internationalbusinessglopem2020 - Tumblr blog

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

As we can see from this picture the Life during the time of WW1 was harsh and the conditions for surviving were minimum. Trenches were long, narrow ditches dug into the ground where soldiers lived.They were very muddy, uncomfortable and the toilets overflowed. There were many lines of German trenches on one side and many lines of Allied trenches on the other. 

"In each human heart terror survives

The ruin it has gorged: the loftiest fear

All that they would disdain to think were true:

Hypocrisy and custom make their minds

The fanes of many a worship, now outworn.

They dare not devise good for man's estate,

And yet they know not that they do not dare.

The good want power but to weep barren tears.

The powerful goodness want: worst need for them.

The wise want love; and those who love want wisdom;

And all best things are thus confused to ill.

Many are strong and rich, and would be just,

But live among their suffering fellow-men

As if none felt: they know not what they do.

We have been moved already beyond endurance, and need rest. Never in the lifetime of men now living has the universal element in the soul of man burnt so dimly (Keynes: 297)."

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

All'ospedale militare tutti i reduci dei battaglioni d’assalto ripetono la stessa litania furibonda: è una vergogna, li hanno congedati così su due piedi, come si licenzia una serva. Prima i generali li hanno voluti umiliare facendoli marciare per mesi, a guerra finita, sotto la pioggia e nel fango per imporre loro un po’ di quella disciplina cui nessuno aveva mai osato sottoporli quando servivano per assaltare le trincee nemiche, e poi i politici li hanno umiliati congedandoli di notte, in silenzio. “Per non provocare,” è stato detto. E chi non si doveva provocare? […] Gli eroi sono rientrati nella vita civile furtivi come ladri nella casa del Signore. […]In Francia i reduci vittoriosi hanno sfilato sotto l’Arco di Trionfo di Napoleone, in tutti i Paesi sono stati accolti da un’apoteosi e loro, invece, loro che hanno distrutto uno dei più grandi imperi della storia, stremandosi in una gigantesca epopea, loro li hanno rimandati a casa al buio e in punta di piedi. Niente marcia su Vienna, niente parate, niente colonie, niente Fiume, nessuna indennità, niente di niente. Tutto va male. Si vive alla giornata. Per che cosa hanno combattuto?

A. Scurati, Il Figlio del Secolo, pp. 27-28

Here Scurati presents the different perception of victory in the war. Indeed, this is the point of view of some italian interventists who blamed the Italian government for not adequately enhancing the war. The comparison with France is clear: France celebration under the Napoleon Triumph Arc and Italy NOTHING, although it had defeated one of the biggest empire of history. 

No patritism in Italy, after all what was there to celebrate?

France punished her lifelong economic enemy, France expected to become the greatest European industrial power after the UK. 

In Italy there was just destruction and disillusion. Nevertheless, some wanted to be appropriately celebrated for their efforts. Indeed, Mussolini pushed a lot on this aspect when he was ascending to power. 

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

Mussolini e quelli come lui erano stati particolarmente impressionati dal fatto che i socialisti facessero sfilare in testa al corteo donne e bambini. L’odio politico urlato dalle bocche sensuali delle femmine e degli imberbi era spaventoso, gettava nella costernazione e nello sgomento il tipo di maschio adulto che aveva voluto la guerra. Il motivo era molto semplice. A quel maschio bottegaio, autoritario, patriarcale, misogino, l’urlo antimilitarista e antipatriottico di donne e bambini lasciava presagire qualcosa di terrificante e d’inaudito: un futuro senza di lui.

A. Scurati, Il Figlio del Secolo, p. 23

Eng Translation: “Mussolini and those like him were particularly impressed by the fact that socialists allowed women and children to do on strike. The political hate shouted from female sensual mouths and beardlesses was frightening, it astonished the kind of adult man who wanted the war. The reason was quite simple. To that shopkeeper, authoritarian, patriarchal, misogynist man, the anti-military and anti-patrioctic scream of women and children let him think of something frightening and unheard: the future without him”.

I tried to translate this passage because it’s really strong, impressive. It suggested me so many emotions that I cannot explain. The use of these sophisticated adjectives is amazing. I hope the english translation is as evocative as the italian version. 

This passage strongly affirms the epocal change in the figure of women and the consequent scorn by the fascist mind. 

Women started to strike, of course, now they fully-fledged worked.

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

29th April 1945 - 29th april 2020 - The end of WWII in Italy. 

Some author in the academic framework argue that WWI and WWII represent in such a way a “Second 30 years war”. (see https://www.jstor.org/stable/3679140?seq=1)

In the picture posted here, the dead body of Benito Mussolini next to his mistress Claretta Petacci and those of other executed fascists, on display in Milan on 29 April 1945, in Piazzale Loreto, the same place that the fascists had displayed the bodies of fifteen Milanese civilians a year earlier after executing them in retaliation for resistance activity. The photograph is by Vincenzo Carrese.  Photo Source: Wikimedia Commons.

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

“Tutto va male. Non c’è nemmeno un soldo. A volte si fa anche la fame. Per che cosa si è combattuto? “

“Everything goes wrong. There is not even a penny. Sometimes we also get hungry. What did we fight for?”

A. Scurati- M. Il figlio del secolo 

I think that this passage sum up the sense and the reality of devastation that WWI left after its end. “What did we fight for?” expresses the way in which many former soldier in Italy and whole Europe felt: totally lost, incapable to go back to a “normal life” because of the shock and wounds of the war, left alone. And it has been on this sentiment, on this feeling, that Mussolini has later developed his propaganda. He knew very well how to make a point on this regard since he was a soldier of WWI himself, so he knew and understood the resentiment and desolation experienced by former fighters. 

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

<<In spite, therefore, of France's victorious issue from the present struggle (with the aid, this time, of England and America), her future position remained precarious in the eyes of one who took the view that European civil war is to be regarded as normal, or at least a recurrent, state of affairs for the future, and that the sort of conflicts between organized great powers which have occupied the past hundred years will also engage the next. According to this vision of the future, European history is to be a perpetual prize-fight, of which France has won this round, but of which this round is certainly not the last.>> (Keynes; Chapter III pp 34-35).

Hitler and his military staff visiting the Eiffel Tower after the success of "Fall Gelb" and the consequent defeat of the French Army - June 23, 1940. 

For Hitler and the Nazy Party needed only one month of fightings to re-write from the start the history of armed conflicts between Germany and France - struggle that had been featuring so deeply the European history since the Middle Ages. The unstoppable German offensive reminds us of those unexpected consequences bound to the Treaty of Verlailles that Keynes had foreseen.

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

"Oh It's A Lovely War!" - British WW1 song

"Oh! What a Lovely War" is a British musical film by Richard Attenborough, released in 1969 and adapted from the homonymous musical by Joan Littlewood in 1963. The film comments and summarises on the unfolding of the First World War by relying on songs and tunes of period music. Many of these songs go back to the 19th century, and the lyrics were changed sarcastically by the soldiers on the front. The musical is inspired by Alan Clark’s The Donkeys (1961), a First World War history book, which is highly critical of officers who have wasted the lives of their people.

The film is punctuated with allegories showing the play of political and social forces at work in the tragedy that is being played: the Brighton Pier represents the First World War, with the audience rushing to the gate, and General Haig in the teller. The protagonists are the members of the Smith family, representatives of the working class and the petty bourgeoisie of the nation. The film was a great success and became the classic expression of an anti-militarist interpretation of the First World War. Indeed, the film shows the indifference of the elites before the massacre of ordinary citizens, and suggests that the objectives of war were profit and colonial domination.

The song "Oh ! it's a Lovely War" was written by J.P Long and Maurice Scott in 1917. 

"Up to your waist in water,

Up to your eyes in slush,

Using the kind of language

That makes the sergeants blush;

Who wouldn't join the army,

That's what we all enquire,

Don't we pity the poor civilians

Sitting beside the fire ?

Chorus:

Oh! Oh! Oh! It's a lovely war,

Who wouldn't be a soldier, eh ?

Oh, it's a shame to take the pay.

As soon as reveille has gone

We feel just as heavy as lead,

But we never get up till the sergeant

Brings our breakfast up to bed.

What do you want with eggs and ham

When you've got plum and apple jam ?

Form fours! Right turn!

How shall we spend the money we earn ?

When does a soldier grumble ?

When does a soldier make a fuss ?

No one is more contented

In all the world than us.

Oh, it's a cushy life, boys,

Really, we love it so;

Once a fellow was sent on leave

And simply refused to go.

Come to the cook-house door, boys,

Sniff at the lovely stew,

Who is it says the colonel

Gets better grub than you ?

Any complaints this morning?

Do we complain ? Not we.

What's the matter with lumps of onion

Floating around the tea ?"

We can see that the song used for the film is satirical.

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

The camouflaged Renault FT17 tank is a gouached drawing by Georges Tournon on October 13, 1918.

I wanted to talk about a technique used during the First World War (probably the second too) that was not mentioned in the first chapters that I find very interesting.

The First World War saw the development of weapons techniques, on the ground, at sea and in the air. In August 1915, the French Army officially recognized a new weapon: Camouflage. This method allows soldiers to hide by using misleading objects. It was set up by artists, and by theater decorators. This method allowed better defense and attack and was ultimately used by both sides.

The revolutionary idea came from painters whose objective was to make artillery and men disappear from the eyes of the enemy and thus, by this method, save men from death.Indeed, at the start of the campaign in 1914, several artists realized that the cannons shine in the sun, which makes them easy to spot. Thanks to demonstrations, Guirand de Scévola (painter) succeeds in convincing the strategists. On August 4, 1915, the Minister of War officially recognized the Camouflage section. To meet needs and install camouflage on the ground, several manufacturing workshops have opened in Paris, notably at the Opéra in Buttes-Chaumont. The artists were made up of painter, sculptors but also cubist artists who allowed a more destructuring and effective vision. In the numerous rooms, there were false hollow and armored trees that the soldiers planted at night, canvases and hedges camouflaging the roads and railways.

Subsequently, camouflage also spread to aviation and the navy. More than 200 French artists have contributed to this method such as Charles Despiau, Henri Bouchard, Charles Dufresne, André Dunoyer de Segonzac, Auguste Herbin, André Mare (one of the founders of Art Deco). The camouflage was the victim of an immense development. In fact, more than 10,000 women were employed in manufacturing workshops during the war. In 1918, 3000 officers and troops worked to camouflage the French army.

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

Cool explicative video focused on the dubious morality/feasibility of the Peace Treaty as a “revengeful peace” towards the German enemy. It recaps all the points we’ve already seen through the reading of Keynes’ book and it is also accompanied by charts, maps, quotations and suggestive historical photos. Paired with another video of the same series that I remember being posted at the beginning of the dashboard, but that previous one was more related to the book, while this offers a broader perspective, illustrating how the enforcement of the Treaty after 1919 was more problematic than the Treaty itself - and ultimately led to WWII. 

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

To keep on with our series of unexpected references in contemporary metal music (thanks again Sergio for the inspiration! XD), here’s another masterpiece tackling the issue of psychological disorders caused by the war in those who come to know its horrors in person - the soldiers.

We have read many beautiful pieces of poetry in this dashboard, but in my opinion the lyrics of this song might be considered poetic as well.

Here’s a short extract:

“Wake to face the day Grab this life and walk away War is never done Rub the patch and battle on Make it go away Please, make it go away

Confusion All sanity is now beyond me Delusion All sanity is but a memory 

My life, the war that never ends

Leave the battlefield Yet it's horrors never heal Coming home from war Pieces don't fit anymore Make it go away Please, make it go away”

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

This time I don’t have a specific passage from Keynes’ chapters VI or VII to attach to this post, but Carlotta’s reference to shell-shocked soldiers and Sergio’s quote on One by Metallica made me think of another problem which  veterans returned from the battlefield still face today, especially in the US: homelessness, poverty and social exclusion. Therefore, it may be linked to peace economics in general, as another one of the numerous negativities of the unproductive and destructive activity “par excellence” - war; today, as 100 years ago.

This metal ballad by Five Finger Death Punch deals exactly with this delicate theme, and even if it may not be your genre I thought it would be an appropriate addition to the discussion.  

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

One of the most discussed and mysterious female figures of the First World War is certainly that of Mata Hari. 

Her name at birth was Margaretha Geerruida Zelle. Until the age of 13, she lived a comfortable lifestyle in the Netherlands, attending elite private schools paid for by her father. However, in 1889, her father went bankrupt and her parents soon divorced.

When she was 18, she answered a newspaper ad from a handsome Dutch officer living in Java, the East Indies. In those days it was common for Dutchman living in colonies to request wives by placing ads in papers. Margaretha moved to Java where the couple had two children. However, the marriage was not a happy one, with her husband, Rudolph Macleod, suffering from alcoholism. They soon divorced in 1902, shortly after the tragic death of their young son. 

When she returned to Paris in 1903, she gained work in a circus before moving on to work as an exotic dancer. With her background in the East Indies, she was able to claim that she was a Java Princess of Hindu birth, something which added to her allure and fascination. It was at this time that she took the name of Mata Hari – meaning “the eye of the day” in Java. Mata Hari had several relationships with powerful men across the continent. This included Frederick William Ernest, the German crown prince, wealthy French businessmen and high ranking French military officers.

The outbreak of the First World War placed her in a unique and difficult position. Initially, she found herself in Germany with her sources of finance cut off. But, with her usual resourcefulness, she was able to gain sufficient finances to restart travelling. With her Dutch nationality, (the Netherlands remained neutral in the war) she was able to cross different national boundaries. This took her between Germany and France often via Britain or Spain to avoid the front line. As she knew both high ranking German and Frenchmen, this inevitably placed her under suspicion as someone who could in theory transfer information about the other side’s war effort. On one occasion, she admitted to the British she was working as a spy for the French. However, the French never confirmed or denied this. 

In January 1917, the French intercepted a coded message from the Germans saying they had gained much useful information from a German spy code-named H-21. From this information, suspicion fell on Mata Hari and she was arrested and convicted of spying. After a trial, she was executed by firing squad on 15 October 1917. After her death, her life has been the subject of many different accounts which have tended to embellish on certain details of her life.

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

Building on President Theodore Roosevelt’s pre-World War I proposal for a League of Peace, President Woodrow Wilson led efforts to craft a multinational settlement at the end of the war that would insure a “lasting peace.” The League of Nations was the centerpiece of the treaty — an international body inclusive of all nations that would adjudicate disputes between them, encourage cooperation, and punish aggression.

The infamous rejection of the Treaty of Versailles by the U.S. Senate in November 1919, and again in March 1920, destroyed this dream. Appealing to U.S. war fatigue, anti-British sentiment, and a distrust of complex diplomatic agreements, separation sounded safer than new cooperative connections with former belligerents. Of course, the opposite was true.

American isolationism delegitimized the Treaty of Versailles. Why would other societies invest in the agreement if one of its leading proponents, also one of the emerging world powers, refused to participate? Many observers appreciated the domestic politics behind the U.S. rejection of the treaty, but that only deepened long-standing perceptions that the United States was an unreliable partner. Why should others tie their hands if the United States acted as a free rider? In the decade after the First World War, U.S. actions encouraged unilateralism by other powerful actors, especially Japan, Germany, and the newly formed Soviet Union.

All of this in stark contrast with Keynes’ own auspices regarding US “generosity” and alleged willingness to act once again as problem solver - a sort of deus ex machina I would say (referring particularly to military efforts during the war and economic support in the aftermath):

“It is from the United States, therefore, that the proposal asks generosity. [...] I believe this to be an act of generosity for which Europe can fairly ask, provided Europe is making an honorable attempt in other directions, not to continue war, economic or otherwise, but to achieve the economic reconstitution of the whole Continent. [...] without this assistance the Allies could never have won the war, quite apart from the decisive influence of the arrival of the American troops. [...] Never was a nobler work of disinterested goodwill carried through with more tenacity and sincerity and skill, and with less thanks either asked or given. The ungrateful Governments of Europe owe much more to the statesmanship and insight of Mr. Hoover and his band of American workers than they have yet appreciated or will ever acknowledge.” (Ch. VII, p. 272-3-4)

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

A schematic depiction of Europe “as the War and the Peace have made it [...]: between the inevitable fruits of the War and the avoidable misfortunes of the Peace.” (Ch. VI, p. 227)

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

 “The Treaty includes no provisions for the economic rehabilitation of Europe, - nothing to make the defeated Central Empires into good neighbors, nothing to stabilize the new States of Europe, nothing to reclaim Russia; nor does it promote in any way a compact of economic solidarity amongst the Allies themselves”. (Ch. VI, p. 226)

I found this article very meaningful because it actually relies upon - and ultimately adopts - Keynes’ position regarding the fallacies and incongruences of the Treaty and its inevitable, disastrous consequences:

“One of the earliest critics of the reparations clause was John Maynard Keynes in his book Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919), in which he portrayed the Versailles Treaty as a Carthaginian peace, intent on ruining Germany as effectively as Rome had destroyed Carthage in 146BC.” (R. Gerwarth)

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]

Ora brindano al 17 febbraio, il giorno in cui Milano e l’Italia, smaltita in fretta la sbornia per la vittoria della nazione sugli storici nemici austriaci, aveva scoperto con sgomento che nel suo futuro c’era un nemico nuovo: la rivoluzione bolscevica. Quel giorno memorabile quarantamila operai in sciopero avevano sfilato fino all’Arena al suono di trenta bande, sventolando migliaia di bandiere rosse e innalzando cartelli che maledicevano la guerra vittoriosa appena conclusa. […] All’altra Milano, quella nazionalista, patriottica, piccolo-borghese, che nel millenovecentoquindici aveva dato diecimila volontari alla guerra, all’Italia di Benito Mussolini, era parso che in quel corteo “i mostri della decadenza si rifacessero vivi”, che il mondo appena pacificato “cedesse a una malattia”. […] Il giorno dopo Mussolini aveva firmato un editoriale violento, “Contro la bestia ritornante”. Il paladino dell’intervento in guerra aveva solennemente promesso di difenderne i morti, a suo dire insultati dai manifestanti, di difenderli fino all’ultimo “anche a costo di scavare le trincee nelle strade e nelle piazze della nostra città

A. Scurati, Il Figlio del Secolo, p. 23

The point of view is that of the omniscent narrator that watches the scene from the outside, but he also knows the feelings of the characters. 

Here there is the scene of workers, men and women, striking presented by both points of view: the workers side blaming the useless war; and, the nationalist bourgeois Italy, that starts to fear the increasing bolshevic souls. In the last part, the author presents Mussolini’s reaction to this strike. He blamed them of insulting the deads of the war. 

The bolscevic terror indeed is perfectly visible here. 

Tell me again if you want the translation or if you can find it on the internet :)

[internationalbusinessglopem2020]