Electric Angel: I recall Spain holding on to most of Latin America until 1820 or so. In 1798, a man could travel from Tierra del Fuego up to Port Angeles, Washington, go east to the Mississippi River drainage, down to New Orleans, and over to Miami, and never set foot on territory not at least nominally under the control of the King of Spain. I wonder if the Tierra del Fuego to Port Angeles distance is more than Belarus to Vladivostok?
Rollory: DC expects everybody on the planet to do exactly as they say. But DC is sure that they’ll do so because everyone is basically good and wants what’s best (except of course for Bad People who need to have bombs dropped on their heads), which is, of course, what DC sees is good and best, because DC is obviously correct in all things, most particularly about the need for everybody to do exactly as DC says. Whether DC formally calls itself an empire or not doesn’t seem to really...
Rollory: France losing the imperial world contest with England might have been the best thing that ever happened to it. As it stands it’ll still be a close thing — all those nonwhites in Paris are there because they’re coming from former French colonies.
James James: “The present infatuation for independence for ever smaller and smaller units will eventually doubtless be succeeded by new international empires.” Interesting prediction! Glubb hasn’t mentioned empires that pretend not to be empires. Is this a new phenomenon? There’s now a DOCX version available on libgen.
Bob Sykes: As Ames pointed out many years ago, plants themselves are a significant source of carcinogens and toxicants, which evolved to offset grazing and browsing.
Scipio Americanus: For Europeans, a hundred miles is a long way. For Americans, a hundred years is a long time.
Scipio Americanus: These numbers are interesting, but not terribly useful in the absence of information about the toxicity and long-term exposure effects of the chemicals in question at those concentrations.
Rollory: I remember seeing Jon Liebowitz (Stewart) talking about how progressive values have been advancing “throughout history”. He gave examples going back to the late 1800s. I’ve pretty much come to the conclusion it doesn’t matter whether he knows what’s wrong with that argument or not.
Bob Sykes: Peter Turchin seems to be filling in the hole.