long-term trend.  The WSJ article notes, US emissions are already 21% lower than the 2005 baseline.  In 2000, the U.S. accounted for 24.2% of emissions while China was 12.9%.

But what are we talking about when we talk about emissions?  That's a subject most journalists and politicians don't understand.

What Counts?

There are three different ways to count what we refer to as Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

The first is CO2 emissions from fuel combustion, which is what the Journal chart portrays.  But this does not capture the full picture because, despite the widespread impression, CO2 emissions from fuel combustion are not equivalent to GHG emissions.

There is a second category of greenhouse gases unconnected (with one exception) to fossil fuel consumption and CO2.  These substances contribute to warming because of their chemical and physical properties.  These are:

Methane: largest sources production and transmission of fossil fuels (32%) and livestock (28%).  Rice cultivation on flooded rice fields is another major source of methane.

Nitrous oxide (N2O): largest source is agriculture - manure and use of nitrogen fertilizers. 

Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs): used in refrigeration, air conditionings, building insulation, fire extinguishing systems.  In the 1990s and early 2000s many companies switched to using HFCs in order to cease using CFCs which were discovered to damage atmospheric ozone.

Perfluorochemicals (PFCs): compounds that repel both oil and water and used in many industrial and consumer products.

Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6): used as electrical insulator and arc suppressant.  Essential to maintenance of electrical grids.  No known substitutes.

Although all of these substances are emitted in far less volume than CO2, scientists have calculated that the Global Warming Potential (GWP) for each is substantially higher than for equivalent amounts of CO2.

Methane is estimated to have a GWP 21X higher than CO2.  For N2O it is 310X higher, for HFCs 150-5,000 times higher, PFCs 6,000-9,000X, and for SF6 23,900X.  As you can see, even a small release of SF6 is significant.

We will refer to these as GWP substances going forward.

In the final category are CO2 emissions related to land-use, including deforestation, which is a significant factor in countries like Brazil and India. 

A full GHG accounting would require counting all three categories.  It's important, because if proponents of action want to determine whether any proposed action might be effective you need to accurate count what you are trying to track.  Anytime you read an article on GHG emission by country try to figure out what they are actually counting.

How Are We Counting?

At the most basic level, CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, are subject to the least variation.  However, there are several different government agencies that are doing the accounting and there is some variation based upon methodology and how they account for uncertainties.

For instance, the chart in the Journal article is sourced to the International Energy Agency (IEA), a source I've also relied on in the past.  In the text it also states that U.S. emissions for 2020 are expected to be 21% lower than the 2005 baseline, but no source for the assertion is identified.

Another source I've used in the past is the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency which has been doing annual reports on CO2 and GHG emissions globally for the past twenty years.  If you look at the report issued by NEA in 2020 with emissions estimates as of 2019, you'll find different numbers than those of the IEA.  For instance, 2018 fossil fuel related emissions in the U.S. are 4.92 gigatons according to the IEA and 5.24 in the NEA report.  The discrepancy is even bigger for China, which IEA reports as 9.6 gigatons and NEA as 11.2.  Even within the definition of fossil fuel combustion the agencies differ as to what is included.

Once you start including GWP substance related emissions like methane, HFCs and SF6 things get even more difficult.  Inherently these estimates are more difficult to derive and, particularly in the case of China, may be subject to manipulation.  The NEA uses error bars to report its combined CO2 and these emissions and its bar for China are much larger than for the U.S. and EU.

The scope of all of the GWP substances is enormous when combined, increasing the importance of knowing what is being measured.  According to the IEA, CO2 fossil fuel combustion emissions in 2018 were 32 gigatons but according to the NEA, 2018 emissions, including GWP substances were 52 gigatons!

The NEA figures for CO2 from fossil fuel combustion show from 2005 to 2019 an increase of 85% in China and decreases in the U.S. and EU of, respectively, 14% and 22%.  For CO2 + the GWP substances, the NEA shows China with an increase of 70%, a decrease of 7% in the U.S. and 19% in the EU.  As you can see, none of these match the 21% decrease cited in the Journal article.

And if you try to do a comprehensive global assessment including all land use variants the process will be subject to even more uncertainty.

The NEA Report

Since I have access to the most recent NEA report and not the IEA report, I'll summarize its findings.  The NEA uses both fossil fuel emissions and those from substances with GWP.

In recent years, the U.S., EU and Japan have consistently shown decreases while China, India and the Russian Federation have increased.  While China emissions are increasing slower in the 2011-19 period than they did in 2000-10, the opposite is true for India.

As of 2019 China was 28% of global GHG emissions while the U.S. was 13%.  Whether it is the IEA or NEA, the specific numbers are different but the conclusions are the same.  In 2000 the U.S. had double the emissions of China while today it is reversed.  

Here is the long term trend as shown in a NEA graphic:

Another take on recent trends from Bloomberg:

The reductions proposed by the Biden Administration are about 1.8 gigatons by 2030, which is equivalent to what China and India added from 2013 to 2019.  Under the Paris Accords neither country has agreed to emissions reductions during the next decade.  The U.S. goal, if achieved would reduce current global emissions by 3.5% but emissions globally would not be reduced.

A related topic that often comes up when GHG emissions reductions are discussed are historical emissions, usually in the context that although China's current emissions are 2X the U.S., cumulative historical American emissions are much higher.  This was a good talking point in 2005 but things have changed since then.  I looked at the NEA data from 1990 to 2019 and then at the IEA which has data back to 1970.  Assuming the 2020 data is about the same as 2019, over the half century since 1970, China and U.S. emissions are about equal.

China has stated that it will begin reducing its emissions in 2030.  If current trends continue for the next decade and if the U.S. takes no further reduction actions, by 2030 China and U.S. emissions will be about equal over the period 1945-2030 (actually China emissions will be slightly higher).  Should the U.S. undertake significant reductions the two countries will have had similar cumulative emissions over the past century.

Momentum

 Oh, for the sake of momentum

 Even though I agree with that stuff about seizing the day

 But I hate to think of effort expended  

All those minutes and days and hours I have frittered away.

From Aimee Mann, better known to some for the 80s hit Voices Carry when she was with Til Tuesday.

Fighting Back

In Fighting The Good Fight, I highlighted a group of liberals/progressives and even a couple of socialists who are openly taking on the Woke and Critical Race Theory (CRT) who believe in the conspiracy theory that everything in our society can be explained by race and by the deliberate plotting of white people to maintain their supremacy.  Even as liberals and progressives who dissent from the New Racism of CRT are eliminated from companies, purged from academia, and publicly attacked as racists, no prominent Democratic politician has come to their defense.

Below I bring you three progressives who are speaking out; a private school teacher, the parent of a student, and a law school professor.

Bari Weiss, a progressive purged from the New York Times last year for refusing to "take the knee", recognizing that once you do so you will never be able to stand on your own two feet again, has, like many capable journalists, migrated to Substack where she now publishes a newsletter.  During the past two weeks she's published letters from those subjected to the Woke madness at elite Manhattan private schools.

First up is this from Paul Rossi, a teacher at Grace Church High School.  He knows the risk he is taking by going public.  Some excerpts:

I know that by attaching my name to this I’m risking not only my current job but my career as an educator, since most schools, both public and private, are now captive to this backward ideology. But witnessing the harmful impact it has on children, I can’t stay silent.  

My school, like so many others, induces students via shame and sophistry to identify primarily with their race before their individual identities are fully formed. Students are pressured to conform their opinions to those broadly associated with their race and gender and to minimize or dismiss individual experiences that don’t match those assumptions. The morally compromised status of “oppressor” is assigned to one group of students based on their immutable characteristics. In the meantime, dependency, resentment and moral superiority are cultivated in students considered “oppressed.”

All of this is done in the name of “equity,” but it is the opposite of fair. In reality, all of this reinforces the worst impulses we have as human beings: our tendency toward tribalism and sectarianism that a truly liberal education is meant to transcend.

Recently, I raised questions about this ideology at a mandatory, whites-only student and faculty Zoom meeting. (Such racially segregated sessions are now commonplace at my school.) It was a bait-and-switch “self-care” seminar that labelled “objectivity,” “individualism,” “fear of open conflict,” and even “a right to comfort” as characteristics of white supremacy. I doubted that these human attributes — many of them virtues reframed as vices — should be racialized in this way.

A few days later, the head of school ordered all high school advisors to read a public reprimand of my conduct out loud to every student in the school.

[Students] report that, in their classes and other discussions, they must never challenge any of the premises of our “antiracist” teachings, which are deeply informed by Critical Race Theory.

One current student paid me a visit a few weeks ago. He tapped faintly on my office door, anxiously looking both ways before entering. He said he had come to offer me words of support for speaking up at the meeting.

I thanked him for his comments, but asked him why he seemed so nervous. He told me he was worried that a particular teacher might notice this visit and “it would mean that I would get in trouble.” He reported to me that this teacher once gave him a lengthy “talking to” for voicing a conservative opinion in class.

More recently Bari published this letter sent by Andrew Guttman to fellow parents of students of the exclusive Brearley School in Manhattan explaining why he had removed his daughter, a Brearley student for seven years, from the school.  Read the whole thing.  Some excerpts:

I object to the view that I should be judged by the color of my skin. I cannot tolerate a school that not only judges my daughter by the color of her skin, but encourages and instructs her to prejudge others by theirs. By viewing every element of education, every aspect of history, and every facet of society through the lens of skin color and race, we are desecrating the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and utterly violating the movement for which such civil rights leaders believed, fought, and died. 

I object to mandatory anti-racism training for parents, especially when presented by the rent-seeking charlatans of Pollyanna. These sessions, in both their content and delivery, are so sophomoric and simplistic, so unsophisticated and inane, that I would be embarrassed if they were taught to Brearley kindergarteners. They are an insult to parents and unbecoming of any educational institution, let alone one of Brearley's caliber. 

If the administration was genuinely serious about “diversity,” it would not insist on the indoctrination of its students, and their families, to a single mindset, most reminiscent of the Chinese Cultural Revolution.

We have today in our country, from both political parties, and at all levels of government, the most unwise and unvirtuous leaders in our nation’s history. Schools like Brearley are supposed to be the training grounds for those leaders. Our nation will not survive a generation of leadership even more poorly educated than we have now, nor will we survive a generation of students taught to hate its own country and despise its history. 

Lastly, I object, with as strong a sentiment as possible, that Brearley has begun to teach what to think, instead of how to think. I object that the school is now fostering an environment where our daughters, and our daughters’ teachers, are afraid to speak their minds in class for fear of “consequences.”

For the sake of our community, our city, our country and most of all, our children, silence is no longer an option.  

We end with this article from Georgetown Law Professor, Lama Abu Odeh.   Two adjunct law school professors were forced to resign because one was caught on Zoom saying “I hate to say this… I ended up having this, you know, angst every semester that a lot of my lower ones are blacks. Happens almost every semester" (no one dared to inquire as to whether her statement was factually accurate), and the other did not immediately denounce her, despite a lack of any evidence either had ever acted in a discriminatory manner regarding black students or, for that matter, any students.  When two progressive faculty members raised objections to a faculty letter ritually denouncing the professors (a letter Odeh declined to sign) they were met by silence from the other faculty.  Some excerpts:

The silence to my mind is telling. It speaks of the lack of resources within progressive thinking that could be drawn upon to resist the trend that has bedeviled American academia over the past few years. 

Progressive liberals are blind to the fact that there is a regime take-over apace everywhere in academic institutions. A new ruling elite is taking over academic institutions by using its “minority status” to exercise a “soft” coup and is appealing to the minoritarianism of progressive ideology to legitimize its coup—or, if you like, to “manufacture consent.” I will call the adherents of this ideology the “progressoriat.”

The only acceptable response when confronted by any aspect of the ideology that has facilitated this coup is to enthusiastically endorse it—to celebrate it.  

The new elite taking over academic institutions has at its disposal an arsenal of tools to perpetuate its rule. It not only postures as representative of others in the way communists did—the “intelligentsia” representing the worker or the peasant in the latter’s case and representing victim groups in the former’s. The new elite can also represent itself as victims, an opportunity even communists would have baulked at.

The ranks of this new ruling class are refreshed by immigrant academics who come to understand themselves in the way progressivism understands them: as minorities who can also act victim-like if they want—a precious endowment in the cultural academic market.(1)

No hesitation or nuance is allowed: nothing but unequivocal loyalty oaths. The progressoriat can only repeat, “I believe in the cause. I believe. I believe. Believe me I believe.”

If this echoes a Maoist take-over, that’s because it is. It passes the sniff test.(2)

UPDATE:  Recently came across this passage from Jonathan Haidt, a card-carrying liberal Democrat and professor, who wrote about the cult-like nature of all this back in 2017:

Today’s identity politics . . . teaches the exact opposite of what we think a liberal arts education should be. When I was at Yale in the 1980s, I was given so many tools for understanding the world. By the time I graduated, I could think about things as a utilitarian or as a Kantian, as a Freudian or a behaviorist, as a computer scientist or as a humanist. I was given many lenses to apply to any given question or problem.

But what do we do now? Many students are given just one lens—power. Here’s your lens, kid. Look at everything through this lens. Everything is about power. Every situation is analyzed in terms of the bad people acting to preserve their power and privilege over the good people. This is not an education. This is induction into a cult. It’s a fundamentalist religion. It’s a paranoid worldview that separates people from each other and sends them down the road to alienation, anxiety and intellectual impotence. . . .

------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1)  This reminds me of the 2018 incident at Smith College when a black student alleged racist behavior by a cafeteria worker and security guard leading to their dismissal and public humiliation and triggering a cascade of actions by the college administration that eventually triggered the resignation and public activism of Jodi Shaw, an administrator harassed because of her refusal to bow to the Woke (you can read more about Jodi in the Fighting The Good Fight post). 

Though an investigation concluded there was no racism involved in the incident, it was too late for the employees and did not deter the college administration from taking actions as though the incident was racist.

Oumou Kanoute, the student who made the accusation, was from a family of immigrants from Mali.  She had received a scholarship to attend a prestigious private school in Connecticut and a full scholarship to attend Smith.  According to her LinkedIn page she is currently working as a Research Assistant Intern at the Columbia School of Social Work at a lab that "focuses on innovative ways to conceptualize, and measure racism". 

In other words, we have someone whose family voluntarily came to America because it offered them opportunities they could not find elsewhere, and Kanoute was privileged to attend elite institutions for free where she was indoctrinated to believe she was oppressed and discriminated against and taught to interpret every action by white people as driven by racism.  Shame on these institutions!

This, in turn, reminds me of the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013 and of the perpetrators, the Tsarnaev brothers, Muslims who emigrated from Russia and settled in Cambridge where they attended and graduated from the public schools.  There was a shocked reaction from Cambridgians when the Tsarnaev's were identified as the culprits because it was believed being educated in Cambridge school they would not have encountered prejudice and learned tolerance.  Having worked in Cambridge for over a decade and being familiar with the schools it did not surprise me.  American history in Cambridge is taught as "black arm-band" history, a sordid tale of racism, colonialism and exploitation.  What contempt the Tsarnaevs must have developed for our country as they listened to this litany of woe and evil!

We are acculturating our young people to hate their country and each other.  This will not end well.

(2) Today's South China Morning Post carried this headline, "Chinese universities should produce inquisitive thinkers who are totally loyal to the Communist Party, Xi Jinping says".  I believe Prof Odeh would say we are on the same track.

And, according to the Daily Mail, "China launches app for citizens to report anyone who has 'mistaken opinions' or 'denies the excellence of socialist culture'".  The app aims to crack down on "historical nihilists".  As the title of this series says, welcome to your future!

The Road Back

"During the whole affair, the rebels attacked us in a very scattered, irregular manner, but with perseverance and resolution, nor did they ever dare to form into any regular body.  Indeed they knew too well what was proper, to do so.  Whoever looks upon them as an irregular mob, will find himself very much mistaken.

"For my part, I never believed, I confess, that they would have attacked the king's troops, or have had the perseverance I found in them yesterday."

- Lord Percy, April 20, 1775

The quote is from Paul Revere's Ride by David Hackett Fischer which I recently reread and Lord Percy is referring to the final part of the British retreat from Lexington to Charlestown, along what is now known as Battle Road, on April 19, 1775.  Percy led a relief column out of Boston that morning to support the British force sent late the prior evening to seize Patriot arms stored in Concord.

When Lord Percy arrived in Lexington at mid-day he found a panicked British force hastening back from Concord in disarray, stunned by the resistance of the local citizens and the number of casualties inflicted upon them by the locals, whom, until that day, they held in contempt.  If Percy had not shown up it is doubtful any of the original British force would have returned to Boston.  Under the direction of Lord Percy the combined force fought its way back with the most violent action of the day taking place in Menotomy (now Arlington).

Lord Percy's observation was perceptive.  For the most part he was not encountering local farmers spontaneously taking positions behind walls to shot at his soldiers.  These were regiments organized by local Massachusetts town and under the direction of William Heath, a Roxbury farmer who had taught himself the rudiments of military strategy and thought deeply in advance how to deal with British regulars.  The local regiments did not fight the British from fixed positions but rather formed a moving circle of skirmishers around the entire enemy column during this last phase of the British retreat.

Learning about the little-known Heath and the patriot military strategy is one of the joys of reading Fischer's book.  While it reclaims the legacy of Paul Revere it also tells the entire story of April 19 in great, and very readable detail.  Revere was much more than the man who made his famous ride.  He was instrumental in the years leading up to the events of April 19, becoming the key link between the artisans and tradesmen of Boston and the elite businessmen and lawyers like John Hancock, Joseph Warren and Sam Adams.  He is seemingly everywhere, involved in every key event.

On the night of April 18-19 Revere was captured by the British on the road between Lexington and Concord.  Released later that evening he made his way to Lexington, where he had previously stopped to warn Hancock and Adams, who were staying at a house next to the town Green, of the British expedition.  On his return he helped relocate the two patriot leaders to a more remote location and then learned they had left a large chest full of sensitive documents at a tavern on the Green!  Recruiting an assistant they removed the chest and carted it across the Green as dawn broke passing through the Lexington militiamen assembling there and seeing the approaching British troops.  As Revere reached the nearby woods he heard the first shots of the American Revolution.

Fischer is one of our great narrative historians and while Paul Revere's Ride is scholarly and full of fascinating footnotes at the end, it is also a rollicking and exciting tale as told by the author.  Washington's Crossing, about the darkest days of the Revolution in late 1776, is another narrative masterpiece by Fischer.  

In his introduction, Fischer explains his continued belief in the power of the narrative even as other approaches have come to dominate historical scholarship:

Pathbreaking scholarship in the 20th century has dealt mainly with social structures, intellectual systems, and material processes.  Much has been gained by this enlargement of the historian's task, but something important has been lost.  An entire generation of academic historiography has tended to lose sense of the causal power of particular actions and contingent events.  

An important key here is the idea of contingency - not in the sense of chance, but rather of 'something that may or may not happen' . . . An organizing assumption of this work is that contingency is central to any historical process, and vital to the success of our narrative strategies about the past.

To that end, this inquiry studies the coming of the American Revolution as a series of contingent happenings, shaped by the choices of individual actors with the context of large cultural processes.

Fischer's first book, originally his doctoral thesis, is Albion's Seed, the most important book ever written about the cultural differences between the British groups that settled America and their impact on the strands of American culture that powered this country throughout its history, at least until recent decades.

While modern academic theory has reduced all those of European origin into a faceless, indistinguishable blob of white supremacy, Albion's Seed reminds us of the strikingly different cultures from different geographical areas within England that settled in various parts of the New World - Puritans in New England, Quakers in the mid-Atlantic, Cavaliers in the South and the Scots-Irish in the backcountry.  Cultural and religious traditions in these groups varied tremendously and those differences carried over into America.

In the introduction to Paul Revere's Ride, Fischer speaks to the cultural traditions he identified in Albion's Seed writing:

Paul Revere's idea of liberty was not the same as our modern conception of individual autonomy and personal entitlement.  It was not a form of "classical Republicanism", or "English Opposition Ideology", or "Lockean Liberalism", or any of the learned anachronisms that scholars have invented to explain a way of thought that is alien to their own world.

He believed deeply in New England's inherited tradition of ordered freedom, which gave heavy weight to collective rights and individual responsibilities - more so than is given by our modern calculus of individual rights and collective responsibilities.

His genius was to promote collective action in the cause of freedom - a paradox that lies closer to the heart of the American experience than the legendary historical loners we love to celebrate.

1952 Vincent Black Lightning

Been on a bit of a Richard Thompson tear lately.  You can't go wrong with a song about a cool motorcycle and a red-haired girl in black leather.  That's Suzanne Vega and Loudon Wainwright watching Richard play.

The Importance Of A Man

Even before integrating major league baseball in 1947, Jackie Robinson was breaking down the wall of segregation.  Listen to all of this story told by Buck O'Neill, Jackie's former Negro Leagues teammate. Robinson was raised in Southern California in an area where, while he encountered discrimination, was nothing like that seen by many Negro League players who grew up in the South or in highly segregated Northern cities.  But what Robinson did encounter he refused to accept whether in civilian life or during his military service.

Buck O'Neill (1911-2006) is one of the most beloved figures in baseball history.  A Negro Leagues ballplayer from 1937 to 1950, mostly with the Kansas City Monarchs, who he also managed from 1948 to 1955, Buck became the first black coach in MLB with the Chicago Cubs in 1962.  Prior to that he'd been a scout for the Cubs, signing future Hall of Famer Lou Brock.  O'Neill served on the Baseball Hall of Fame Veterans Committee from 1981 to 2000 and was instrumental in the establishment of the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum in Kansas City, which is well worth a visit.

The Kansas City Royals created a Buck O'Neill Legacy Seat at Kauffman Stadium and also have a legacy seat dedicated to Buck at their spring training park in Surprise AZ which I discovered when sitting in the row behind it in March 2020.

Buck O’Neil, who is a one of the most important figures in baseball history shares a tremendous story about #JackieRobinson - the ending still gives me goosebumps. I don’t think til this day we truly know how important of a person #Jackie42 was. #MustWatch @nlbmprez pic.twitter.com/HE4hfoG7vC

— BaseballHistoryNut (@nut_history) April 15, 2021

Romans Always Win!

 Graffiti is nothing new, nor is rooting for the home team.

A fav. photo of all time. Priceless. Roman-period Greek inscription from the Jibal Hisma mountain range in #Saudi Arabia. Signed Lauricius (possibly a soldier), which declared "[The] Romans always win!". Inscribed circa 2ndC AD to reflect Roman military success.Tks to @DrJEBall pic.twitter.com/HaPDYnTzbH

— Stefano Ambrogi (@StefanoAmbrogi1) April 17, 2021

The Jibal Hisma range is in the northwest corner of Saudi Arabia and the inscription is further evidence of the extent of the Roman Empire at its peak in the 2nd century AD.  This is what it looks like:

 

For more on the Roman occupation of this remote area read Madain Saleh and The Farthest Outpost.

Xi And Biden Agree On America

Last month's meeting in Alaska between China and U.S. officials got a bit tense.  I want to specifically focus on a couple of remarks by Chinese Director of the Office of the Central Commission for Foreign Affairs Yang Jiechi. (You can find the full transcript here.)

Many people within the United States actually have little confidence in the democracy of the United States, and they have various views regarding the government of the United States.

On human rights, we hope that the United States will do better on human rights. China has made steady progress in human rights, and the fact is that there are many problems within the United States regarding human rights, which is admitted by the U.S. itself as well . . . And the challenges facing the United States in human rights are deep-seated. They did not just emerge over the past four years, such as Black Lives Matter. It did not come up only recently.

Although the American officials responded to some of the Chinese comments, they did not directly respond to the comments quoted above.

They didn’t because the Biden Administration agrees with these criticisms by China.

In the past, American administrations with critical views of prior administrations, or of American history, have always addressed this using expressions such as “America straying from its values” or “yes, America has sometimes fallen short of our aspirations but we are always trying to improve.”  In other words, any supposed defects can be corrected by referring back to the aspirations of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the words of the Founding Fathers and Abraham Lincoln.  Even President Obama, as annoying and deceptive as he could be at times, used this rhetorical device.

That approach is not available to those representing the Biden Administration.  With its continued statements regarding the need for “equity,” the adoption of the principles of Critical Race Theory, and its nomination of appointees saturated in CRT, the Biden Administration is promoting an entirely different view of America.  Simply put, America never had legitimate aspirations or values; the “ideas” of liberty, freedom, equality, self-governance, even the idea of democracy, were just smokescreens for the permanent seizure and holding of power by white people and used to maintain white supremacy.  There were no legitimate ideas or principles behind the Founding.  It was simply a power grab.  In Biden’s view, this rotten history means we are no longer anchored in core principles, instead America must be reconstructed on a completely different basis.  The Administration believes China is correct in asserting “the challenges facing the United States in human rights are deep-seated” because it believes our very Founding was illegitimate.

The Biden Administration is promoting a radical repudiation of traditional American values.

Politico has an article explaining that Secretary of State Blinken is “racing to address a 232-year-old problem, the department’s overwhelming and entrenched whiteness” and has appointed a Deputy Assistant Secretary “in every departmental bureau to take charge of diversity, equity and inclusion issues.”  There you have it; AmeriKKKa; evil at the beginning, still evil today.  No wonder he didn’t respond to the Chinese.

We received further confirmation in the recent speech our new ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, made on April 14, which received some media attention because of this line:

I have seen for myself how the original sin of slavery weaved white supremacy into our founding documents and principles.

However there is so much more wrong with Thomas-Greenfield's remarks (full remarks can be found here).  The speech was given at the 30th Annual Summit of the National Action Network, an organization founded and still led by Al Sharpton, who made his reputation as a race hustler, con artist, and Jew-baiter, before becoming President Obama's go-to guy on race issues and being blessed with a featured show on MSNBC.  Despite his tawdry history, the ambassador lauds Sharpton with these words, "Your lifetime of activism is an inspiration to us all".(1)  She also makes sure to make multiple references to the need for "equity".(2)

That the ambassador has become well-versed in the language of Critical Race Theory can be seen in this passage:

We have to acknowledge that we are an imperfect union – and have been since the beginning – and every day we strive to make ourselves more perfect, and more just. In a diverse country like ours, that means committing to do the work.

In CRT speak, "do the work", means white people need to come to grips with white privilege and supremacy and not question the premises of CRT.  

She also obediently gave the nod of approval to Black Lives Matter, providing special privileging to an organization dedicated to the overthrow of American society, the establishment of a new race-based order, and the destruction of the nuclear family.

Just look at the way the Black Lives Matter movement spread this past summer.

All of this explanation in service of explaining why the United States is reengaging with the United Nations, a morally compromised and corrupt organization dominated by dictatorships and anti-Semites! 

As to her key passage, which I will requote:

I have seen for myself how the original sin of slavery weaved white supremacy into our founding documents and principles.

This is pure CRT and 1619 Project stuff.  CRT is a repudiation of the Civil Rights Movement which used our founding documents and principles to move the conscience of white Americans.  The 1619 Project seeks to eliminate 1776 and 1789 as the founding dates for the United States because those dates represent the illegitimate racist founding of the Republic.  It's why the 1619 Project makes only passing reference to Frederick Douglass, who famously spoke of the founding documents as anti-slavery, and minimizes the role of Reverend Martin Luther King, who spoke so eloquently of the principles embodied in those documents.

Instead, Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield supports CRT which embraces the theories of John C Calhoun, the South Carolina politician who proudly proclaimed slavery a positive good and promoted the theory that the Declaration and Constitution only applied to white people, a theory adopted by Justice Taney in the Dred Scott decision.  Even some Confederates found Calhoun's theories far-fetched.  In his famous 1861 Cornerstone speech, Confederate Vice-President Alexander Stephens noted that the Confederacy's new Constitution corrected the great error of the founding documents which had asserted "all men are created equal" by adding language explicitly limiting that concept to whites and eternally protecting the property right of whites to enslaved black people.

How strange and dispiriting to have an American administration in the 21st century reverting to the theories about the American founding of a white supremacist who died in 1850.  Maybe not so strange given the reactionary and race-based nature of Critical Race Theory.

I've begun to realize that those who invoke CRT seem to fall into three categories.

(1) The true believers and haters.  I think Kristen Clarke, Biden's nominee to head the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, fits in this category.

(2) The political opportunists who see CRT as just another arrow in the Democratic Party's quiver in order to keep black voters paranoid about white people and Republicans, while instilling a continued sense of futility and powerlessness in order to maintain 90+% of their vote.  Kamala Harris and Joe Biden fit here.

(3) The final category are those who don't fully understand the implications of CRT and just see it as another way to fight racism.  They believe the multiple false narratives woven about race in America by the media, academia and progressives.  Many Democratic voters and some public figures fall in this category.  People of good intentions which CRT then twists to its purposes.  And some of them have trouble intellectually following a logic trail (though CRT tells me that is a trait of white supremacy).  My sense is Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield falls in that category.  I think she is a person of goodwill but with cloudy thinking.  Carefully reading her full speech it is difficult to make logical sense of it.  It is a collection of bromides that don't seem to mean much when read together.  

But the bottom line is I doubt any other UN Ambassador from any other country is running around making statements like this about their own country.  If she thinks this will somehow strengthen her posture at the UN she is sadly mistaken.  China and other countries will know how to turn her own rhetoric against her, as we have already seen from what happened last month in Alaska.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) "Activism" means "radical left ideology".

(2) "Equity" is a term from Critical Race Theory, which has replaced "equality" which was the goal of the Civil Rights Movement.  Equity is based on the conspiracy theory that any statistical difference in any outcome between racial and ethnic groups is because of deliberate acts by white supremacists (a term that encompasses all white, including Jews, and, depending on the circumstances, can also include Asians and Hispanics).  Inequities can only be cured by dismantling the system of white supremacy and imposing numerical quotas.

Good Move

Since I disapprove of pretty much everything the Biden Administration has done so far, believing it to be the most radical in American history, I thought I'd give the man some credit for his announcement today of the withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan, a decision I completely agree with for the reasons set forth in this post from January 2020.  I also agreed with President Trump's draw down of forces and his plans to complete withdrawal this year.  There is no good purpose in keeping our military there and it is an action that should have been taken many, many years ago.

Two other notes:

I think it baffling and insulting for President Biden to set the withdrawal date for September 11.

It is ironic for him to claim the mission is over since we pursued Bin Laden to "the gates of Hell" since then VP Biden opposed President Obama's 2011 decision to go after Bin Laden in Pakistan.

I Feel So Good

 And this is just so good.  Richard Thompson with some witty lyrics and great guitar playing.

All Things Must Pass

From the 2002 memorial tribute concert to George Harrison, organized by his friend Eric Clapton.  This is a beautiful version of All Things Must Pass and Paul McCartney's vocal does it justice.  That's George's son, Dhani, next to Paul.  You can also see Ringo on drums and the late Billy Preston on piano.  Also recognized Gary Brooker from Procol Harum on keyboards and Jeff Lynne and I'm sure there are some other well known names there.

The Rains Of Shiloh

It was a hard, cold rain that fell on the living and dead the night of April 6-7, 1862, but it was the rains of a few days before that may have determined the course of the Battle of Shiloh.

In February 1862, General Ulysses S. Grant had captured Forts Henry and Donelson, opening up central Tennessee to the Union and making him a national hero with his insistence on “unconditional surrender.” Grant advanced his army along the Tennessee River to an isolated area just north of that state’s borders with Mississippi and Alabama. Another army, commanded by General Don Carlos Buell, had been ordered to join Grant and they would both then advance to capture the key rail junction at Corinth, Mississippi, less than 25 miles to the southwest.

The Confederate commander, Albert Sidney Johnston,regarded as the new nation’s best general, sought to disrupt the Union plans and regain the initiative for the South. His Army of Mississippi was concentrated around Corinth and he planned a surprise advance and attack on Grant before Buell could join him. Johnston’s scouts had made him aware that Grant, obsessed with advancing, had left his encampment unfortified and vulnerable.

The Confederates set forth from Corinth on April 3, planning to attack on the 4th, well before the arrival of Buell. However, a torrential rain turned the already primitive roads and trails into a morass of mud. During the Civil War, it was difficult in the best of conditions to get an army to its destination on time. Now it proved impossible and took three days for Johnston to advance the 23 miles. The result was that while he succeeded in initially catching Grant by surprise on April 6, Buell was to arrive in time to help launch a Union counterattack the next day.

The initial assault early on the morning of the 6th seemed like it would yield a Confederate victory. A soldier of the 6th Arkansas, Henry Morton Stanley, who ten years later was to “discover” Dr. David Livingstone in Africa, recalled:

Those savage yells, and the sight of thousands of racing figures coming towards them, discomfited the blue-coats; and when we arrived upon the place where they had stood, they had vanished. Then we caught sight of their beautiful array of tents, before which they had made their stand, after being roused from their Sunday-morning sleep, and huddled into line, at hearing their pickets challenge our skirmishers. The half-dressed dead and wounded showed what a surprise our attack had been.

But though some Union units fled, others made a stand, slowing the Confederate advance. The topography of the battlefield also worked against the Rebels, as it both funneled their advance into a narrower front and required them to cross several deep ravines in the face of Union fire, including from gunboats on the river. The Confederates became more disorganized, a confusion compounded by the mortal wounding of General Johnston. The battlefield eventually quieted as darkness fell.

What was it like that night? Here are the recollections of a Union soldier of the 9th Indiana; Ambrose Bierce, author of The Devil’s Dictionary and An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge (made into a famous “Twilight Zone” episode; Owl Creek was on the Shiloh battlefield), who was to disappear in Mexico in 1913 during its revolution:

The night was now black-dark; as is usual after a battle it had begun to rain. Still we moved, we were being put into position by somebody. Inch by inch we crept along, treading on one another’s heels by way of keeping together . . . When the men had pressed so closely together that they could advance no farther they stood stock-still . . . In this position many fell asleep . . . Very often we struck our feet against the dead; more frequently against those who still had spirit enough to resent it with a moan . . . Some had sense enough to ask in their weak way for water. Absurd! Their clothes were soaken, their hair dank; . . . Besides none of us had any water. There was plenty coming, though, for before midnight a thunderstorm broke upon us with great violence. The rain, which has for hours been a dull drizzle, fell with a copiousness that stifled us; we moved in running water up to our ankles.

Grant may have failed to take precautions to protect his position but once the battle started his customary calmness and imperturbability came into play. Refusing to take the advice of some of his officers to withdraw the army, Grant directed the establishment of a new defensive line and, once he knew Buell’s army would be available on the 7th, determined to take the offensive. With daylight, Grant ordered an advance and much of the ground lost by the Union in the first day was recovered and the Confederates withdrew back to Corinth, their goal not attained. Grant received much criticism for leaving his army so exposed to attack but managed to survive, fortunately for the Union. Henry Morton Stanley was captured in the Union counterattack, ending his career as a Confederate soldier, though he was to enlist and briefly serve in the Union Army.

The casualty toll of Shiloh was a shock to both sides.  The bloodiest battle of the war had been Bull Run in July 1861 where the combined dead and wounded amounted to 3,500. For the entire Civil War until April 6 about 10,000 had been killed or wounded. The dead and wounded in the two days of Shiloh totaled just under 20,000. It was a harbinger of worse to come.

You can learn more about the Battle of Shiloh watching this video from the American Battlefield Trust.