WW II an ethnic conflict? Please. Apparently Ferguson never heard of British imperialism. WWs I resulted from the Brits efforts to maintain their worldwide dominance. WW II was a continuation of WW I. I see Fergurson has heard of imperialism after all, but only as it applies to Germany and Japan. This guy is political correct 10 times over. For an alternate perspective see W. Engdahl's 'A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order'.
I dislike the association below of this man with AJP Taylor. Taylor wrote that a historian must act as a citizen first and historian second. EP Thompson, now there's a great historian. Niall Ferguson is no doubt and interesting man with interesting ideas and a highly accessible writing style which I enjoy greatly. Unfortunately he doesn't explore his ideas thoroughly and his books often contain great silences and ignores the voices from the bottom up.
What impresses me most is that Nial was born in a Glasgow tenement house, he is a working class buy who did well, I think this street wise toughness style comes through in his historical analysis. I don't always agree with him but you can respect his work. The war of the world and Colossus the fall of the American Empire are both excellent books a must read.
Well, just as Christopher Hitchens had done the previous year, here we have Niall suggesting a movement with ambitions to create a new "empire state" (for which the Muslim expression is "caliphate") in the Middle East. Premonitions of ISIS, on the part of both these great thinkers? But I have a confession: as Niall laid out his three putative preconditions starting with E, and portending that there was one place in today's world where all three were conspicuously met, I was actually expecting him to instance the former USSR, where they apply (it seems to me) at least as much as in the Middle East. Certainly there's the *E*thnic melange, and most certainly there's *E*conomic instability writ large, (and massive inequality,which as he had pointed out is the major source of tension arising from changes in prosperity whether the overall situation is a gain or a loss) What's more, arguably the vacuum left by the regressing *E*mpire is greater than that left by the US in retreat from the Middle East, where it was only a shadow empire, 'behind the curtains', predominantly presiding over cashflows (it seems to me) with implicit rather than explicit mechanisms of powerbroking, and no direct hands-on governance role. So Niall could have been doubly prescient, because his criteria seem to have foretold the impending conflict which is currently blossoming in (once again) the Ukraine. NB: not having yet read his book, I can't be sure he doesn't give this second example there, in which case, kindly ignore my comment.
I loved the way Niall covered the Ascent of Money. Became a kind of a fan. However, his transformation from economic history to geopolitical history is something that has disappointed. His recent coverage has given one more example of the fact that historians are story tellers, mostly fictional or an expression of their imagination. Need not be the truth.., in fact far from it. Thank you Niall for nudging me down that path.
Ok mr peeltower. My name is Niall nd its pronounced fuking N-i-a-l-l as in Nigh-all. AND IT IS AN IRISH NAME CAUSE US IRISH HAVE IRISH NAMES FOR ENGLISH 1'S AND DERS NO IRISH NAME FOR NIALL CAUSE ITS ALREADY IRISH. AS OUR TEACHER'S IN SKOOL HAS TOLD US BECUASE GUESS WHAT YEESSS THERE FLUENT IN DA IRISH LANGUAGE. IS DAT OK PEELTOWER??????
I'm not trying to be racist but I was pretty annoyed throughout this that Niall was constantly getting pulled to talk about Jewish populations in history by the Jewish host. Just wanted to hear about the bigger picture not so much on one people :/
+User Error You do your cause no favours, it seems to me, taking hyperbolic and solipsistic exception to such a relatively unexceptionable observation. The interview (it struck me) was rather like watching an interview with an author who'd written a sweeping history of sport, conducted by a person who was interested only in one sport.
Nearing the end of the pre-McCain era we're not allowed to call the US an empire and we can't say that the US is in recession. China is holding now 1.5 trillion dollars from trade surplus, earning low interest and yet it's advantageous to have the US consuming its production. So let's say the US is the reigning empire, overextended, in debt, in recession with only a mechanized millitary to do its bidding? Do you really think McCain's belligerence will be limited to diplomacy.
Would have been totally with you there Hoggy except for your dreadful text-like spelling, which lets down the whole Irish education system. But it is Niall as in the river NILE, and he's a very good guy, love his Ascent of Money programme. Peeltower displays terrible ignorance.
Very good about the past. Not so good about the present. "I know it looked like appeasement with the Nazis, and the present policy looks like appeasement, but don't you make this conclusion." Well, why not? If it looks like a duck.... "American empire, if you forgive" - no, I will not forgive. The U.S. is not an empire. Not at all. Calling it an empire goes against truth, (cont.)
@bum1973 Ferguson is a good historian, I have read several of his books. His is not factually incorrect. Firstly, German is a concept, envisioned by Schiller and willed into existence by Bismarck. The Nation-State of Germany doesn't have much of a track record of anything. The western parts of what we know call Germany were actually very tolerant of minorities as Jews AFTER around 1750. The Prussian lands in the 19th Century were not bad. Austrian lands in the SE were the most violent.
And the bumpy ride followed by collapse is not of "American empire," but of American democracy (236 y.o., which is very long for a democracy). Maybe of America as such.
My only problem with Ferguson in this is when he claims that the tendency in (so-called) democracies to delay or be weary of imperial adventures and only be willing/able to respond after Pearl Harbour-like incidents is a BAD thing..isn't it a good thing for the very reason that self-defence is the only justifiable form of war?
The problem with Empire is when the Empire has become victorious and universal. The universal Empire leads to internal collapse. See Carol Quiggley's Tragedy and Hope. Can't wait to read the Assent of Money.
Could not. Could not care less. Could care less makes no sense. If part of you can care less than you do already, it suggests that you do somewhat care to begin with.
malma1 I also have to ask: what makes you say he is amoral? I read his Wikipedia page and it is clear he has conservative, approaching neo-conservative views, believes in the pre-eminence of the West and has tried to justify wars like the Iraq war, is that what you're getting at?
I don't expect he would always be right, although I'd be surprised if he actually put forth inaccurate claims. But I can respect your criticism, because it addresses his premises and style from at least an ostentatiously objective vantage. Calling someone a "pig" doesn't quite rise to that level for me. One note of order. Declaring the 2005 Paris riots as "Muslim riots" is not an outright falsehood. There are reasons for not declaring them as such, but I can understand why someone might do so.
Well actually he isn't always factually correct. I just finished War of the World and I loved it, except for the last section where he e.g. makes the outright false claim that the 2005 Paris Riots were Muslim riots. As for intelligence it surprised me that while being superb for 625 pages, Ferguson in the epilogue appeared at times simplistic & seemed to suffer from an anxious undertone which I find difficult to put in words (xenophobic is too clearly too much, but skeptic is an understatement).
The power of Chinese Central Bank is yet to be known to the world. Already most of the top Industrial men in India have huge debt with Chinese Central Banks.
I watched his series: The accent of Money. I found it to be very informative and information rich. He did not seem to have a political ax to grind. He wanted to educate us how the economy works and these ecomomic bubbles and crashed are repeated many times in history. Understanding history helps us understand what is happening today.
Dreadful sound on the synth at the beginning of the talk. The composer in trying to appear sophisticated reveals his vulgarity of taste - like Ferguson does in every clip he is involved in, regarding his amoral take on history and his career at Harvard...
WW II an ethnic conflict? Please. Apparently Ferguson never heard of British imperialism. WWs I resulted from the Brits efforts to maintain their worldwide dominance. WW II was a continuation of WW I. I see Fergurson has heard of imperialism after all, but only as it applies to Germany and Japan. This guy is political correct 10 times over. For an alternate perspective see W. Engdahl's 'A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order'.
2006? this looks like an earlys 90s film..
Even the discussion seems like it was based in the 90s, as interesting and relevant as it is.
Yea, I got the same feeling! XD
I dislike the association below of this man with AJP Taylor. Taylor wrote that a historian must act as a citizen first and historian second. EP Thompson, now there's a great historian. Niall Ferguson is no doubt and interesting man with interesting ideas and a highly accessible writing style which I enjoy greatly. Unfortunately he doesn't explore his ideas thoroughly and his books often contain great silences and ignores the voices from the bottom up.
Why do I hate Niall Ferguson?
Don't we all
i like this guy. Read his "Empire" book about Great Britain reshaping the world. Very cool
What impresses me most is that Nial was born in a Glasgow tenement house, he is a working class buy who did well, I think this street wise toughness style comes through in his historical analysis.
I don't always agree with him but you can respect his work.
The war of the world and Colossus the fall of the American Empire are both excellent books a must read.
His father was and doctor and mother a physics teacher upper middle class.
Well, just as Christopher Hitchens had done the previous year, here we have Niall suggesting a movement with ambitions to create a new "empire state" (for which the Muslim expression is "caliphate") in the Middle East. Premonitions of ISIS, on the part of both these great thinkers?
But I have a confession: as Niall laid out his three putative preconditions starting with E, and portending that there was one place in today's world where all three were conspicuously met, I was actually expecting him to instance the former USSR, where they apply (it seems to me) at least as much as in the Middle East. Certainly there's the *E*thnic melange, and most certainly there's *E*conomic instability writ large, (and massive inequality,which as he had pointed out is the major source of tension arising from changes in prosperity whether the overall situation is a gain or a loss)
What's more, arguably the vacuum left by the regressing *E*mpire is greater than that left by the US in retreat from the Middle East, where it was only a shadow empire, 'behind the curtains', predominantly presiding over cashflows (it seems to me) with implicit rather than explicit mechanisms of powerbroking, and no direct hands-on governance role.
So Niall could have been doubly prescient, because his criteria seem to have foretold the impending conflict which is currently blossoming in (once again) the Ukraine.
NB: not having yet read his book, I can't be sure he doesn't give this second example there, in which case, kindly ignore my comment.
I loved the way Niall covered the Ascent of Money. Became a kind of a fan. However, his transformation from economic history to geopolitical history is something that has disappointed. His recent coverage has given one more example of the fact that historians are story tellers, mostly fictional or an expression of their imagination. Need not be the truth.., in fact far from it. Thank you Niall for nudging me down that path.
Ok mr peeltower. My name is Niall nd its pronounced fuking N-i-a-l-l as in Nigh-all. AND IT IS AN IRISH NAME CAUSE US IRISH HAVE IRISH NAMES FOR ENGLISH 1'S AND DERS NO IRISH NAME FOR NIALL CAUSE ITS ALREADY IRISH. AS OUR TEACHER'S IN SKOOL HAS TOLD US BECUASE GUESS WHAT YEESSS THERE FLUENT IN DA IRISH LANGUAGE. IS DAT OK PEELTOWER??????
I'm not trying to be racist but I was pretty annoyed throughout this that Niall was constantly getting pulled to talk about Jewish populations in history by the Jewish host. Just wanted to hear about the bigger picture not so much on one people :/
+User Error You do your cause no favours, it seems to me, taking hyperbolic and solipsistic exception to such a relatively unexceptionable observation. The interview (it struck me) was rather like watching an interview with an author who'd written a sweeping history of sport, conducted by a person who was interested only in one sport.
+User Error My, you really are a piece of work
@brettnchls Yeah well at least one set of his grandaparents are from Glasgow that he mentions in one of his tv series. Niall is also from Glasgow.
as am I great city
Niall commands an endearingly animated and bravura style of verbal and nonverbal presentation, with a huge stock of vocabulary to boot.
I think his family is scottish
Nearing the end of the pre-McCain era we're not allowed to call the US an empire and we can't say that the US is in recession. China is holding now 1.5 trillion dollars from trade surplus, earning low interest and yet it's advantageous to have the US consuming its production. So let's say the US is the reigning empire, overextended, in debt, in recession with only a mechanized millitary to do its bidding? Do you really think McCain's belligerence will be limited to diplomacy.
Would have been totally with you there Hoggy except for your dreadful text-like spelling, which lets down the whole Irish education system. But it is Niall as in the river NILE, and he's a very good guy, love his Ascent of Money programme. Peeltower displays terrible ignorance.
Very good about the past.
Not so good about the present.
"I know it looked like appeasement with the Nazis, and the present policy looks like appeasement, but don't you make this conclusion." Well, why not? If it looks like a duck....
"American empire, if you forgive" - no, I will not forgive. The U.S. is not an empire. Not at all. Calling it an empire goes against truth,
(cont.)
@bum1973 Ferguson is a good historian, I have read several of his books. His is not factually incorrect. Firstly, German is a concept, envisioned by Schiller and willed into existence by Bismarck. The Nation-State of Germany doesn't have much of a track record of anything. The western parts of what we know call Germany were actually very tolerant of minorities as Jews AFTER around 1750. The Prussian lands in the 19th Century were not bad. Austrian lands in the SE were the most violent.
And the bumpy ride followed by collapse is not of "American empire," but of American democracy (236 y.o., which is very long for a democracy). Maybe of America as such.
My only problem with Ferguson in this is when he claims that the tendency in (so-called) democracies to delay or be weary of imperial adventures and only be willing/able to respond after Pearl Harbour-like incidents is a BAD thing..isn't it a good thing for the very reason that self-defence is the only justifiable form of war?
A Self Regarding Opportunist - A Poseur - No Sense Of Morality...
The problem with Empire is when the Empire has become victorious and universal. The universal Empire leads to internal collapse.
See Carol Quiggley's Tragedy and Hope.
Can't wait to read the Assent of Money.
Could not. Could not care less. Could care less makes no sense. If part of you can care less than you do already, it suggests that you do somewhat care to begin with.
Ok Niall is an Irish name nd heS ENLGISH WTF LIKE IM IRISH ND MY NAMES NIALL...
UR MAN SAYS NEIL...
He is certainly nothing to do with Scotland!
malma1 I also have to ask: what makes you say he is amoral? I read his Wikipedia page and it is clear he has conservative, approaching neo-conservative views, believes in the pre-eminence of the West and has tried to justify wars like the Iraq war, is that what you're getting at?
I don't expect he would always be right, although I'd be surprised if he actually put forth inaccurate claims. But I can respect your criticism, because it addresses his premises and style from at least an ostentatiously objective vantage. Calling someone a "pig" doesn't quite rise to that level for me.
One note of order. Declaring the 2005 Paris riots as "Muslim riots" is not an outright falsehood. There are reasons for not declaring them as such, but I can understand why someone might do so.
Well actually he isn't always factually correct. I just finished War of the World and I loved it, except for the last section where he e.g. makes the outright false claim that the 2005 Paris Riots were Muslim riots. As for intelligence it surprised me that while being superb for 625 pages, Ferguson in the epilogue appeared at times simplistic & seemed to suffer from an anxious undertone which I find difficult to put in words (xenophobic is too clearly too much, but skeptic is an understatement).
The power of Chinese Central Bank is yet to be known to the world. Already most of the top Industrial men in India have huge debt with Chinese Central Banks.
If a movie were to be done about Niall Ferguson; Russell Crowe would have to play the part...lol
That is the worst music I've ever heard. Apart from that, this series is good.
I watched his series: The accent of Money. I found it to be very informative and information rich. He did not seem to have a political ax to grind. He wanted to educate us how the economy works and these ecomomic bubbles and crashed are repeated many times in history. Understanding history helps us understand what is happening today.
Indeed so. Niall is a great writer and picks a lot of specifics in his works that I really enjoy. I encourage all to read his various stuff.
Niall is a great man; his classes are extremely tough, if you blink, vital information will be lost for good.
ferguson is the chap. Does anyone know where I can find the TV series?
CWK922,
I couldn't complete the exercise.
My hand smelled too bad.
Which book were you waiting on? You should enjoy his works.
Ferguson is an intelligent, and engaging speaker.
Very good points...my sentiments, exactly!
Same to you, Spencer! :-) Same to you!
not to mention resources= oil
It could be a misprint.
brilliant as always !
I love youtube
I like it.
Actually, I'm English and my name is Niall and we pronounce it (Nigh-all).....
I, as an American cringed but he the Scott probably thought "another American mispronouncing it."
Monty Python!
Dreadful sound on the synth at the beginning of the talk. The composer in trying to appear sophisticated reveals his vulgarity of taste - like Ferguson does in every clip he is involved in, regarding his amoral take on history and his career at Harvard...
....is this guy claiming that getting educated makes you a fascist?!
He's pointing out it doesn't innoculate you against it. Not the same thing at all.
Gottenhimfella Ok, but if that was his point that doesn't come across in his talk.
"Huuuuge.. tracks of land!"
tracts not tracks