The Real Drug War

As both a historian and a Texan, I obviously love a good story.  Once a week for the last decade and a half, I’ve written a new story (totaling hundreds of them), and if there was a common thread (other than the number of times I have mentioned Napoleon or the Titanic) it might be how frequently those stories mention alcohol.  There are hundreds of stories that begin with someone saying, “Hold my beer and watch this.”

Unfortunately, there are essentially no great stories that start with someone eating a salad.

Even stories about warfare are frequently the direct result of armies using—and abusing—high levels of alcohol and drugs.  The same governments that would hand out harsh punishments for driving the family car while “impaired” have ordered pilots and tank commanders to use those same substances during warfare.  I mean that literally, since the Nazi Panzerkorps used to give their tank commanders something called “Tank Chocolate” that was actually amphetamines.

For the Greeks, the drug of choice was wine, drunk by the gallons just before battle, while the Vikings fermented a potent drink made from Amanita mushrooms.  Military commanders from the earliest of times have realized that drugs could change ordinary men into the ruthless army necessary to win victories.  Simply put, drugs allowed men to do the horrific and heroic acts that sober men would never consider.

An 18^th century historian, who witnessed the warriors of Mindanao in action, wrote that after consuming “sugapa”, a psychedelic root plant, “He who eats it is made beside himself, and rendered so furious that while its effect lasts he cares not for dangers, nor even hesitates to rush into the midst of pikes and swords….and by eating it at the time of the attack, they enter the battle like furious wild beasts, without turning back even when their force is cut to pieces; on the other hand, even when one of them is pierced from side to side with a lance, he will raise himself by that very lance in order to strike at him who had pierced him.”

That pretty well sums up why armies continued to use large amounts of otherwise illegal drugs to push men to their limits.  During World War I, both the German and English armies issued codeine to their troops for both medical use and as a stimulant.  The English distributed codeine tables known as Forced March that promised to increase endurance while suppressing hunger.  Commanders also noted that the use of codeine calmed “agitated” troops.

It was during World War II that the use of drugs really became a standardized item.  Germany issued its soldiers a drug called Pervitin, considered at the time an ideal war drug, as it could keep pilots alert for long periods of time, and kept entire armies euphoric despite hazardous duties…As well it should, since the drug was actually an early form of crystal meth.

Part of the reason for the German Army’s success in the early days of the war was this drug.  During the Blitzkrieg, soldiers under the effects of Pervitin could march for 3 days without sleep, carrying heavy loads, and still remaining alert with a positive morale.

Pervitin was everywhere, even Hitler himself was injected with a liquid form of the drug.  The 3 mg pill form was distributed by the Wehrmacht (the German Army) extensively.  By the end of the war, more than 35 million doses had been distributed.  Since the drug was habit forming, soldiers frequently wrote home asking their families to purchase it over the counter to send to them.

Allied soldiers hearing about the wondrous “Super Pill” of the Nazis began experimenting with Pervitin, too.  The results for the early tests of the drug were positive, bomber crews could remain alert for extended periods of time.  It did not take long, however, for the negative effects to appear.  After prolonged use, long periods of rest did not seem to compensate for the loss of sleep.  Otherwise healthy young soldiers who used the drug died of heart failure, while others committed suicide during psychotic phases. And those who became addicted to the drug developed the usual symptoms of addiction and withdrawal: sweating, dizziness, hallucination, and depression.  (Just think of any episode of Breaking Bad, but replace the entire cast with Nazis.)

Over time, the combat effectiveness of the units using the drug declined to the point that some military commanders recommended that the German Army discontinue prescribing it to soldiers.  Nevertheless, the drug was not only used for the duration of the war, but the West German Army, the Bundeswehr, continued to maintain stockpiles of the drug until the 1980’s.  On the other side of the Iron Curtain, the East German National People’s Army did not discontinue use of the drug until 1988.

While various armies continued to use various forms of the drug for decades—including the U. S. Army during the Vietnam War—you have to wonder what might have happened if the German Army had perfected its miracle weapon, a Super Duper Pill.

Nazi scientists, using political prisoners at the Sachsenhausen concentration camp as test subjects, were developing an enhanced endurance pill.  Mixing 5 mg of Cocaine, 3 mg of Methamphetamine, and 5 mg of Oxycodone with various other stimulants, the scientists developed a compound called D-IX.  After being dosed with the compound, political prisoners could march 65 miles while carrying 45 pounds of equipment without rest.  Considering the general physical condition of prisoners in a German concentration camp, these results are remarkable.  The drug would be capable of turning ordinary soldiers into near supermen.  (It should be noted that the efficient Nazi scientists took advantage of the experiments to simultaneously test new forms of military boots.)

Fortunately for the prisoners (and perhaps, for the rest of the world), the war ended before the compound was perfected.  But, I’m sure someone, somewhere, is working on it.  If it is not ready for the next war, I'm sure it will soon be for sale in your neighborhood.

Denied!

The chance that a sitting president will run for reelection is almost a dead certainty.  The chances that he will win reelection, using history as a guide, are better than even.  The chance that a president will seek reelection only to be denied the opportunity to do so by his party is remote.  If history is a guide, a sitting president, regardless of his lack of popularity, can almost always count on his party’s nomination.  Almost.

Note.  Obviously, I’m referring to President Biden’s apparent desire to run for another term in 2024—a move that many in his own party now seem to oppose.  To be fair, I suppose that I should disclose that in the last presidential election, I did not support either of the two dominant parties’ candidates.  The following had nothing to do with President Biden and is just my feeble attempt to provide historical context to current events.

Any president is considered to be the head of his political party, and as such, wields enormous power and influence over the rest of the party membership.  Through political favors, campaign assistance, and most importantly, by control of the party’s sizeable campaign funds, a president can reward his supporters and punish disloyal party members, easily insuring sufficient support to insure his party’s nomination for a second term.   

Sometimes, however, it just doesn’t work.

The exception to all this party nonsense was George Washington, who had the good sense to run for office before the development of political parties.  His successor, John Adams was not quite so fortunate.  When Adams ran for reelection in 1800, the two parties immediately began a campaign so incredibly dirty—claims of insanity, treason, marital infidelity, serial bedwetting, etc., etc.—that it has  become the norm for every campaign since.  Despite the fighting between the parties, Adams wanted the support of the Federal Party for a second term and his party supported him.

The first sitting president to fail to receive his party’s nomination for reelection was Franklin Pierce.  Elected in 1852, Pierce’s presidency literally derailed even before his inauguration.  Traveling from Boston after the election, the railroad car containing the president-elect, his wife, and their 11-year-old son Benny, leapt from the track, rolling down an embankment.  Before his parents’ horrified eyes, the boy was crushed and nearly decapitated.  Pierce, obviously suffering from prolonged depression, never really recovered, and the First Lady publicly wondered if the accident was divine punishment for the sin of hubris.  The four years of the Pierce administration were more of a continual wake than an active presidency. 

Though unpopular with voters, President Pierce still expected to run again in 1856 and sought his party’s nomination.  The other two popular candidates within the Democratic Party, James Buchanan and Stephen Douglas, forged an agreement where Buchanan would get the nomination in 1856 and Douglas would run in 1860.  By pooling their support, Pierce was denied the chance to run for reelection.

In 1868, President Andrew Johnson tried to secure the Democratic nomination, but this was almost impossible.  Johnson had served as Vice-President to Republican Abraham Lincoln, who had selected the Southern Democrat as a measure to unify a nation embroiled in the Civil War.  While Johnson was popular with Southern Whites, he was extremely unpopular in the North.  On the 22^nd ballot, the Democratic Party selected Horatio Seymour, a New Yorker, while Johnson received only four ballots—those of the delegates from his home state of Tennessee. 

Chester A. Arthur became president after the assassination of James Garfield, at a time when the Republican Party had split into two rival camps.  Arthur had been chosen for the post of Vice-President primarily because he was a centrist, a compromise candidate.  As president, Arthur tried to win the support of both camps, and might have been successful had not the news of his medical condition become public knowledge.  Suffering from Bright’s disease (called nephritis today), Arthur appeared weak and his party gave the nomination to James Blaine.  When Blaine lost the election to Grover Cleveland, he blamed the loss on Arthur’s refusal to support his campaign.

The most contentious Party fight was for the Republican candidacy for the 1912 election.  President Theodore Roosevelt had selected William Howard Taft to be his replacement in 1908, and Taft’s victory had been largely been due to Roosevelt’s endorsement and tireless campaigning.  After leaving office, Roosevelt had spent 18 months traveling outside the United States with no communication with the new president.  Upon Roosevelt’s return, he found that Taft had abandoned many of Roosevelt’s Progressive policies.  As Republicans across the country began to urge the former president to run in 1912, Roosevelt announced that the tradition of presidents serving only two terms—a tradition begun by George Washington—only applied to two consecutive terms.

Taft had never really wanted to be president, but he was the president and decided to act like one.  Refusing to step down, he ran against Roosevelt in the party primaries of 1912.  While Roosevelt won the majority of the delegates that were selected by ballot, Taft won the majority of delegates that were selected by the state party committees, giving Taft the nomination after a contentious fight at the 1912 Republican Convention. 

The rift between the two men might have been avoided if Archibald Butt, a Republican leader who had served in the administrations of both Roosevelt and Taft not perished on April 15, 1912, with the sinking of the Titanic.  Without Butt, there was no one to broker a compromise between the two presidents.

Theodore Roosevelt, believing—mostly correctly—that the nomination had been stolen from both him and the voters by deceitful maneuvering of Taft and the convention president, bolted the Republican Party, forming the Progressive Party (informally known as the Bull Moose Party).  The Democrats ran Woodrow Wilson.

Taft never really stood a chance of being reelected, due to party defections to Roosevelt, and the sitting president wasn’t even on the ballots in California and South Dakota.  Taft received 23% of the vote, Roosevelt received 27%, and Wilson won with 42% of the vote.  Without a doubt, had either Taft or Roosevelt bowed out of the election, the remaining Republican candidate would have defeated Woodrow Wilson.

There is no better teacher than witnessing utter failure, so since 1912, both political parties have refrained from allowing party arguments creation of third parties.  (Ross Perot’s Reform Party in 1996 wasn’t really a spinoff from the Republican Party, but it did probably allow Bill Clinton to defeat George Bush.)  While a few party members have wished to steal the nomination from an incumbent president (like Ted Kennedy in 1980), no political party has ever allowed such a challenge to actually prevent a president to run for reelection since 1892.

Will 2024 be the year that breaks that tradition?

London’s Smallest Sculpture

As a culture, we don’t erect enough public statues, and considering the recent political climate, we may be tearing down more statues than we are currently erecting.  Worse, far too many of the recent public art works are so difficult to interpret and so abstract that it is almost impossible to understand what the artist is trying to convey.

I like art that tells me a story.  If you are kind, you might say this is only natural because I’m a historian.  If you are honest, you would probably say that I’m just a poor dumb ol’ country boy who lacks the sophistication needed to appreciate any art that doesn’t hit me upside the head with its meaning.  Like Blanche Dubois, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers.

If the artwork does have a message, I prefer the meaning to have a little humor—perhaps a little satire—that is revealed through some study of the art’s back story (such as the story about the statue honoring Francisco Morazán in Tegucigalpa, Honduras.  You can read the story here.)  I want to look at statues that make me laugh.  (Or you can read this one.  Or this one.)  Look at how the people of Chicago used the statue of Marilyn Monroe before the 26 foot tall piece was moved to Palm Springs.  (Where the citizens have been arguing for years about the kitschy and misogynistic work.  If it rained more often in Palm Springs maybe the people could agree on where to place the piece.)

If you want fun statues, there is no better place in the world than London.  The Brits know how to enjoy their monuments—as evidenced by the large number they have appropriated from all over the world.  The city that hides a solar laboratory under Nelson’s Column, gave a nude statue of Napoleon to the Duke of Wellington so he could hang umbrellas on it and built hidden, roomy chambers under everything (including some extensive rooms below the Albert Memorial)…well, this is a city that knows how to have fun with its public statues.

One of the largest statues in London is the Albert Memorial, but today I want to tell you a story about the smallest statue….One that has no plaque, no marker, and no signs.  You could walk past it a dozen times and never see it.

In 1861, workmen began construction of a five story building on the corner of Eastcheap and Philpot.  While the building had a relatively small footprint, it was five stories tall, with more than sufficient space to house the spice merchants Messrs. Hunt and Crombie.  These guys must have had a great sense of humor because the building at 23 Eastcheap has polychromatic bricks, barley twist window columns, and carved figures of animal heads in the eaves.  The style is called Lombardic Gothic and, personally, I wonder why we don’t erect more buildings like this.  (The equally interesting buildings nearby on Eastcheap are examples of Victorian Gothic.)  The photo at left really doesn’t do the building justice, I suggest you use Google Earth Street View and examine it for yourself.  Or just go there and see the coffee shop it houses today, called Joe the Juice.  London is wonderful in June.

During construction, two men, employed by the architect, John Young, were working on a scaffold high above the street.  When the two men paused work for lunch, they noticed that their cheese sandwiches were missing and each man blamed the other for the theft of their meal.  As the two men argued, both became increasingly angry and soon harsh words were replaced with shoves, then blows.  Inevitably, both men fell from the scaffold, losing their lives on the stone street of Philpot Lane.

Shortly after the two fell to their death, other workmen discovered neither man had been responsible for the theft of the lunch, the actual culprits were a pair of mice who had attracted by the smell of the cheese.

No one is sure who commissioned the memorial, it could have been the spice merchants Hunt and Crombie who had already paid to have the building decorated with the likenesses of sheep and pigs’ heads.  It might have been the architect, since the two men had worked for him.  Personally, I like to think it was the other workmen, the stone masons and brick layers who knew the two men, who created the work in memory of their two lost friends.

If you walk down Eastcheap, you can turn up Philpot Lane, a street that only extends a single block.  To your left is the enormous top-heavy monstrosity of an office building known locally as the Walkie Talkie for its resemblance to a brick-like cell phone.  But if you turn to your right, just above the first floor towards the back of the building, you can see what is inarguably London’s smallest sculpture:  two mice fighting over a piece of cheese, known as the Philpot Mice.

If you go there, please do me a favor.  Go into the coffee shop and ask the good folks at Joe the Juice if they sell cheese sandwiches in honor of the two workmen.

A Cheap Summer Reading List

Thirteen years ago when I began to write this weekly blog, I selected the title of ‘Random Thoughts’ because I didn’t want to be restricted to a single subject or field.  Occasionally, I’ve thought a better title might have been ‘Apropos of Nothing Whatsoever” or “Yet Another Non Sequitur”. 

Over the years, I’ve written about history, art, economics, a little archaeology, the peculiarities of working at Enema U (a poor football team with a small university attached), a few feeble attempts at fiction, and whatever tickled my fancy on a Friday night as I sat before my computer with a bottle of beer.  A few of the posts have gone viral, a couple have been banned in certain countries that still exercise a draconian form of censorship, and just this week, Facebook decided that a history piece I wrote eight years ago does not meet its community standards.  While this banishment doesn’t completely show that the fact checkers at Facebook are ignorant, it does prove that they read slowly.

This is the first of June—the start of a new summer—and it is my usual practice between semesters to binge read the books I was too busy to read during the school year.  This year, the pickings of new good books seem a little sparse (perhaps some lingering effect of the pandemic).  At the same time, inflation is making everyone a little hesitant to spend money.  This gave me the idea of putting together, just this once, a list of good books to read this summer.  What makes this list different is that every book on the list has been published for years, meaning that good used copies can be found at Abebooks.som or at a good used book store.  Most of the books listed can be purchased for your Kindle for under $10 an edition.

Presented in no particular order:

Science Fiction.  Old Man’s War by John Scalzi.  Scalzi was obviously partially inspired by Robert Heinlein’s Starship Troopers:  both books attempt to tell the story of what infantry warfare will be like in the future, only Scalzi does it better.  Both Scalzi’s characters and the story are so compelling that he wrote several more books, turning one book into a series, and since Netflix has bought the movie rights to the entire series, eventually you may see the story on television.  Since good books are nearly always changed by cretinous Hollywood directors, you should read the book first.

The Caves of Steel by Isaac Asimov.  I have no idea why books by Asimov are not still constantly available in bookstores….well, that’s a stupid sentence.   I should just say I have no idea why there aren’t more bookstores selling good books.  In The Caves of Steel, Asimov moves the classic murder mystery far into the future and pairs an urban hardnosed detective with a robot.  Asimov is famous for his robot stories, particularly I, Robot, but that novel has already been ruined by a cretinous director (see above) and while this book was used for a British television show starring Peter Cushing, only a small portion of the film survives.

Asimov wrote the novel to prove his theory that science fiction could be adapted to any genre of fiction (in this case, the mystery).  Originally written as a stand-alone novel, Asimov eventually linked the story to his Foundation Trilogy as part of his Future History series of books.  While I would heartily recommend the entire series, this book by itself is a great read.

History/Economics.  A Splendid Exchange: How Trade Shaped the World by William J. Bernstein.  While this book is primarily about the economics of trade, it is also a wonderful history book.  There was a breakthrough moment a few thousand years ago when agriculture in a few areas was so successful that not everyone had to engage in full time subsistence farming, enabling some people to specialize in the production of other goods.  This division of labor dramatically increased production, creating not only increased wealth, but the necessity of trade.  The book reads like an adventure story…. Well, it does if you’re a history/economist nerd.  This is one of those books with ideas that come back to you again and again, forcing you to think about new concepts.  It is also one of those books that I keep nearby on a shelf so I can go back and refer to it.  While I wouldn’t categorize this as light reading, it is certainly enjoyable, providing new insight every time I reread it.

Economics.  Forty Centuries of Wage and Price Controls:  How Not to Fight Inflation by Robert L. Schuettinger and Eamonn F. Butler.  In plain and non-technical language, the authors give a history of the repeated failures of price controls as a method of fighting inflation.  As I write this, such measures have recently been instigated in Italy, Turkey, and Mexico and are once again being considered by morons in Washington.  The book is fascinating and should be required reading for American politicians.

Travel/Art/Literature.  The Innocents Abroad or The New Pilgrim’s Progress by Mark Twain.  It’s by Mark Twain, so how can you go wrong?  In 1867, Twain somehow managed to convince a newspaper to pay his expenses for a five-month excursion through Europe and the Holy Land.  In exchange, Twain sent regular accounts of his adventures back home, which were published in serial form.  Two years after the trip, Twain collected these letters and published them as a book.  Not only was the book an incredible success, but it was the best-selling of his books during his lifetime.

Among the side trips taken by the passengers of the USS Quaker City was an excursion from Marseilles to Paris for the 1867 Paris Exhibition, the second French World’s Fair as ordered by Emperor Napoleon III.  While you can read the book strictly for the comedy, Twain is actually using satire to compare history with the modern world.  If you have never read the book, I’m somewhat envious—I’d give almost anything to read a book by Twain for the first time.

Art Crime.  The Art of Forgery by Noah Charney.  What is it about art forgery that is so compelling and fascinating?  In my case, I think part of it is jealousy:  since I can’t afford to own my very own Picasso or Vermeer, I like to see the experts accepting a fake as the real thing.  One of the strengths of this book is that it explores the motivation—other than greed—for an artist to create a forgery.  While the layout of the book is unusual, you are unlikely to stop reading once you start.

Mystery.  Fer-de-Lance by Rex Stout.  This was the book that introduced Nero Wolfe and Archie Goodwin.  Though the book is set in New York during the Great Depression, the reader will hardly notice that nearly a century has passed since the book was published.  Stout wrote the Nero Wolfe stories with timeless characters, literally.  Though Stout wrote 33 books in the series over five decades, the two main characters remain the same age in every book.   Though it has been almost half a century since the last appearance of Nero Wolfe, he remains timeless. 

Whip Hand by Dick Francis.  Francis was a British steeplechase jockey with over 350 winning rides, and at one time he raced horses belonging to Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother.  After being injured in a fall, Francis began a long career of writing mysteries set in the world of racing that he knew so well.  Whip Hand, an Edgar Award Winner, is one of his best books.  While a made-for-television movie was based on the book, the movie has rarely been shown outside of the United States.  After writing 40 mysteries dealing with almost every aspect of British racing, Francis died in 2010.  Today, his son, Felix Francis, has followed in his father’s footsteps and is writing similar books.

Runners-up.  Here are some honorable mentions in case your used bookstore cannot find any of the above.  These are all great books that just are not as popular any more, for some obscure reason.

The African Queen, by C.S. Forester

Cautionary Tales by Hillaire Belloc

Diary of a Nobody by John Lawrence

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert Heinlein (Fair Warning:  every time I re-read this book, I talk and write in Pidgin English for a week.  And swear in Chinese.  You have been forewarned!)

The Path Between the Seas by David McCullough

Friday the Rabbi Slept Late by Harry Kemelman.  The author mixes interesting mysteries with fascinating theology.

The Thinking Machine by Jacques Futrelle

Max Carrados by Ernest Bramah

Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant by U.S. Grant

The Killer Angels by Michael Shaara

Desert Solitaire by Edward Abbey

Flashman by George MacDonald Fraser

The Lost City of Incas by Hiram Bingham.  The book is dated, but it is impossible to read the book and not think about Indiana Jones.  Bingham is also notable for becoming a Congressman who once landed his gyrocopter on the Washington Mall.

Waiting for the Galactic Bus by Parke Godwin