I think he went over his allotted time so he apologized for it. There was another lecture afterwards (it sounded good as well, too bad it wasn't included).
Applaud this channel for getting it's audio pretty spot on. It sounds like a feed directly from the podium which has cut out extraneous bleed which I must say is so welcome with how many lecture uploads fail to achieve. Thank you!!! Also love this fascinating lecture, keep up the good work!
"Unity in Diversity" is our Indonesian motto. Living harmoniously in peace with hundreds of languages and cultures. Indonesia was not, is not and will never be Islamic country. World map is inaccurate since Mercator projection 1569. In reality Indonesia is huge as Russia including our ocean and even much richer. Even much bigger before West and Middle East came took our former Australia, Singapore, Malaysia+Brunei, South Thailand, The Philippines, Vietnam even Madagascar Africa. Actually countries in Europe are just regencies and provinces in Indonesia. Learn the fact who are the men on Malaysian Ringgit notes, Singaporean Dollar notes also Brunei Dollar notes. The founder of Mindanao and Manila of The Philippines. Indeed of our Minangkabau Sumatra Kingdoms. Even the writer and composer of Singaporean National Anthem came from Our Bukittinggi West Sumatra Indonesia. And grave of my beloved belated maternal Grandma Lady of Bukittinggi, is in Batam East Sumatra Indonesia's small islands next to Singapore. Singaporeans favourite escape destination. Egypt isn't the oldest, even Egypt is very poor, very dry, far off the center of the Equator line. Most highest humidity on Earth: Indonesia, meaning many much older artifacts has decayed much faster than just few thousands years Egypt. And Judaism/Christianity/Islam are just the same dumb. Even most of people know nothing about much older ancient modern civilization here in Indonesia before mega eruption of Toba supervolcano of Sumatra 75,000 years ago. Including 25,000 years old Gunung Padang pyramid in Indonesia. Hindu isn't from India either. Original Hindu is Indonesia not in India. Hindu in India and in Bali are totally different Indus, Indo, Hindia, Hindu = Indus Islands = Indo Nesos = Indonesia. The same with Astrology came from Indonesia not by the Greeks, Egyptians nor Aramaic/Arabs/Jews. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are just frauds branches of modified Hinduism in India. Real Hindu came from Indonesia not India. Hindu, Hindia, Indus, Indo, etc = Indo Nesos, Indus islands, Indonesia over 17000 islands, exactly on the center of the equator line, the center of all civilization, all Indo around the world came from here especially because of eruption of Toba supervolcano Sumatra 75000 years ago bigger than Yellowstone USA, resulted today world's largest volcanic lake Toba Sumatra. Yet, world map is wrong since Mercator projection 1569, real Indonesia is Huge as Russia and even much richer than the rest of the world. Dutch + British VOC in Indonesia was richer than any today existing world's richest companies combined (research yourself). Coffee is native in Indonesia not brought by the Dutch. Too many lies they wrote about Indonesia even at formal school books! The fact is whole Europe, UK, USA has been built with Indonesia's wealth for centuries by mentally and intellectually they hasn't changed a bit. But inner the same mediaeval.
I always believed we forgot how real capitalism formed, not because of a virtuous colonial life, but because of the East India Company major corporate power that combined military, economic, legal, political, and even missionary-religious attributes. This is not a critique of the history, what happened happened, but of our modern story of economic development that ignores the messy details of the actual practices that led to our world today. Thanks for the scholarship and dedication!
No one had representation. Not least the British people themselves. The Old Sarum rotten borough type situations wouldn't change until the great reform act of 1832, and even then, only 1 in 6 men gained the vote.
Best hour spent on TH-cam in a long time. Disheartening to discover that we are in the same, if not worse, situation now even with so called representation.
Great: This explains a lot of the situation happening in the world today-2024. Pattern repeats in process with different variables- world trade conceptual models, AI, etc.
This is possibly the best AUDIO breakdown of the situation that i have heard. The US in 2024 has devolved into an Oriental Despotism like in Bengal. Same players (multinational corporations), no actual representation anymore, and a standing army to enforce burdensome levels of taxation (IRS, FBI, FEDERAL MARSHALL SERVICE).
Finally, we are into the modern age of lectures where audio, video, graphics, and content meld together to create a perfect universe. Best AV presentation I've seen yet, Govnor!
May I recommend the podcast available on youtube: The Rest Is History Listen to their take on the East India Company. Not to detract from this excellent lecture!
Excellent presentation. For decades I've been trying to understand why the American colonists became so upset about a stupid tax on tea. Now I FINALLY understand: they feared that the British East India Company would do to the American colonies what the Company had already done to Bengal.
But what the settlers did to the Natives was even worse. Basically the settlers wanted their own colony where they could exploit some other people and land to enrich themselves.
No, the real cause was the PROCLAMATION LINE OF 1763. The line was drawn to set a reservation for the Indians to the west . This prevented the big land speculators ( Washington, etc) and the settlers from class . This line had to be removed so the American empire could come to be.
In as far as human nature is concerned, yes, we had to have an Empire. In as much as Christian love is concerned, no, we never needed the Empire, we could have worked with the native peoples.
Thank you, I greatly appreciated your presentation on this topic. I've always been strongly interested in this subject. History was my minor at University. I think one of the things that interests me regarding this period of time is that my family was very much involved in it. My family came to America in the 1620's and 1630's primarily, but I also had extended family on the Mayflower. The Revolutionary War was very much a civil war within my family. I had family on both sides. My great-grandfather (x4) was Captain Edward Ruggles, the minute man, who served under General George Washington. My great-uncle (x4) was Sir Timothy Ruggles, who was a Brigadier General in the king's Army and also mandamus Council to the king, he was also the president of the Stamp Act Congress. They were also first cousins of John Adams. I had several ancestors who were "Sons of Liberty." We had family on both sides in this period of History and it always has interested me. Once again I would like to say thank you very much, and I would like to learn more. Sincerely, Henry c. Ruggles
Am listening to this, purely by accident on my walk to achieve my 10,000 steps goal,from Pune, India. Wonderful, didn't know how time passed and steps jncreased.😂
@@jonhelmer8591 Your mother was born in India because of the grace of God - Who is able to achieve great good... even though through the Central Bankers😊
@rmp7400 That God and his grace are made up. But Good Wizard (G-d for short) believes in all of us and sends his Holy Text which tells us how Harry Pottter the magical savior defied inept tyrants to fight the greater evil.All who believe in his saving magic can go to Hogwarts on fullride scholarships.
Geez, that was fascinating. Thinking about the revolution in the context of what was happening with the British East India company in India and not just the 7 years war is something I was unfamiliar with. Would highly recommend following this up with one of William Dalrymple’s talks on the BEIC.
Just stumbled onto this channel. The presenter has such amazing knowledge, all off the top of his head. Great array of historical information presented in an engaging way. Well done!
As we observe so called globalism, global trade and even State/Corp power in our own day, I found this presentation equally fascinating and to compare some of the parallels. Even to the point we got here today as much a result of them getting there too.
Seems clear to me that the United States never learned from the errors of the British government and general and the East Indian Company in particular.
A fine lecture. My question revolves around the 'new form of civil society' ( first mentioned, 13:38 ) beginning in the earliest decade of the 18th Century, which is increasingly characterized by the rise of individualism. Specific examples of this new individuality are given such as the people choosing for themselves their employment of labor. Yet consider this vis a vis the conditions mentioned in Dicken's, Oliver Twist. Does the juxtaposition of the two imply that London had taken giant steps backward; that the people remain as serfs but their new lords are the industrialists?
My question is his description of British people as 'farmers'. They weren't farmers. They were agricultural labourers. They didn't own or rent farms. They worked on the land as hired labourers.
I think the English-American Empire, dedicated to Capitalism and Colonist ambitions was definitely an "Empire of Liberty"... Mr. Vaughn is intelligent and speaks very well. Thank You VERY MUCH for this talk..!! I appreciate the 'American Revolution Institute' and 'Cincinnati Society' for their amazing and honest presentation of our North American history..!!
Nay, Good Sir, 'twas not a trespass but a pleasure. You're insight is obviously fundamental to the understanding of the colonial perspective & experience. Had you twice the time you had no doubt I would have twice the questions. Not because you were unclear rather because you opened so many windows and doors upon other questions and matters of great concern. My first question would be, by 1775 what percentage of the economic power of the colonies was tied to the plantations?
24:30 what is he talking about? The British East India Company had a mercenary army in India several times larger than Britain's own standing army! They didn't need to defeat the Mughal empire though, they bought it out. By 1760 the British were in charge via the Raj. The last vestige of the Mughal Empire in Delhi which was under Company authority prior to the advent of British Raj was abolished and seized by the Crown in the aftermath of the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 for its support of the rebellion.
By saying: ~ "The East India Company doesn't go to the East with a large army and conquer [...]" He very clearly means that it started as a commercial venture - not a military one. It didn't land in India with a 20 thousand strong army and started burning things down. Instead it began as a "bunch of merchants setting shop". It took over from the Duch East India Company directly after it went bankrupt, if I remember correctly. As it grew in scope and power it started to employ and train it's own troops, all true, but the quality and loyalty of those troops was highly questionable (as you yourself very rightly point out with regards to Sepoy Mutiny). The East India Company Sepoys needed direct military support from regular Redcoats to deal with the local opposition who was very often backed by their own foreign contingent of allies and supporters - the French being one of them. Sir Arthur Wellesley - Duke of Wellington - pretty much started his military career there.
@@Kwodlibet First off, the lecturer even referring to them as "a global corporation" or simply "a corporation on the London stock exchange" is misleading. People just think they're AMAZON OR APPLE in the age of sail. The word MONOPOLY - which is used by idiot liberals for the last 100 years to mean "A big company" is a term from monarchy which has lost all meaning now. It means the monarch has granted you a monopoly which doesn't simply mean you control all means of production, it means others shall have no access. East India had that. They are also COLONIZERS. It's not like they sat in some corporate HQ, they are establishing British law, magistrates, engaging in war w/ their rivals, acts of brigandry and piracy with the blessing of the King.. The profits from their first years are entirely from piracy, and when they landed in India they immediately went to war w/ the Mughal Empire. It's more appropriate to think of them as an extension of the King and aristocracy, not as some "company" unless you can imagine Amazon not digging some new EU tax then sending warships and marines to Brussels: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Mughal_war_(1686%E2%80%931690)
@@Kwodlibet Cool 'history' you mean dilettante. Here, learn something... "The English and Dutch East India Companies' Invasions of India In the early 17th century, the Dutch and English East India Companies turned their eyes towards India, as part of their grand schemes to develop extensive trade networks across the Indian and China Seas. They were faced with two significant challenges: 1) gaining the favor of the Mughals who now controlled most of North India and, 2) pushing out the Portuguese who were well entrenched along the west coast. The Mughals By 1600, the Muslim Mughals under Akbar the Great (r. 1556-1605) ruled most of India. The Mughals had arrived on the subcontinent about the same time as the Portuguese. Akbar was a ‘workaholic’ who seldom slept more than three hours a night and personally oversaw the administration of his vast country. He built his empire by conciliating conquered rulers through marriage and diplomacy, winning him the support of even his non-Muslim subjects. www.worldhistory.org/article/2048/the-english-and-dutch-east-india-companies-invasio/
@@Kwodlibet Cool "history" you mean. Not like the lecturer doesn't remark on it all going to hell quickly. THE ENGLISH AND DUTCH EAST INDIA COMPANIES INVASION OF INDIA The EEIC Takes Full Control of India In 1686, the EEIC felt the time was right to embark on a direct war with the now fading Mughal Empire to obtain broad trading privileges across the entire continent and more specifically to get permission to build a fortress in Bengal. A fortress in Bengal was seen as a critical step to protect the company’s burgeoning trade there from the Dutch and interlopers. The First Anglo-Mughal War (1686-1690) began at the Hugli River at Calcutta and ultimately was fought on both coasts. Often called ‘Child’s War’, it was driven by one of the company’s major stockholders, Josiah Child, and proved to be a great embarrassment to the English nation. Twelve British battleships were involved, and several battles raged across the continent including a siege of Bombay and burning of the city of Balasore. The British navy blockaded the Mughal ports on the western coast and attacked its army on land. Several major cities were significantly damaged in the fray including Bombay, Madras, Calcutta and Chittagong. n the wake of this bloody uprising, the British government effectively abolished the EEIC in 1858, taking away all its administrative and taxing powers. The Crown assumed control of all its territories and armed forces. Thus began the British Raj and the direct British colonial rule over India which continued until India was given its independence in 1947. www.worldhistory.org/article/2048/the-english-and-dutch-east-india-companies-invasio/
Gladly, the Irish learned enough from the Americans and the British to carry out an effective revolution. Sadly, the Scottish have not. The ruling class in Britain has always had a southern bias and, today, one can still see in economic degradation and poverty in Northern England the failure of the state to create a country fit for all.
Darn! I was so misinformed. I had thought the English were desperate for a king and they accepted James. Or, was it that they offered him a greater Kingdom than Scotland alone could possibly offer?
What an excellent lecture!! So interesting and engaging. He prepared so well, and delivers it in such a helpful way, repeatedly recapping and summarising what he's been saying, so that you really understand and retain the information. Teaching and revision in one. Masterful! Thank you to the Professor, and to ARI for uploading.
This was a fantastic lecture. There is a very obvious correspondence between the British constitutional instruments of the latter 18th century and the US constitution of 1789. And I've always been a bit confused by this. Why would the colonies put themselves through a revolution only to institute a new system that was almost exactly the same as the system they overthrew? This history shows that the colonies weren't necessarily overthrowing injustice and finding freedom, but rather were trying to preserve a liberty that they were afraid was descending into tyranny.
And shorn of the first 10 amendments, as originally written, the Constitution can be read as a document that protects the rights and the richest of the wealthiest. Then you come to the 10 amendments: the right to habeas corpus, the right to freedom of the press, the right to assembly and the right to present grievances to the government - to say nothing of the right to Religious Freedom, and that part of the Constitution is radical. Some Scholars argue that the 10 amendments are the Apex of the Enlightenment.
The "United States" was founded as a series of crown corporate colonies given charters by the crown to corporate investors for creating plantation based states in the Americas. Nobody who came to America from England (or Europe) could do so unless under such a charter. What separated the United States from Australia or Canada was the fact that those charters were never under direct rule of the British parliament. One only needs to look at the original charter for the State of Pennsylvania to see the concept. As such, it was a feudal or at least neo feudal system where the land owners/plantatation owners were given political power to run the colony as they saw fit via the House of Burgesses. Only land owners could vote, only landowners could become members of the House of Burgesses and only the largest land owners could become President as almost all of the founding fathers were members of the HOuse of Burgesses. The "American Revolution" was simply those former Burgesses just declaring themselves as independent from the British Parliament and government even though they mostly maintained the original charters for many of the early colonial states with some amendments to create the new state constitutions.
The original post is problematic because of, for example, freedom of the press, freedom of Assembly, the right to petition the government for redress of grievances and habeas corpus. There was a definite populous strain within the revolution and it couldn't be denied or put down. If it had been denied or put down the first 10 amendments would look very different, No doubt
@@tereseshaw7650 All persons who sailed from England to settle in America had to get a charter from the Crown. The Puritan charter was for the Massachusetts Bay Colony which was also a corporate colony along with Georgia which is the name of the company as well. All of these charter documents are available online.
The tales of the British East India company reminds me of corporate personhood and that the thirteen colonies still seem to rule America through the Ivy League despite the power of monopolistic corporations enabled by regulatory capture. I wonder what James Vaughn has to say about America's enabling of Communist China and its current "buyer's remorse" which is so puzzling to spectators like me. Also how did the US become so beholden to "subjects" of the former British empire in the sphere of the fourth estate?
While I realize that the talk is specifically about the causes of the Revolution, the speaker keeps referring to the Atlantic American trade which would include the now Canadian provinces. The map shown at 28minutes into the talk completely excludes any Maritime province from this discourse which to me, renders the talk somewhat revisionist and skewed. The British East India company was involved in the fur and beaver pelt trade to the almost extinction of beavers just as much as trade with the saunter colonies. This would be a more accurate account of the extent of Transatlantic trade notwithstanding the revolution which was to follow.
Could the fact that English Common Law is based on "Precedent" be the catalyst for the Revolution? A Tea tax could have been seen as opening the door for a "precedent" to be set allowing the English Parliament to dictate the levying of direct taxation upon American Colonists?
yes and the precedence was more about taxes as tariffs. The US practiced import substitution - this was a big force driving the civil war since the slavers wanted "free trade" with Great Britain...
Its quite obvious from this lecture that the Indian Princes made nothing out of the East India Company. Which raises the question , how did a few thousand men control 300 million.
I suppose the same question could be asked of Spain and the conquistadors. How could they have created or 'won' the largest Empire in the Americas? An Empire that spanned more of the two continents than any other empire ever came close to garnering.
Because India in the 18th century wasn't a united country like today it was a collection of different Kingdoms ruled by different Kings Queens princes Dukes and Lords.
Also forgot 16 mins in, the city of London is a free territory within the kingdom, and the home to the international banking and finance which drives the commerce, and the displacement of agricultural rural dwellers that he speaks about.
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885I don't understand. Could you give some explanations, or examples. Perhaps you were talking about the division in opinions regarding the war in Ukraine?
@@RingsLoreMasterYes I wrote an op-ed about that when I was a graduate student and I got hired to write op-eds for the University Minnesota Daily newspaper. That was 25 years ago!! hahaha. Military keeps playing with big toys Published May 14, 1998 With Mother’s Day as its focus, this past week has been an ode to anti-militarism in the Midwest. I have been quoted in The Minnesota Daily as one of three University students to conduct civil disobedience at Alliant-Tech, a Hopkins-based conglomerate peddling $1.3 billion per year in tax-funded killing machines. On Mother’s Day, I also joined 50 other people in an annual demonstration at Project Extremely Low Frequence (ELF). ELF is the Northern Wisconsin-based electromagnetic “first strike” trigger system for one half of the U.S. nuclear weapons force. As a result of this demonstration, I have been charged with trespassing, which carries a five-year suspension of my driver’s license as its penalty. Here in the United States and specifically the Twin Cities, we are in “the belly of the beast,” and nonviolent direct action is the only means of confronting the corporate-military’s escalating addiction to world annihilation. Fellow students must recognize that the University and other centers of higher learning play critical roles in promoting war-mongering. For example, only a handful of contractors receive more military research funds than the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and John Hopkins University. Why does the University research how to better disseminate chemical weapons at high-mach, high altitudes? New techniques for missile design analysis, stronger tank and weapon materials and the development of an aggressive tailless fighter jet are just a few of the other underground “higher education” projects at the University. In fact, with the University receiving $17 million in Department of Defense funds for 1997 (up from $11 million in 1993), it seems that the post-Cold War peace dividends are delayed at best. The research contracts on campus reveal that nano-technology, or “the mechanizing of the molecular level,” is a dominant interest at the University. Computers are taking on a crucial role in designing a brave new world of fabricated nano-structures that will display two-way memory effects in nano-magnetic devices. The broad military implications start with machine-to-machine air traffic control and end with cellular automata used for self-propagating molecular robotics, brain implants and other man-machine surveillance devices. The grand achievement exposed on campus is geared towards a “NATO neural network” emphasizing how the University is contributing to the most bloated and destructive system in the world. The federal Office of Management and Budget states that the military is only 17 percent of the national budget, but several factors are obfuscated by this misleading figure. The correct percentage hovers around 50 percent. During the Vietnam War, when the government created the so-called “Unified Budget,” which includes unallocatable trust funds - social security is not part of the dispensable congressional budget - the military percentage instantly shrank. Retired generals and admirals at the Center for Defense Information also point out that military spending was hidden in non-military portions of the budget. For instance, here at the University further military research is most likely being funded by NASA, the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation. Very significantly, the 17 percent federal figure does not include past military spending costs, i.e. the cost of veterans benefits and the 80 percent of the interest on the national debt that is from military spending - thank you, Ronald Reagan. Since the combined military budgets of Iraq, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Russia and China are still less than half of the United State’s official 17 percent figure, obviously “defense” is not our defining military role. Among the world’s recent major conflicts, 90 percent involved one or more parties receiving U.S. weapons or military technology prior to the outbreak of war. Recently, the U.S. share of world arms exports has increased by 50 percent and the United States now supplies more than 60 percent of the world’s military weapons, with half of the cost funded by U.S. taxpayers. The government has consistently ignored recommendations by the Congressional Budget Office that suggested cutting the incompetent B-2 stealth bomber, the F-22 jet, the Trident II D-5 nuclear missile and Star Wars. President Clinton just last fall ended a 20-year ban on advanced weapons sales to Latin America. Now Lockhead-Martin, which has operations in the Twin Cities, can sell F-16s to be used against democracy movements in our hemisphere. Recent military scandals include training death squads for use against grass roots democracy in Indonesia, Columbia and Mexico coupled with the approval of bio-weapon testing within U.S. cities. The addition of 13 more countries to NATO promises the further exportation of military jobs along with corporate welfare costs estimated at $250 billion. Even though the Twin Cities receives hundred of millions of dollars per year in military projects - 500 pages list just 1993 contracts - downsizing, increased profits and further environmental superfund sites are definitive of military spending. Ironically, federal corporate arms export subsidies equal the total amount of subsidies cut from federal social service programs. These unabashed acts of greedy, bloody U.S. militarism are not surprising considering that in 1994 Congress passed a law enabling the Department of Defense, or any of its contractors, to test biological weapons in any U.S. city, provided that they give a city official 30 days notice. Currently, the Pentagon, at the behest of the military industry, is requesting a waiver of the anti-personnel land mine moratorium, even though 124 nations have already signed the international mine ban treaty. Furthermore, the United States, like India, is hypocritically in the process of conducting six underground nuclear tests, in direct violation of the International Test Ban Treaty. Direct global democracy inspires hope, though, as the protests of French nuclear testing proved, as well as Alliant Tech land mine production and Project ELF recently being judged illegal by international law. Students at the University, which has $110,000 invested with Alliant Tech, have a duty to rise up and take action against our rogue state. Under the 1996 Solomon Amendment, if military recruitment is cancelled on campus, all federal funding for the University would be stopped. Just as the United States-funded military regime of Indonesia is now shut down by students, we here need to take similar measures. Conversion to an efficient, productive and sustainable society is the clear choice in the face of our behemoth killer monster. Students should demand an end to the profit-driven U.S. war machine. Only by converting the military will a sustainable society be achieved. Drew Hempel is a University College graduate student pursuing a Master of Liberal Studies.
Eye and mind opening lecture! I'm reeling over the things I begin to understand, not just over the past, but explaining our American culture. As an advice to the speaker: this should be presented over and over again but without belaboring points already made. The lecture could easily have been 20 minutes shorter. Still: stupendous information. Thank you!
Hey the colonists weren’t wrong they could see the writing on the wall.. even if it wasn’t the crowns intent initially.. could definitely be India pt 2
So then what is the difference between this and the present day inequality we see; the conduct of institutional finance and it’s industrial and political beneficiaries vs your average American. Student loans, housing, credit card, medical debt. What percentage of American citizens, today, feel like they have a degree of influence or control over their daily lives and futures and the tools and other means to pursue that “enfranchisement”.
Fantastic lecture. The Brits essentially taxed tea because they were stressed and wanted to make a symbolic point to the settlers that they truly had no control. Fools! At least that bloke from the end quote had some sense.
It is interesting to note that the tea that was thrown into Boston harbour was tea of the Dutch Combined East India Company, and the three ships involved were American owned and crewed. There is more behind the story than has been told.
I heard it was the Knights of the Golden Circle and they're an offshoot of the Freemasons and the plot was designed at some little Tavern that I forget the name of
It is misleading to compare the British East India Company to "companies" as we know them today. In those days people were not free to start companies. The King issued a royal charter: Usually a permit to create a protected monopoly. Today we would call this "Fascism". "Companies" with such political protection from competition always become bad actors.
No. Total prohibition or control by absolute rulers of voluntary exchange was the norm for thousands of years in all societies. Only gradually did some rulers begin to allow freedom of association (including creation of private "companies") and of exchange in some areas of life. The extent to which rulers then retain arbitrary veto power on those freedoms is the measure of fascism. "Mercantilism" is the aspect of fascism limiting my freedom to trade with people in foreign countries.
other than where he uses the term Conservative for who are actually more as Monarchs or aristocratic or autocratic.. I'd say the libertarian colonists of the Americas were to be pushed to Conservativism , after the fact as spoken . a very good historical context none the less. these committees or institutions are fundamental to remembering our past peoples constructs they stood for. we should not be accountable to pay for other peoples failed policy that do not represent our peoples needs . those that steal from us for their own crooked endeavors are indeed crooks
Wonderful! Thank you so much for capturing this and making it available. Can someone help me find any information on the relationship between the British EIC and the founding fathers of the United States? I've recently become fascinated by the subject after learning Ben Franklin advocated that the (then new) U.S. adopt the company's flag as our own.
Very good lecture we had such a good past Great British Empire it is horrible to watch what is happening today might even start seeing empty shelves lost or trade routes and the freedom of movement
He forgot the REAL REASON: THE PROCLAMATION LINE OF 1763, forbids all English colonies to take the land reserved for the Indians west of this line . The rich big land owners and speculators and the settler class all wanted that land to get rich on. America empire could not be without this removing this line
That is correct however you forget one important detail: The Indian tribes started selling land off to settlers in exchange for gold, guns and whatever other trade good in sections, this is something that often more than not get overlooked because it is more convenient for the American empire narrative types as well as some other revisionist pieces of history and their historian propagandists.
And leaving out the Holdings of France and Spain is significant in what way? After all, the American Wealth that surpassed that of England was created primarily east of the Appalachian mountains.
@@RingsLoreMaster the proclamation line is meaningless in the context OP is attempting to apply. The Louisiana purchase covered a third of the continent and Spain had already colonized the southwest, California and Texas. Pretending like the colonials were prevented from conquering native lands by the crown is just stupid. The purpose was to suppress security costs, not some noble effort by the king of England nor “conflict driven by greedy speculators”.
Wasn't there a lucrative line on the go involving the importation of tea for New England's more discerning palates?! I gather that the VOC were very happy to supply certain Bostonian entrepreneurs, John Hancock amongst them, with this condiment. The imposition of a tea monopoly, only that transported by the 'Too Big To Fail' HEIC, was going to be basically duty free and thus undercut the smuggled beverage, thereby wrecking the alternative funding stream!
The British Government should have realized that the American colonies’ economies were growing at great speed and that tax revenues would correspondingly increase.
Anyone ever notice the templar insignia all over the east India company and that they were chartered by members of city of London...city of London which is a sovereign state just like DC and Vatican city.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![[#2024MAMA] BIGBANG (빅뱅) - 뱅뱅뱅 (BANG BANG BANG) + FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EQsYfiPR9uM/mqdefault.jpg)
Fantastic... He apologises at the end!? I could have listened all night.
Thank you for this...
Perfect!
I think he went over his allotted time so he apologized for it. There was another lecture afterwards (it sounded good as well, too bad it wasn't included).
Applaud this channel for getting it's audio pretty spot on. It sounds like a feed directly from the podium which has cut out extraneous bleed which I must say is so welcome with how many lecture uploads fail to achieve. Thank you!!!
Also love this fascinating lecture, keep up the good work!
Yes - really clean audio!!!
"Unity in Diversity" is our Indonesian motto.
Living harmoniously in peace with hundreds of languages and cultures.
Indonesia was not, is not and will never be Islamic country.
World map is inaccurate since Mercator projection 1569.
In reality Indonesia is huge as Russia including our ocean and even much richer.
Even much bigger before West and Middle East came took our former Australia, Singapore, Malaysia+Brunei, South Thailand, The Philippines, Vietnam even Madagascar Africa.
Actually countries in Europe are just regencies and provinces in Indonesia.
Learn the fact who are the men on Malaysian Ringgit notes, Singaporean Dollar notes also Brunei Dollar notes.
The founder of Mindanao and Manila of The Philippines.
Indeed of our Minangkabau Sumatra Kingdoms.
Even the writer and composer of Singaporean National Anthem came from Our Bukittinggi West Sumatra Indonesia.
And grave of my beloved belated maternal Grandma Lady of Bukittinggi, is in Batam East Sumatra Indonesia's small islands next to Singapore.
Singaporeans favourite escape destination.
Egypt isn't the oldest, even Egypt is very poor, very dry, far off the center of the Equator line.
Most highest humidity on Earth: Indonesia, meaning many much older artifacts has decayed much faster than just few thousands years Egypt.
And Judaism/Christianity/Islam are just the same dumb.
Even most of people know nothing about much older ancient modern civilization here in Indonesia before mega eruption of Toba supervolcano of Sumatra 75,000 years ago.
Including 25,000 years old Gunung Padang pyramid in Indonesia.
Hindu isn't from India either. Original Hindu is Indonesia not in India.
Hindu in India and in Bali are totally different
Indus, Indo, Hindia, Hindu = Indus Islands = Indo Nesos = Indonesia.
The same with Astrology came from Indonesia not by the Greeks, Egyptians nor Aramaic/Arabs/Jews.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are just frauds branches of modified Hinduism in India.
Real Hindu came from Indonesia not India.
Hindu, Hindia, Indus, Indo, etc = Indo Nesos, Indus islands, Indonesia over 17000 islands, exactly on the center of the equator line, the center of all civilization, all Indo around the world came from here especially because of eruption of Toba supervolcano Sumatra 75000 years ago bigger than Yellowstone USA, resulted today world's largest volcanic lake Toba Sumatra.
Yet, world map is wrong since Mercator projection 1569, real Indonesia is Huge as Russia and even much richer than the rest of the world.
Dutch + British VOC in Indonesia was richer than any today existing world's richest companies combined (research yourself).
Coffee is native in Indonesia not brought by the Dutch.
Too many lies they wrote about Indonesia even at formal school books!
The fact is whole Europe, UK, USA has been built with Indonesia's wealth for centuries by mentally and intellectually they hasn't changed a bit.
But inner the same mediaeval.
I always believed we forgot how real capitalism formed, not because of a virtuous colonial life, but because of the East India Company major corporate power that combined military, economic, legal, political, and even missionary-religious attributes. This is not a critique of the history, what happened happened, but of our modern story of economic development that ignores the messy details of the actual practices that led to our world today. Thanks for the scholarship and dedication!
Capitalism formed way before that.
Oh wow, when?
Yep they carried a real powerful ideology - get rich and conquer.
No one had representation. Not least the British people themselves. The Old Sarum rotten borough type situations wouldn't change until the great reform act of 1832, and even then, only 1 in 6 men gained the vote.
Absolutely brilliant! Best lecture I have heard in 20 years! Where do I send this guy some money! Thanks!
Best hour spent on TH-cam in a long time. Disheartening to discover that we are in the same, if not worse, situation now even with so called representation.
It is. Knowledge is power though or else it wouldn't be mentioned even by the ancients. And, faith.
@@melissasmind2846 I like that.
@@mr.w5132 I get high on knowledge.
Brilliant! You get the feeling he was trying to skim the cream off of 100 hours of fascinating knowledge.
I love the way articulated or captured it.
A fantastic lecture, where anyone who wants to understand the roots of 1776. A brilliant lecturer, whose university students are very blessed.
Great: This explains a lot of the situation happening in the world today-2024. Pattern repeats in process with different variables- world trade conceptual models, AI, etc.
Please trespass more on our time. Very informative. I never knew someone spoke on the floor of the House of Commons on our behalf. Thank you.
This is possibly the best AUDIO breakdown of the situation that i have heard.
The US in 2024 has devolved into an Oriental Despotism like in Bengal.
Same players (multinational corporations), no actual representation anymore, and a standing army to enforce burdensome levels of taxation (IRS, FBI, FEDERAL MARSHALL SERVICE).
Finally, we are into the modern age of lectures where audio, video, graphics, and content meld together to create a perfect universe. Best AV presentation I've seen yet, Govnor!
May I recommend the podcast available on youtube:
The Rest Is History
Listen to their take on the East India Company.
Not to detract from this excellent lecture!
Thank you
Thank you for the recommendation. I am listening to it now. And I think this is the right one.
th-cam.com/video/Ei0mlL8vSDM/w-d-xo.html
I wonder how many of the power-elite in the thirteen colonies owned stocks in the East India Company prior to the declaration of independence.
All of them .... the first flag to fly in 1777 was the EIC flag by George Washington in Massachusetts
Excellent presentation.
For decades I've been trying to understand why the American colonists became so upset about a stupid tax on tea. Now I FINALLY understand: they feared that the British East India Company would do to the American colonies what the Company had already done to Bengal.
But what the settlers did to the Natives was even worse. Basically the settlers wanted their own colony where they could exploit some other people and land to enrich themselves.
No, the real cause was the PROCLAMATION LINE OF 1763. The line was drawn to set a reservation for the Indians to the west . This prevented the big land speculators ( Washington, etc) and the settlers from class . This line had to be removed so the American empire could come to be.
In as far as human nature is concerned, yes, we had to have an Empire. In as much as Christian love is concerned, no, we never needed the Empire, we could have worked with the native peoples.
Fantastic, brilliant professor!
An outstanding lecture. Thank you.
Thank you, I greatly appreciated your presentation on this topic. I've always been strongly interested in this subject. History was my minor at University. I think one of the things that interests me regarding this period of time is that my family was very much involved in it. My family came to America in the 1620's and 1630's primarily, but I also had extended family on the Mayflower. The Revolutionary War was very much a civil war within my family. I had family on both sides. My great-grandfather (x4) was Captain Edward Ruggles, the minute man, who served under General George Washington. My great-uncle (x4) was Sir Timothy Ruggles, who was a Brigadier General in the king's Army and also mandamus Council to the king, he was also the president of the Stamp Act Congress. They were also first cousins of John Adams. I had several ancestors who were "Sons of Liberty." We had family on both sides in this period of History and it always has interested me. Once again I would like to say thank you very much, and I would like to learn more.
Sincerely, Henry c. Ruggles
What an interesting family history. That's cool!
Thanks for the paragraph of bragging. It really adds to the discussion
@@jsigur157 Thank you for your input; It was a wonderful indicator of your maturity and intelligence. Have a nice day ☺
Thanks for your good humor, I apologize@@henryruggles7523
@@jsigur157this just cries " i wish i could have a connection to history like you "
greetings from south wales, uk.. 🙂
fascinating..
thankyou for sharing this..
I just found out I have Welsh ancestors a few days ago, and coincidentally they were surnamed Evans. Greetings from the other side of the pond.
Am listening to this, purely by accident on my walk to achieve my 10,000 steps goal,from Pune, India.
Wonderful, didn't know how time passed and steps jncreased.😂
He forgot to mention that the East India company had it's own army and navy.
At one point the East India Company army was over 250,000 men.
I'm English but my Mum was born in India, because of the Empire.
@@jonhelmer8591
Your mother was born in India because of the grace of God - Who is able to achieve great good... even though through the Central Bankers😊
@rmp7400 That God and his grace are made up. But Good Wizard (G-d for short) believes in all of us and sends his Holy Text which tells us how Harry Pottter the magical savior defied inept tyrants to fight the greater evil.All who believe in his saving magic can go to Hogwarts on fullride scholarships.
Actually he did mention it at about the 1 hour mark
The aChIeVeMeNt Of AmErIcAn InDePeNdEnCe.
Geez, that was fascinating. Thinking about the revolution in the context of what was happening with the British East India company in India and not just the 7 years war is something I was unfamiliar with. Would highly recommend following this up with one of William Dalrymple’s talks on the BEIC.
th-cam.com/video/Ei0mlL8vSDM/w-d-xo.html
Phenomenal lecture. incredibly relevant. One of the many things that comes to mind is The morrell tariff that led to the American Civil War
Just stumbled onto this channel. The presenter has such amazing knowledge, all off the top of his head. Great array of historical information presented in an engaging way. Well done!
This was fascinating and illuminating but too short. More from this lecturer on this subject.
As we observe so called globalism, global trade and even State/Corp power in our own day, I found this presentation equally fascinating and to compare some of the parallels. Even to the point we got here today as much a result of them getting there too.
exactly, it felt like a straight line to me, to better understand our national history that is connected to our future global paths.
Seems clear to me that the United States never learned from the errors of the British government and general and the East Indian Company in particular.
A fine lecture.
My question revolves around the 'new form of civil society' ( first mentioned, 13:38 ) beginning in the earliest decade of the 18th Century, which is increasingly characterized by the rise of individualism.
Specific examples of this new individuality are given such as the people choosing for themselves their employment of labor.
Yet consider this vis a vis the conditions mentioned in Dicken's, Oliver Twist.
Does the juxtaposition of the two imply that London had taken giant steps backward; that the people remain as serfs but their new lords are the industrialists?
Dicken's classic, Oliver Twist, was first published in 1837. That is over one hundred years after John Dickenson.
My question is his description of British people as 'farmers'. They weren't farmers. They were agricultural labourers. They didn't own or rent farms. They worked on the land as hired labourers.
If I Venture a guess, that "farmer" in this instance is American English, would that in some way help to ease the inaccuracy?
Excellent lecture. I understand he was time limited, but it would be great to hear him go into even more detail.
Truly marvelous, thank you!
Could’ve gone on another hour though I’m comfortable at home. Thanks so much for a wonderful presentation.
Really good stuff. I haven't felt this good in a while. Great work. The truth warms the heart.
Thanks for posting
12 min in, I never heard our history explained this way. Absolutely love having my mind twisted like a pretzel. ❤
I think the English-American Empire, dedicated to Capitalism and Colonist ambitions was definitely an "Empire of Liberty"... Mr. Vaughn is intelligent and speaks very well. Thank You VERY MUCH for this talk..!! I appreciate the 'American Revolution Institute' and 'Cincinnati Society' for their amazing and honest presentation of our North American history..!!
Also forgetting the enclosures, and the civil war.
I must listen agan to all of the exposé. Stunning.Many thanks. West meets East and , I grew up in Shrewsbury.Our house was named Clive house !
Nay, Good Sir, 'twas not a trespass but a pleasure. You're insight is obviously fundamental to the understanding of the colonial perspective & experience. Had you twice the time you had no doubt I would have twice the questions. Not because you were unclear rather because you opened so many windows and doors upon other questions and matters of great concern.
My first question would be, by 1775 what percentage of the economic power of the colonies was tied to the plantations?
today sounds of echos of the past when it comes to govt monetary inflation debt taxes
24:30 what is he talking about? The British East India Company had a mercenary army in India several times larger than Britain's own standing army! They didn't need to defeat the Mughal empire though, they bought it out. By 1760 the British were in charge via the Raj. The last vestige of the Mughal Empire in Delhi which was under Company authority prior to the advent of British Raj was abolished and seized by the Crown in the aftermath of the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 for its support of the rebellion.
By saying: ~ "The East India Company doesn't go to the East with a large army and conquer [...]" He very clearly means that it started as a commercial venture - not a military one. It didn't land in India with a 20 thousand strong army and started burning things down. Instead it began as a "bunch of merchants setting shop".
It took over from the Duch East India Company directly after it went bankrupt, if I remember correctly.
As it grew in scope and power it started to employ and train it's own troops, all true, but the quality and loyalty of those troops was highly questionable (as you yourself very rightly point out with regards to Sepoy Mutiny). The East India Company Sepoys needed direct military support from regular Redcoats to deal with the local opposition who was very often backed by their own foreign contingent of allies and supporters - the French being one of them. Sir Arthur Wellesley - Duke of Wellington - pretty much started his military career there.
@@Kwodlibet First off, the lecturer even referring to them as "a global corporation" or simply "a corporation on the London stock exchange" is misleading. People just think they're AMAZON OR APPLE in the age of sail. The word MONOPOLY - which is used by idiot liberals for the last 100 years to mean "A big company" is a term from monarchy which has lost all meaning now. It means the monarch has granted you a monopoly which doesn't simply mean you control all means of production, it means others shall have no access. East India had that. They are also COLONIZERS. It's not like they sat in some corporate HQ, they are establishing British law, magistrates, engaging in war w/ their rivals, acts of brigandry and piracy with the blessing of the King.. The profits from their first years are entirely from piracy, and when they landed in India they immediately went to war w/ the Mughal Empire. It's more appropriate to think of them as an extension of the King and aristocracy, not as some "company" unless you can imagine Amazon not digging some new EU tax then sending warships and marines to Brussels:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Mughal_war_(1686%E2%80%931690)
@@edwardrichardson8254 Cool story, bro.
@@Kwodlibet Cool 'history' you mean dilettante. Here, learn something...
"The English and Dutch East India Companies' Invasions of India
In the early 17th century, the Dutch and English East India Companies turned their eyes towards India, as part of their grand schemes to develop extensive trade networks across the Indian and China Seas. They were faced with two significant challenges: 1) gaining the favor of the Mughals who now controlled most of North India and, 2) pushing out the Portuguese who were well entrenched along the west coast.
The Mughals
By 1600, the Muslim Mughals under Akbar the Great (r. 1556-1605) ruled most of India. The Mughals had arrived on the subcontinent about the same time as the Portuguese. Akbar was a ‘workaholic’ who seldom slept more than three hours a night and personally oversaw the administration of his vast country. He built his empire by conciliating conquered rulers through marriage and diplomacy, winning him the support of even his non-Muslim subjects.
www.worldhistory.org/article/2048/the-english-and-dutch-east-india-companies-invasio/
@@Kwodlibet Cool "history" you mean. Not like the lecturer doesn't remark on it all going to hell quickly.
THE ENGLISH AND DUTCH EAST INDIA COMPANIES INVASION OF INDIA
The EEIC Takes Full Control of India
In 1686, the EEIC felt the time was right to embark on a direct war with the now fading Mughal Empire to obtain broad trading privileges across the entire continent and more specifically to get permission to build a fortress in Bengal. A fortress in Bengal was seen as a critical step to protect the company’s burgeoning trade there from the Dutch and interlopers.
The First Anglo-Mughal War (1686-1690) began at the Hugli River at Calcutta and ultimately was fought on both coasts. Often called ‘Child’s War’, it was driven by one of the company’s major stockholders, Josiah Child, and proved to be a great embarrassment to the English nation. Twelve British battleships were involved, and several battles raged across the continent including a siege of Bombay and burning of the city of Balasore. The British navy blockaded the Mughal ports on the western coast and attacked its army on land. Several major cities were significantly damaged in the fray including Bombay, Madras, Calcutta and Chittagong.
n the wake of this bloody uprising, the British government effectively abolished the EEIC in 1858, taking away all its administrative and taxing powers. The Crown assumed control of all its territories and armed forces. Thus began the British Raj and the direct British colonial rule over India which continued until India was given its independence in 1947.
www.worldhistory.org/article/2048/the-english-and-dutch-east-india-companies-invasio/
Excellent lecture. Very informative.
Great talk, thank you.
Gladly, the Irish learned enough from the Americans and the British to carry out an effective revolution. Sadly, the Scottish have not. The ruling class in Britain has always had a southern bias and, today, one can still see in economic degradation and poverty in Northern England the failure of the state to create a country fit for all.
The scotts are brittish and created great britian
Scotland created the union. It wasn't a colony of England
Darn! I was so misinformed. I had thought the English were desperate for a king and they accepted James. Or, was it that they offered him a greater Kingdom than Scotland alone could possibly offer?
Nice conversation today.
I thought it was "The blah blah blah Company and the start of ...The CIA" 🤦...😜
Nice presentation. Madras my home town.
Excellent / informative. Great background.
What an excellent lecture!! So interesting and engaging. He prepared so well, and delivers it in such a helpful way, repeatedly recapping and summarising what he's been saying, so that you really understand and retain the information. Teaching and revision in one. Masterful! Thank you to the Professor, and to ARI for uploading.
This was a fantastic lecture. There is a very obvious correspondence between the British constitutional instruments of the latter 18th century and the US constitution of 1789. And I've always been a bit confused by this. Why would the colonies put themselves through a revolution only to institute a new system that was almost exactly the same as the system they overthrew?
This history shows that the colonies weren't necessarily overthrowing injustice and finding freedom, but rather were trying to preserve a liberty that they were afraid was descending into tyranny.
And shorn of the first 10 amendments, as originally written, the Constitution can be read as a document that protects the rights and the richest of the wealthiest.
Then you come to the 10 amendments: the right to habeas corpus, the right to freedom of the press, the right to assembly and the right to present grievances to the government - to say nothing of the right to Religious Freedom, and that part of the Constitution is radical. Some Scholars argue that the 10 amendments are the Apex of the Enlightenment.
The "United States" was founded as a series of crown corporate colonies given charters by the crown to corporate investors for creating plantation based states in the Americas. Nobody who came to America from England (or Europe) could do so unless under such a charter. What separated the United States from Australia or Canada was the fact that those charters were never under direct rule of the British parliament. One only needs to look at the original charter for the State of Pennsylvania to see the concept. As such, it was a feudal or at least neo feudal system where the land owners/plantatation owners were given political power to run the colony as they saw fit via the House of Burgesses. Only land owners could vote, only landowners could become members of the House of Burgesses and only the largest land owners could become President as almost all of the founding fathers were members of the HOuse of Burgesses. The "American Revolution" was simply those former Burgesses just declaring themselves as independent from the British Parliament and government even though they mostly maintained the original charters for many of the early colonial states with some amendments to create the new state constitutions.
Not so for all colonies. Jamestown, yes. But certainly not the Mayflower of 1620, ore the Puritans of 1629. Georgia was a settlement for prisoners.
The original post is problematic because of, for example, freedom of the press, freedom of Assembly, the right to petition the government for redress of grievances and habeas corpus. There was a definite populous strain within the revolution and it couldn't be denied or put down. If it had been denied or put down the first 10 amendments would look very different, No doubt
@@tereseshaw7650 All persons who sailed from England to settle in America had to get a charter from the Crown. The Puritan charter was for the Massachusetts Bay Colony which was also a corporate colony along with Georgia which is the name of the company as well. All of these charter documents are available online.
Really interesting stuff keep relistening thanks brotha
The American flag is a copy of the East India Trade Company flag of that period.
The tales of the British East India company reminds me of corporate personhood and that the thirteen colonies still seem to rule America through the Ivy League despite the power of monopolistic corporations enabled by regulatory capture. I wonder what James Vaughn has to say about America's enabling of Communist China and its current "buyer's remorse" which is so puzzling to spectators like me. Also how did the US become so beholden to "subjects" of the former British empire in the sphere of the fourth estate?
Loving this!
While I realize that the talk is specifically about the causes of the Revolution, the speaker keeps referring to the Atlantic American trade which would include the now Canadian provinces. The map shown at 28minutes into the talk completely excludes any Maritime province from this discourse which to me, renders the talk somewhat revisionist and skewed. The British East India company was involved in the fur and beaver pelt trade to the almost extinction of beavers just as much as trade with the saunter colonies. This would be a more accurate account of the extent of Transatlantic trade notwithstanding the revolution which was to follow.
0:00:00 i n t r o d u c t i o n
0:04:30 START >>> James Vaughn
Bravo and well done MR. Vaughn. 😎
Could the fact that English Common Law is based on "Precedent" be the catalyst for the Revolution? A Tea tax could have been seen as opening the door for a "precedent" to be set allowing the English Parliament to dictate the levying of direct taxation upon American Colonists?
yes and the precedence was more about taxes as tariffs. The US practiced import substitution - this was a big force driving the civil war since the slavers wanted "free trade" with Great Britain...
Fascinating lecture. I could have easily listened to another hour.
Excellent presentation. Thank you!
Thank you!
Its quite obvious from this lecture that the Indian Princes made nothing out of the East India Company.
Which raises the question , how did a few thousand men control 300 million.
With guns and economic coercion
Placeholder
I suppose the same question could be asked of Spain and the conquistadors. How could they have created or 'won' the largest Empire in the Americas? An Empire that spanned more of the two continents than any other empire ever came close to garnering.
Because India in the 18th century wasn't a united country like today it was a collection of different Kingdoms ruled by different Kings Queens princes Dukes and Lords.
Really enjoyed that. But why is the continental flag the East India Co flag? Always wondered
Ben Franklin had really bad marketing skills. He also was really Keen on having the turkey for our national bird
Also forgot 16 mins in, the city of London is a free territory within the kingdom, and the home to the international banking and finance which drives the commerce, and the displacement of agricultural rural dwellers that he speaks about.
Sounds like the American revolution was the English civil war part II
Strange that iv studied the VOE and British east and west as well for years. only came across this information twice
Interesting perspective well presented. Missing are the usually interesting question and answer session at the conclusion of the talk.
The East Indian company was the British empire
Economic investigator Frank G Melbourne Australia is following this very informative content cheers Frank 😊
A foundational lecture. Exceptional.
Can I please like this presentation twice?
Omg, this was a great presentation. Thank you, Doctor! Many details I did not know about 18th century America.
shift the responsibility of the empire onto the periphery - that's what's happening right now in the U.S. and thus causing "imperial implosion."
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885I don't understand. Could you give some explanations, or examples. Perhaps you were talking about the division in opinions regarding the war in Ukraine?
@@RingsLoreMasterYes I wrote an op-ed about that when I was a graduate student and I got hired to write op-eds for the University Minnesota Daily newspaper. That was 25 years ago!! hahaha. Military keeps playing with big toys
Published May 14, 1998
With Mother’s Day as its focus, this past week has been an ode to anti-militarism in the Midwest. I have been quoted in The Minnesota Daily as one of three University students to conduct civil disobedience at Alliant-Tech, a Hopkins-based conglomerate peddling $1.3 billion per year in tax-funded killing machines.
On Mother’s Day, I also joined 50 other people in an annual demonstration at Project Extremely Low Frequence (ELF). ELF is the Northern Wisconsin-based electromagnetic “first strike” trigger system for one half of the U.S. nuclear weapons force. As a result of this demonstration, I have been charged with trespassing, which carries a five-year suspension of my driver’s license as its penalty.
Here in the United States and specifically the Twin Cities, we are in “the belly of the beast,” and nonviolent direct action is the only means of confronting the corporate-military’s escalating addiction to world annihilation. Fellow students must recognize that the University and other centers of higher learning play critical roles in promoting war-mongering. For example, only a handful of contractors receive more military research funds than the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and John Hopkins University.
Why does the University research how to better disseminate chemical weapons at high-mach, high altitudes? New techniques for missile design analysis, stronger tank and weapon materials and the development of an aggressive tailless fighter jet are just a few of the other underground “higher education” projects at the University. In fact, with the University receiving $17 million in Department of Defense funds for 1997 (up from $11 million in 1993), it seems that the post-Cold War peace dividends are delayed at best.
The research contracts on campus reveal that nano-technology, or “the mechanizing of the molecular level,” is a dominant interest at the University. Computers are taking on a crucial role in designing a brave new world of fabricated nano-structures that will display two-way memory effects in nano-magnetic devices.
The broad military implications start with machine-to-machine air traffic control and end with cellular automata used for self-propagating molecular robotics, brain implants and other man-machine surveillance devices. The grand achievement exposed on campus is geared towards a “NATO neural network” emphasizing how the University is contributing to the most bloated and destructive system in the world.
The federal Office of Management and Budget states that the military is only 17 percent of the national budget, but several factors are obfuscated by this misleading figure. The correct percentage hovers around 50 percent.
During the Vietnam War, when the government created the so-called “Unified Budget,” which includes unallocatable trust funds - social security is not part of the dispensable congressional budget - the military percentage instantly shrank. Retired generals and admirals at the Center for Defense Information also point out that military spending was hidden in non-military portions of the budget. For instance, here at the University further military research is most likely being funded by NASA, the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation.
Very significantly, the 17 percent federal figure does not include past military spending costs, i.e. the cost of veterans benefits and the 80 percent of the interest on the national debt that is from military spending - thank you, Ronald Reagan.
Since the combined military budgets of Iraq, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Russia and China are still less than half of the United State’s official 17 percent figure, obviously “defense” is not our defining military role. Among the world’s recent major conflicts, 90 percent involved one or more parties receiving U.S. weapons or military technology prior to the outbreak of war.
Recently, the U.S. share of world arms exports has increased by 50 percent and the United States now supplies more than 60 percent of the world’s military weapons, with half of the cost funded by U.S. taxpayers. The government has consistently ignored recommendations by the Congressional Budget Office that suggested cutting the incompetent B-2 stealth bomber, the F-22 jet, the Trident II D-5 nuclear missile and Star Wars.
President Clinton just last fall ended a 20-year ban on advanced weapons sales to Latin America. Now Lockhead-Martin, which has operations in the Twin Cities, can sell F-16s to be used against democracy movements in our hemisphere. Recent military scandals include training death squads for use against grass roots democracy in Indonesia, Columbia and Mexico coupled with the approval of bio-weapon testing within U.S. cities.
The addition of 13 more countries to NATO promises the further exportation of military jobs along with corporate welfare costs estimated at $250 billion. Even though the Twin Cities receives hundred of millions of dollars per year in military projects - 500 pages list just 1993 contracts - downsizing, increased profits and further environmental superfund sites are definitive of military spending. Ironically, federal corporate arms export subsidies equal the total amount of subsidies cut from federal social service programs.
These unabashed acts of greedy, bloody U.S. militarism are not surprising considering that in 1994 Congress passed a law enabling the Department of Defense, or any of its contractors, to test biological weapons in any U.S. city, provided that they give a city official 30 days notice.
Currently, the Pentagon, at the behest of the military industry, is requesting a waiver of the anti-personnel land mine moratorium, even though 124 nations have already signed the international mine ban treaty. Furthermore, the United States, like India, is hypocritically in the process of conducting six underground nuclear tests, in direct violation of the International Test Ban Treaty.
Direct global democracy inspires hope, though, as the protests of French nuclear testing proved, as well as Alliant Tech land mine production and Project ELF recently being judged illegal by international law. Students at the University, which has $110,000 invested with Alliant Tech, have a duty to rise up and take action against our rogue state. Under the 1996 Solomon Amendment, if military recruitment is cancelled on campus, all federal funding for the University would be stopped. Just as the United States-funded military regime of Indonesia is now shut down by students, we here need to take similar measures. Conversion to an efficient, productive and sustainable society is the clear choice in the face of our behemoth killer monster.
Students should demand an end to the profit-driven U.S. war machine. Only by converting the military will a sustainable society be achieved.
Drew Hempel is a University College graduate student pursuing a Master of Liberal Studies.
Eye and mind opening lecture! I'm reeling over the things I begin to understand, not just over the past, but explaining our American culture.
As an advice to the speaker: this should be presented over and over again but without belaboring points already made. The lecture could easily have been 20 minutes shorter.
Still: stupendous information. Thank you!
Lecture commences promptly at 4:06
Hey the colonists weren’t wrong they could see the writing on the wall.. even if it wasn’t the crowns intent initially.. could definitely be India pt 2
So then what is the difference between this and the present day inequality we see; the conduct of institutional finance and it’s industrial and political beneficiaries vs your average American. Student loans, housing, credit card, medical debt. What percentage of American citizens, today, feel like they have a degree of influence or control over their daily lives and futures and the tools and other means to pursue that “enfranchisement”.
Yup
Fantastic lecture. The Brits essentially taxed tea because they were stressed and wanted to make a symbolic point to the settlers that they truly had no control. Fools!
At least that bloke from the end quote had some sense.
This was excellent to fall asleep to. Thank you!
It is interesting to note that the tea that was thrown into Boston harbour was tea of the Dutch Combined East India Company, and the three ships involved were American owned and crewed. There is more behind the story than has been told.
Are you saying the Boston tea party was a false flag?
It was an aggressive move designed to provoke a response. The sons of liberty wanted a fight. They were a pain in butt to the Continental Congress...
@@thomasmassey322it was about the taxes on tea I thought. On all imports.
I heard it was the Knights of the Golden Circle and they're an offshoot of the Freemasons and the plot was designed at some little Tavern that I forget the name of
Always.
It is misleading to compare the British East India Company to "companies" as we know them today. In those days people were not free to start companies. The King issued a royal charter: Usually a permit to create a protected monopoly. Today we would call this "Fascism". "Companies" with such political protection from competition always become bad actors.
Are you implying, or stating, that mercantilism was the beginning of fascism?
No. Total prohibition or control by absolute rulers of voluntary exchange was the norm for thousands of years in all societies. Only gradually did some rulers begin to allow freedom of association (including creation of private "companies") and of exchange in some areas of life. The extent to which rulers then retain arbitrary veto power on those freedoms is the measure of fascism.
"Mercantilism" is the aspect of fascism limiting my freedom to trade with people in foreign countries.
Does that mean you see total control or complete prohibition up trade or other voluntary forms of Congress give me the roots of fascism?
@@RingsLoreMastersomeone is maybe fixated on fascism...
Companies are decide what will going happened in the Countries. Not the government.
other than where he uses the term Conservative for who are actually more as Monarchs or aristocratic or autocratic.. I'd say the libertarian colonists of the Americas were to be pushed to Conservativism , after the fact as spoken . a very good historical context none the less. these committees or institutions are fundamental to remembering our past peoples constructs they stood for. we should not be accountable to pay for other peoples failed policy that do not represent our peoples needs . those that steal from us for their own crooked endeavors are indeed crooks
The Magna Carta made this possible and its last remnants are being abolished by the elite.
You make a very Harringtonian point about land ownership being above 50%. What are your thoughts on James Harrington and the American Founding?
Very well explained. Thank you
Wonderful! Thank you so much for capturing this and making it available. Can someone help me find any information on the relationship between the British EIC and the founding fathers of the United States? I've recently become fascinated by the subject after learning Ben Franklin advocated that the (then new) U.S. adopt the company's flag as our own.
Very good lecture we had such a good past Great British Empire it is horrible to watch what is happening today might even start seeing empty shelves lost or trade routes and the freedom of movement
Are you speaking of loss of freedom of movement within the British Islands or throughout the commonwealth?
Spain has been ignored to the American revolution contribution and the its independence.
This was good
I enjoyed it werry good❤
Great lecture...very informative...
Very good lecture.
Tremendous!
I am a Limey and I approve this message.
He forgot the REAL REASON: THE PROCLAMATION LINE OF 1763, forbids all English colonies to take the land reserved for the Indians west of this line . The rich big land owners and speculators and the settler class all wanted that land to get rich on. America empire could not be without this removing this line
That is correct however you forget one important detail:
The Indian tribes started selling land off to settlers in exchange for gold, guns and whatever other trade good in sections, this is something that often more than not get overlooked because it is more convenient for the American empire narrative types as well as some other revisionist pieces of history and their historian propagandists.
Ignores the e holdings of Spain and France lol
And leaving out the Holdings of France and Spain is significant in what way? After all, the American Wealth that surpassed that of England was created primarily east of the Appalachian mountains.
@@RingsLoreMaster the proclamation line is meaningless in the context OP is attempting to apply. The Louisiana purchase covered a third of the continent and Spain had already colonized the southwest, California and Texas. Pretending like the colonials were prevented from conquering native lands by the crown is just stupid. The purpose was to suppress security costs, not some noble effort by the king of England nor “conflict driven by greedy speculators”.
Wasn't there a lucrative line on the go involving the importation of tea for New England's more discerning palates?!
I gather that the VOC were very happy to supply certain Bostonian entrepreneurs, John Hancock amongst them, with this condiment.
The imposition of a tea monopoly, only that transported by the 'Too Big To Fail' HEIC, was going to be basically duty free and thus undercut the smuggled beverage, thereby wrecking the alternative funding stream!
FEDERAL RESERVE
Fascinating .Thank you .
Very interesting and well done.
It was an instrumentality of the Crown which chartered it.
The British Government should have realized that the American colonies’ economies were growing at great speed and that tax revenues would correspondingly increase.
They did. That's why they taxed.
Tea tax was from debt on Ringwood manor nj iron ore debt .look into it
Anyone ever notice the templar insignia all over the east India company and that they were chartered by members of city of London...city of London which is a sovereign state just like DC and Vatican city.
The last quote is vertiginous of new perspectives : America's founding fathers were not like British Anarchy makers in India, but the opposite !