Category: History

The Ghost Map: The Story of London’s Most Terrifying Epidemic – and How It Changed Science, Cities, and the Modern World by Steven Johnson fell into my lap unexpectedly. While reviewing the syllabus for the 9th grade East-West History class I was contracted to teach I saw the book listed as a required on the syllabus for the prior year and so purchased it. I later found out that it was a optional reading item for extra credit, but I’m so glad that I read it and have since used it as a component of the class dealing with the International Baccalaureate’s emphasis towards understanding the manner in which technology effects human society.

Ghost Map is one of the best works of popular history that I have ever read. I loved it without qualifications and have already recommended it to several people. The style, the pacing, the everything is a homerun and my students that have read it have all found it enjoyable if at times a little difficult.

As the book states in the opening, it is largely the tale of four protagonists: John Snow – a pioneering surgeon and medical researcher; Henry Whitehead – a priest; the city of London itself and the cholera bacterium. Spoiler alert: the story is easily summed up in a few sentences. A cholera outbreak occurs in London at a time when people believe that such illnesses are passed around by bad smells and there is no real infrastructure to removed human and animal waste products from cities. A talented and ambitious but humble medical researcher named John Snow starts to investigate and with the help of a local priest familiar with those affected and armed with information garnished from new practices of governmental record keeping is able to determine from when the cholera outbreak came and to provide a thorough but at the time unrecognized refutation of the miasma theory of cholera dissemination. It’s the attention to detail that he gives these characters, the depth he goes to explain the rationale for functioning of practices and creatures that doesn’t seem overwhelm the reader, the contextualization of the various obstacles faced and the underlying exegesis of some of the concepts of historical materialism that made it such an engaging read. I knew that this would be somewhat the case as the book opens with a quote by Walter Benjamin from the Theses on the Philosophy of History regarding Klee’s Angelus Novus. However I was presently surprised by how much of this was described in relationship to these four protagonists.

Johnson carefully documents how the class system existent at the time and the low level of scientific knowledge played a huge role in the perpetuation of a false medical paradigms that contributed to both degrading attitudes and the delay of infrastructural development needed to address the preconditions for cholera and other diseases spread. There is an irony that hints at comedy in such disdain, for despite the bourgeoisie hatred for the “lower classes” whose labor created the capital that they enjoyed such feelings of superiority for some in the nicer communities are leveled when they too contract it. Related to this is the miasma theory of disease. Johnson cleverly shows all the holes in the theory and shows how this relates to the elite classes own prejudices much as scientific racism was an outgrowth of the conditions of American slavery.

The sections on cholera were insightful without getting too deep within scientific jargon while those on Dr. John Snow and Henry Whitehead were both compelling. In the YouTube videos that I perused for use in the classroom unrelated to the author the former is highlighted while the latter largely goes unreported. Even then Snow is depicted as an abstraction rather than a person whose motives and actions were far outside the norm of his epoch. John Snow’s devotion to finding this at no profit to him self and how in fact it causes him to face ridicule from a large number of medical professionals at his time, shows how heroic he was. Such circumstances make for good reflections on the nature of the modern hero.

Despite the book being so good, I found that some of my students whose first language isn’t English had major difficulties with the text. Understandable as while “big” concepts were well described in simple language, they had to spend a lot of time looking up words. I think it’s a good practice for students to keep a running list of the words that they use and think that this would be a great interdisciplinary text to use with science lessons.

While I normally avoid mass-market history books, as it’d been assigned to one of the IB classes I was assigned to teach the year before I read The Cold War: A New History by John Lewis Gaddis. What can I say about it that wasn’t already written in this eight pageNew York Review of Books article that gives it the proper criticism that it deserves? Not much, really. As Tony Judt notes, it’s aligned with the type of liberal triumphalism that Francis Fukuyama and others used to crow about prior to the numerous crises which liberal capitalist societies have experienced since 2008. It’s not just that the subsequent crises make the tone of capitalist banner-waving seem quaint but that the tone and outlines of historical development is idealistic to a fault, disturbingly uneven in it’s treatment of events and naïve.

How so naïve? Well, for one there are now a number of research articles (1, 2, 3) that attest to the fact that it was only a result of the Soviet state’s existence that workers in the West were able to obtain the gains that they did and that as soon as Socialism/Communism was no longer an ideological threat the attacks against workers rights and wages were accelerated. Additionally element of naivety is the fact that a number of major social repressions that occurred in the U.S.A. and other countries for ideological purposes is not, seemingly, worthy of mention. The numerous domestic Red Scares with the help of the FBI and the liquidations of Communist Party members abroad that were accomplished with the help of the CIA do not even get a footnote in Gaddis’ book. While the overthrow of Guatemala, Iran and Chile are mentioned the first two are glossed over as excesses excused by zealousness to protect those regions from Soviet influence while the last one is justified.

Additionally naïve is the manner in which, as Judt points out, Gaddis depicts the manner with which power operates in the United States. On page 168 he states, “The idea that their leaders might lie was new to the American people.” as if prior to the Cold War was a halcyon age wherein American politicians always kept their word. Not only that Gaddis frames such a claim such that it was the fault of the Soviets to cause such dissimulation. If only those people over there weren’t so evil and untrustworthy, he seems to state, then American politicians would never stoop to such behavior.

The lack of political economy in explaining material conditions of the combatant nations is also disturbing. It’s absence means that instead of macroeconomic issues creating social pressures and changes it is simply the whims of major actors that determined the direction and pace of historical development. The Soviet Union’s demise is due to moral failings of godless Communists rather than other historical, secular circumstances. This is not to say that Gaddis ignores political economy completely – but he does not do so in a way that is genuinely comparative. What this means is that while he will mention the large number of Russians killed fighting the Nazi’s during World War Two, the effects of this and the destruction of a large number of factories in Nazi Occupied countries that would soon fall under the influence of Stalin have almost no effect on the country’s ability to manufacture goods for the international marketplace. Because of this and a number of other omissions the criticism he makes – that the Soviet’s simply produced poor quality goods – lose some of the bite. While such a criticism is deserving – it is unfortunately lacking a full depiction in a political-economy constellation and thus the moralistic imprecations that follow which laud liberal capitalism.

In the end Gaddis’s view of the Cold War does not include the perspective of any people of any country affected by police or military conflict with the exception of those regions that sought to rebuff encroaching or existent Soviet influence. It is thus the perfect book for Americans looking to legitimize the notion that they won a moralistic war and that they can kick up their feet knowing that America is the epitome of ethical goodness.

Despite the fact that I have a stack of books resting on the stand by my bed ready to be read, when I saw a paperback copy of The House of Morgan: An American Banking Dynasty and the Rise of Modern Finance with a deeply broken spine at the Lake Worth Library book sale I decided to pick it up and place it first in the queue. Weighing in at 848 page, this was no small diversion from previously scheduled reading. I was, however, richly rewarded for my decision. It wasn’t a total surprise, it did win the National Book Award in 1991.

How did it do this? The account successfully manages to illustrate the myriad complex legal changes made in the United States from the 1860s to the 1990s in a manner both informative and stylistically compelling. By describing the actions of Morgan personnel, their competitors, those that would seek to regulate them as well as those that want loans the contributions of Pierpont Morgan, Jack Morgan, Tom Lamont, and many others are placed into a context that allows the reader to see the effects that various flows and concentrations of capital had on the world’s political economic system.

The history of the Morgan Bank is periodized into three distinct periods: The Baronial Age, The Diplomatic Age and The Casino Age. The book explains the reasons for the changes that occurs – whether it be increasing public distrust of banks to self-regulate or the increasing capital powers of companies to raise their own capital – and also gives accounts of the most significant issues the leaders of the various financial service companies that spawned from the Morgan Bank following the passage of Glass-Steagall had to face.
In the Baronial Age – most associated with the aristocratic Rothschilds, bankers relied upon an individual’s character and social connections to determine creditworthiness and competition between banks was moderated by The Bankers Code. The Bankers Code was the set of value–judgments that inhibited bankers from poaching clients and getting involved in cutthroat competition so as to make any services provided not profitable. This was an age when most bankers relied upon their connections to aristocrats to do business and as such were highly cultured. England, then the Financial Capital of the World was where George Peabody first began his transformation from rich to wealthy. Peabody, a miser who financed many British and colonial merchant ventures, was the true “founder” of the Morgan Bank. Taking on a young Junius Morgan in the autumn years of his life, it is only after Peabody’s death that Junius is able to gain greater access to elite and rename the enterprise to J. S. Morgan and Co. An Anglophile to the core with blue-blooded heritage, Morgan is able to become the pre-eminent representative of the American financial market. As a representative of the British Bondholders for capital investments in the United States, Junius was constantly advocating for the financial duties of his clients to be fulfilled. Thus though American, he consistently fought for the interests of what were predominantly foreign investors. This was a logical extension of the Bankers Code, which sought to protect creditors’ investment and thus demonstrate integrity. As time went on and national conflict grew this came to be a ticklish task to accomplish without unduly promoting the interests of belligerent states in Europe. This internationalist position ostracized the Morgan Bank from the domestic political leaders of the time, the smaller domestic banks that lacked access to the British and European capital markets and was one of the reasons that much of the press at the time likened them to a foreign power placing undue duress on American working men. The domestic policies, practices and investments of the Morgan Bank, however, elicited much greater public brouhaha in the news of the day. It was typical for Morgan executives to sit on the board of multiple companies that they had loaned money to – a circumstance that lent themselves to being depicted as a financial cabal running the country. During the railroad price wars, for instance, the Morgan banks involvement in holding companies purchases to help create a monopoly line in the North-East and North-West lead to congressional investigations that went largely nowhere. Chernow here also documents how typical it was for the bankers of this era to be so hard working that many died both rich and young. The work culture that Banks imbued is so taxing that a number of associates and partners die prematurely. Also worth noting is the particularly fascinating scene were J. P. Morgan is able to “save” Wall Street nearly singlehandedly.

During the Diplomatic Age, which occurred following the cessation of the First World War and ended a decade after the second – many of these prerogatives, policies changed due to the new situation on the ground. The bank slightly eased its underwriting policies – previously they has only been willing to underwrite “sure-things” – and became, to an extent, an extension of American diplomatic policy in Latin American and Asia. Innuendos voiced by government officials transformed into guarantees on return. Given the rhetoric and history of U.S. involvement in these places, this is understandable. Conflicts between other banks, previously seemingly small, start to become more heightened. The animosity between the Jewish banks and the Anglophile, Anti-Semitic House of Morgan are a partial cause for a new set of hearings. It is also during this time that the bankers heightened service for his clients is tested. As various foreign powers, such as Italy and Japan, began bellicose campaigns in foreign nations under the aegis of self-defense and development Morgan partners defend those that will soon be enemy combatants. The sections on the creation of an Italian-American news group that re-frames Mussolini’s actions in an American context and that is apologetic about Japanese military action in Manchuria. The Diplomatic Age lasts a little bit longer than the end of the Second World War, though this time instead of directly writing loans to destroyed countries seeking to revivify their industries they play predominantly an advisory role. Not only had experience shown that this was a problematic situation for these banks to operate in but also by this time the American Federal Government has successfully bureaucratized and expanded enough that it no longer needed to rely upon private financiers.

By the time of the Casino Age, the Gentleman’s Banker’s Code is practically out the window. Competition created by the resurgence of the defeated WW2 powers and the increasing ability means that the banks need to offer greater incentives to maintain clients as now large industries are capable of raising funs themselves. As a wide variety of cultural productions such as Wall Street, The Wolf of Wall Street, American Psycho, etc. have shown – this is when a massive consolidation of American industry occurs. The shift from Gentlemen Bankers to hot-headed, rash, ultra-competitive bankers marks a total one-hundred and eighty degree shift in the manner in which business is done. Sectoral shifts in policy are often initiated by the House of Morgan – which by now is a number of enterprises that actively compete against each other.

In Chernow’s depiction of these three epochs there are so many biographical/business stories that makes the world of banking not merely come alive but seem much more interesting than it had before. I enjoyed reading about the work-culture of Wall Street as well as getting to understand the minds working behind the scenes. There were several people that I’d like to learn more about, but considering the name of the bank I’d like to focus some thoughts on Junius Morgan.

He is depicted in the book as practically possessed by the need to collect as much of the “great” European art as he can. A telling statement that Chernow discovered is the fear that art sellers had that when he died the prices for their products would drop by nearly half. While I understand his desire to collect all of the treasures of the past that he thought the most edifying onto American shores so that those less financially endowed as himself could have the opportunity to visit it, I can’t help but wonder what would have happened had he encouraged the most talented artists in both Europe and Asia to relocate as a condition of their patronage.

One of the more interesting insights that I learned about Pierpont’s perspective was his attitude on macro-economic policy. Even thought he is considered the incarnation of finance capitalism today as in his own, his perspective was for a managed economy. At a time when an increasing number of attacks coming from the organs of industry promote political candidates that would enact austerity measures on the economy is worth finding examples of capitalists who THEMSELVES state that macro-economic planning principles are the only sound way with which to manage an already large and continuing to grow industrial economy.

While it may seem that this era has little to do with the present it’s worth noting that while talking about a different book of Chernow’s – Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. – Corey Robin posted a quote from this peer of the Morgan’s to Jodi Dean’s Facebook Profile. That commentators on the current state of political affairs continue to look at this period to contextualize the present indicates how a historical, material perspective is needed to understand the world rather than simply decrying an abstract “injustice”. It’s through understanding the people that lobbied and influenced government policies – as well as understanding how those policies function – that one can better understand both Wall Street and U.S. policies.

Much like Liquidated and To Serve God and Wal-Mart The House of Morgan: An American Banking Dynasty and the Rise of Modern Finance provides a history of Wall Street. I am grateful for Mr. Chernow’s contribution to my understanding of that world that is at the time of this writing so far away and yet having such a huge impact on both the USA and the rest of the world, especially at a time when J.P. Morgan associated banks are paying out more than 30 billion dollars for activities that many are calling criminal.

Brink Lindesy’s book The Age of Abundance: How Prosperity Transformed America’s Politics and Culture is an excellent narrative of the some of the cycles of American thought and politics and masterfully shows how it is that quantitative shifts in general material well-being can create significant qualitative shifts in thought. Brink writes through a lens that applies several of Karl Marx’s materialist and historical categories, but does so in the vein of Max Weber. While this does at times preclude consideration of the economic factors that inform the development of various personal and social agency, I did not find it to be something that was generally overly problematic. I say this as Lindsay writes from the position of an expositor rather than an academic demagogue – something that’d I’d first been concerned about given his relationship to the Cato Institute. The clear breadth of his research into the subject, the warm, friendly tone of his commentary and the analysis which never falls too long into excessive details and the framing of his tale into a form matching Nietzsche’s Birth of Tragedy makes the book for a compelling read on how it is that America’s transition from a fundamentalist, frontier, material culture to an affluent, post-materialist one. For Lindsay, these reactions presage and inform all of our contemporary Culture Wars and furthermore hint at the possibility for a greater reconciliation based upon the libertarian aspirations engendered by a post-scarcity context of material abundance.

Scarcity, technological crudity and cultural under-development was a defining feature of 19th and early 20th century America. As America shifted from a society whose production still predominantly consisted of craftsmanship to industrial production there were many significant cultural, social, and economic changes. Agriculture was the primary avocation of many American up until the beginning of the second world war, the number of American’s graduating from high school, going on vacation, with an income that they could dispose on novel consumer goods was all quite small. Prior to World War II, America was still, in phrasing that we would use today, largely a second world country. World War II changed all of that and created such great reserves of wealth among the elite and militancy amongst the workers demanding a portion of it that the government could not overly resist their demands and it was shared. As I hinted at in the above, Lindsay sees the two major responses to such wealth to be Dionysian and an Apollonian, or as he puts it in his words libertarian and conservative. Increased purchasing power and advances in technology, be it in the realm of transportation or in family planning, radically shifted the realm of potential social forms. It became easier than ever for children to leave their homes and the support structures which once kept them in check. The symbolic possibilities for self and group identification multiplied exponentially which, combined with the real threat of potential nuclear annihilation helped engender new forms of “counter culture”.

These counter cultures were in many ways a conscious refutation of the staid, puritanical bourgeoisie order that had previously encouraged thriftiness, delayed gratification, industriousness, etc. Now that people no longer had to annually carry tons of wood to light their homes but could simply turn on a switch, now that people could go to a doctor instead of pray to get better, now that people were increasingly literature and could take part in the cultural wealth made available to them by previous generations captains of industry and robber-barons who sought to immortalize themselves through public arts bequests the shift of American’s concern was not on the immediate needs to replicate life but on more abstract notions like happiness and self-actualization. These were not the sole preoccupations of Americans, many still sought to accumulate wealth and status and found the disruptive activities of the counter-cultures to be upsetting. Affluence was thus not a balm upon the soul of Americans but a new battleground manifested by all the varieties of life-styles that it enabled. It is as a response to this outgrowth of New Age morality predicated on epicureanism, sensualism and a resistance to engage in banal forms of labor that Lindsey sees the development of the evangelist movement in the United States. While pulling intellectually from the fundamentalist tradition, a term now unfashionable and thus in need of re-branding, it sought to provide an avenue to channel the anxieties created by such worldly affluence. These fears over the new parent-child, racial, gender, labor-management and religious relations helped engender a politically conservative backlash that divided states into reds and blues. Funding for minor arts programs became hot-button issues and as the ownership class increasingly supported the leaders of these religious revivalist movements. Additionally, with the increased awareness of political issues and disposable money able to support NGOs, a new era in political consciousness and activism emerged.

Such a wholly antagonistic relationship was bound not to last, Lindsey points out, as there is an essential difference between the Christian gospel which seeks to ameliorate the sufferings of poor and deny the exploitative rich man into heaven with the capitalist one that seeks to personally benefit from others labor as cheaply as possible. Additionally, the failed New Left movement of the 60 has increasingly sought accommodation with the state rather than a total overthrow of all hierarchies. Because of these two developments Lindsay points out how currently there is an increasing convergence of the values advocated by modern politicos. The liberal and conservative positions have merged in many ways and this, he states, has opened up the field for increasingly libertarian policy promotion. While the form of the community may not have been settled, mutual recognition and respect of a yearning for it has been. The recognition that workers immiseration is something to be resisted has not been completely reconciled but is no longer solely recognized as the cause of individual failings except by the most intractable ideologues. Increasingly the command and control regulatory structures designed to promote economic growth was dismantled and reformulated way due the realization that it promoted inefficiencies and engendered perverse incentives. These re-regulations have not always been perfect and are still a battlefield, however many of the core values informing debate on them are agreed upon if not the form they take in operationalization. This along with the increasing fractionalization of group identities had made it more difficult for one cultural group to excerpt hegemonic control over another – though recent data on public policy suggests that this is not true and that the economic elites actually do – and that the time of polarization is mostly over due to the realization that compromise is necessary. I greatly enjoyed this book and would assign it for freshman survey courses in American history.