The Bourbon Restoration by Gary Hainsworth

The Bourbon Restoration (1814-15; 1815-1830) is divided into three periods: 

1) The First Restoration (04/06/1814-03/20/1815), which saw the restoration of the French crown under Louis XVIII shortly after Napoleon Bonaparte’s exile to Elba (where he did not remain for long). 

2) The Hundred Days (03/20/1815-07/08/15), a brief Napoleonic interregnum ending with Napoleon’s defeat at the Battle of Waterloo (in present-day Belgium).

 3) The Second Restoration (1815-1830), which lasted until the July Revolution of 1830 deposed King Charles X (r. 1824-1830) until he was ultimately replaced by Louis Philippe I (r. 1830-1848). 

Hubert van Es and the Fall of Saigon by Gary Hainsworth

On April 30, 1975, the day after Hubert van Es photographed the Huey Helicopters on top of the CIA-owned Pitman Towers, one of the images he captured would appear on the front page of The New York Times. It would be under the headline: “Minh Surrenders, Vietcong in Saigon: 1,000 Americans and 5,500 Vietnamese Evacuated by Copter to U.S Carriers.1” The photo’s caption will describe the scene as “A Crewman from an American helicopter helping evacuees to the top of a building in Saigon for flight to a U.S carrier.” Since the shooting of these hastily filmed images forty years ago, the Pittman Towers photographs have become forever associated with the Fall of the Saigon the same way Jeff Widener’s photographs of “Tank Man” attempting to block four Type 59’s have become forever associated with the Tiananmen Square Protests of 1989. In many ways, good or bad, the images of the events themselves have become the context by which most people understand the war itself.  

The Vietnam War, a.k.a. the American War, a.k.a. The Second Indochina War, a.k.a. War of Liberation, a.k.a. Anti-U.S. War of National Liberation, a.k.a The Vietnam Conflict, was finished. The two divided Vietnam's, bifurcated on account of conflicting visions regarding what ideological, economic system would better serve the interests of the Vietnamese people, were once again united. This time under a communist government with Soviet backing. Meanwhile, just fourteen months shy of its bicentennial, or four-hundred and thirty-one (431) days to be exact, the United States of America was about to grapple with something unprecedented: defeat. Where and when did things go wrong? “...Was there ever a realistic chance for a negotiated settlement?2” or was the United States fighting an unwinnable war?”

Selected Bibliography

1= The New York Times 30 Apr. 1975: n. pag. Print.

2 = Lawrence, Mark Atwood. 2010. The Vietnam War a concise international history. Oxford: Oxford University Press, page 3

The Ink of History by Gary Hainsworth

Generally speaking, a relationship is only as strong as the person that wants it least. In this sense, a war is not declared when you want it to happen but when the other guy starts firing first. If you want peace and they want war, prepare for war because you are already in one (and chances are it will not end until one of you has lost so do not be the one to lose). Do not be decent to those that would use your decency as a weapon against you. In my experience, situations are only as good as the person with the least amount of integrity will allow it to be.

In many ways, Europe is too decent for its own good. Western civilization is not perfect but no civilization is perfect, and one would be guilty of the Nirvana fallacy if they measured the imperfect civilization against the perfect, but purely hypothetical utopia and found the former wanting. All of world history is written with blood & sperm (but some, not often from a lack of trying, spill less than others). Don’t believe me, ask the Mauryans, ask the Mongols, ask the Ottomans, ask the Seljuqs, ask the Timurids, ask the Umayyads; conjure up the spirits of Ashoka, Genghis Khan, Osman, Tughrïl, Tamerlane. and Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan and ask them if they disagree. I am sure they would concur with Augustus, with Charlemagne, with Napoleon, with Stalin, and Atilla the Hun.

Societies Can Be Better Than Others by Gary Hainsworth

I hate to see the City of Lights surrounded by so much darkness. I don’t like to see “the hexagon” trapped in a politically correct shame spiral often perpetuated by hack human beings seeking largely undeserved rentals. Personally, I preferred the term ‘privilege’ when it was called ‘original sin’. Some cultures are demonstrably better than others and the proof is in their actions. How do they treat their women or women in general? How do they treat their children or children in general? How do they treat their boys? How do they treat their girls? How do they treat their friends? How do they treat their enemies? How do they treat those that are neutral? How do they treat partisans on either side of the conflict? How do they treat the rich? How do they treat the poor? For a society which treats the poor as if poverty alone sufficed to grant one automatic moral superiority is doomed. A society which demonizes the rich because of their prosperity is also doomed. Perhaps, more so since at least in a plutocratic scheme a la Downton Abbey, the poor can find some form of employment under the auspices of the ridiculously rich.

First written, November 14, 2015
Revised: February 15, 2016