So let us have no truck with those who say the free enterprise system has failed. What we face today is not a crisis of capitalism but of Socialism. No country can flourish if its economic and social life is dominated by nationalization and State control
Thatcher adamantly claims that the contemporary issues that Britain was facing were not a result of capitalism’s failings, but of socialism as administered by the Labour Government.
It is the Labour Government that has brought us record peace-time taxation.
This is a less than subtle repudiation of the Labour Party. It is clear the Conservative Party is pointing a finger so-to-speak at the Labour Government for what they claim to be rampantly irresponsible spending.
From what I have seen of our Russian friends and allies during the war, I am convinced that there is nothing they admire so much as strength, and there is nothing for which they have less respect than for military weakness
Churchill seems to be implying that if the former Allies wish to remain on positive terms, or possibly even remain at all in any sense, military weakness and lack of strength cannot be tolerated, as Russia would be capable of exploiting this.
We welcome her to her rightful place among the leading nations of the world
Here Churchill reluctantly concedes that the Soviet powers were here to stay and that they had earned their “right” to world power for their efforts in WWII, even if Churchill is convinced that they exist solely as an oppositional force.
If the Nazi dictator should choose to look westward, as he may, bitterly will France and England regret the loss of that fine army of ancient Bohemia [Czechoslovakia] which was estimated last week to require not fewer than 30 German divisions for its destruction.
Churchill is practically shaming his nation for its abandonment of what he refers to as “ancient Bohemia”, invoking the Medieval title of the region. This appeal to age aims to prove that Czechoslovakia’s Independence is historically precedented.
After [Hitler's] seizure of Austria in March . . . I ventured to appeal to the Government
Churchill is pointing out that he has been warning the country of these possibilities since Hitler began his annexation in Europe.
total and unmitigated defeat
Churchill seems committed to driving home the weight of the consequences of appeasement.
We had no treaty obligations and no legal obligations to Czechoslovakia
Chamberlain tries justifying his acceptance of Germany’s expansionism by claiming that Britain has no responsibility over the sovereignty of Czechoslovakia, wishfully thinking that was the extent of Hitler’s ambitions.
Does the experience of the Great War and of the years that followed it give us reasonable hope that, if some new war started, that would end war any more than the last one did?. . .
It is clear that Chamberlain is very concerned with the possibility of a repeat of the First World War, and is willing to placate the Germans in order to prevent it.
did not feel that they had such a cause for which to fight
Without knowing the future, this point of view is very reasonable, especially in today’s context. This claim is very similar to many American opinions on the Vietnam War for instance.
London is a sort of whirlpool which draws derelict people towards it, and it is so vast that life there is solitary and anonymous. Until you break the law nobody will take any notice of you, and you can go to pieces as you could not possibly do in a place where you had neighbours who knew you. But in the industrial towns the old communal way of life has not yet broken up, tradition is still strong and almost everyone has a family -- potentially, therefore, a home. . . .
Orwell is describing the dynamics of city life in a city that is just so brimming with people that it is impossible for what he claims is the "old communal way of life" to exist within it, rendering people essentially anonymous.
self-respect
Dickens isn't being subtle with his attempts at guilting the reader.
The employment of the wife dissolves the family utterly and of necessity, and this dissolution, in our present society, which is based upon the family, brings the most demoralizing consequences for parents as well as children. A mother who has no time to trouble herself about her child, to perform the most ordinary loving services for it during its first year, who scarcely indeed sees it, can be no real mother to the child, must inevitably grow indifferent to it, treat it unlovingly like a stranger.
This is quite an interesting (and still controversial) point: is a women's labor truly liberating if it is debilitating to their family, especially children? Though today modern family planning accompanied by many other improvements for the lives of women has made women's integration in the workforce an undeniable right as well as benefit, Engels seems to make an intriguing argument for the 19th century family.
It would be a great misunderstanding of this doctrine to suppose that it is one of selfish indifference, which pretends that human beings have no business with each other's conduct in life, and that they should not concern themselves about the well-doing or well-being of one another, unless their own interest is involved.
Mill's views on liberty clearly reject the suggestion that his liberalism is informed by 'selfish indifference'.
In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.
This is a clear explanation of Mill's interpretation of liberalism.
in the morning sometimes, when they are very drowsy, and have not got rid of the fatigue of the day before.
It's not at all hard to imagine children being less then attentive in similar, yet less horrible, modern situations, let alone the excess involved in child labor. These children displaying perfectly appropriate reactions to their environment would have been seen as insubordinate, and fated them to correction in the form of corporal punishment.
I was, when working those long hours, commonly very much fatigued at night, when I left my work; so much so that I sometimes should have slept as I walked if I had not stumbled and started awake again; and so sick often that I could not eat, and what I did eat I vomited. Did this labour destroy your appetite? -- It did.
The lengths to which people, including children, were pushed in their employment is now quite rightly seen as unconscionable, but appears to be pervasive in the younger years of industry.
Do we need a stronger evidence of the absurdity of hereditary government than is seen in the descendants of those men, in any line of life, who once were famous?
This statement as well as the paragraph that follows seems to be an immensely important concept for the Revolutionary era, since it is outright insisting that hereditary monarchies are objectively unjust, and obselete.
When Reason seem'd the most to assert her rights
Is Wordsworth claiming that the late 18th century was the ideal time to attempt the French Revolution?
This examinate says that about eight years since she received a little black puppy from one Margaret Simson of great Catworth, which dog the said Margaret had in her bed with her, and took it thence when she gave it to the examinate. The examinate further says, that the said Margaret told her, that she must keep that dog all her lifetime; and if she cursed any cattle and set the same dog upon them, they should presently die, and the said Margaret told her that she had named it already. His name was Pretty. And the said examinate further says, that about the same time one goodwife Weed gave her a white cat, telling her, that if she would deny God, and affirm the same by her blood, then whomsoever she cursed and sent that cat unto, they should die shortly after. Whereupon this said examinate says that she did deny God, and in affirmation thereof she pricked her finger with a thorn, whence issued blood which the cat presently licked; and the said goodwife Weed named the cat Tissy. And the said examinate further said, that one William Foster, about sixteen years since, would have hanged two of her children for offering to take a piece of bread, and for that cause about six years since she cursed the said William Foster, whereupon the white cat went to him and he immediately fell sick, and lying in great pain for the space of seven or eight days, and then died. But being demanded what the cat did to him, or what she bid it do, she says she remembers not. And she further says that about five years since, she keeping cows in the field, a cow of Edward Hulls went into the grain, she cursed her, and set Pretty on her and she swelled and died shortly after; and after that a cow of one Peter Browne went into the corn and she likewise cursed her, and set Pretty on her and she died within two or three days after. And she further says that she killed the said dog and cat about a year since; and yet after that the like dog and cat haunted her familiarly: and when she was apprehended, they crept under her clothes, and tortured her so that she could not speak to confess freely, and more she said not.
These two paragraphs are documenting supposed familiars of accused witches. Familiars were generally thought to be demons in disguise that aided witches.
The many instances of forged miracles and prophecies and supernatural events, which, in all ages, have either been detected by contrary evidence, or which detect themselves by their absurdity, prove sufficiently the strong propensity of mankind to the extraordinary and marvellous, and ought reasonably to beget a suspicion against all relations of this kind
Hume is very clear that he sees no rational reason for the belief in anything supernatural or otherwise contrary to scientific knowledge.
A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature
This is an astoundingly strong claim even for the Enlightenment thinkers. This shows that naturalist thinking was gaining ground fast.
declare that the pretended power of suspending of laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of parliament is illegal; that the pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal
This is marking a clear line of demarcation between the parliament and the King.
The petition exhibited to his majesty by the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in this present parliament assembled, concerning divers rights and liberties of the subjects, with the king's majesty's royal answer thereunto in full parliament.
This seems to me to be reinforcing the concept that freemen are allowed that status by their lord, and are not entitled to it by virtue of being human.
good Kings of Judah did: "To procure the peace of the people," as the same David saith: "To decide all controversy that can arise among them," as Solomon did: "To be the minister of God for the weal of them that do well, as the minister of God, to take vengeance upon them that do evil," as St. Paul saith. . . .
King James makes it plainly obvious he is appealing to people's religiousity by invoking names like 'Solomon'.
To be, or not to be, that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing end them.
Many people will claim that Shakespeare is perhaps too effete or pretentious, and while the language (which is actually recent enough to be Modern English and not actually Old English despite what many think) is very archaic to modern ears, and requires contextual help to fully understand and appreciate, the actual stories and the themes presented in them are very grounded and timeless. Here, Hamlet is struggling with suicidal thoughts of death and by skillful use of metaphor, Shakespeare eloquently portrays the dilemma presented before Hamlet facing his seemingly insurmountable problems. The way Shakespeare so expertly portrays Hamlet's increasingly pervasive melancholy decent into despair is timeless and universal.
Just a heads up to anyone who might care, Akira Kurosawa's various film adaptations of Shakespeare are fantastic if you don't care for the Early Modern English, and they beautifully illustrate how the themes of Shakespeare are universal and timeless.
The Utopians enslave prisoners of war only if they are captured in wars fought by the Utopians themselves. The children of slaves are not automatically enslaved, nor are any men who were enslaved in a foreign country. Most of the slaves are either their own former citizens, enslaved for some heinous offense, or else men of other nations who were condemned to death in their own land.
How wonderfully enlightened of them... (Please realize this is sarcasm)
hand-guns
More than likely referring to early arquebus, or 'hand-cannon' as opposed to say a pistol or modern "handgun", since the technology was still novel in Europe, and also relatively new to the world in general.
houses here are so low that no one can shoot out of them
I was having trouble understanding what she means here, but I believe she is referring to the height of the longbows being too large to fit properly with low ceilings.
I commend myself to you and ask you to get some crossbows, and windlasses to wind them with, and crossbow bolts, for your houses here are so low that no one can shoot out of them with a longbow, however much we needed to. I expect you can get such things from Sir John Fastolf if you were to send to him. And I would also like you to get two or three short pole-axes to keep indoors, and as many leatherjackets, if you can.
I'm curious as to how typical this is for the lordly wife. Is she being instructed by someone else in charge of military matters? Or Is she personally conversing with her men at arms over their defenseive shortcomings?
a public cook shop; there eatables are to be found every day, according to the season, dishes of meat, roast, fried and boiled, great and small fish, coarser meats for the poor, more delicate for the rich, of game, fowls, and small birds.
I'm curious about whether or not this is referring to what we would now call a restaurant, or simply a tavern or public house, since I was under the impression that the concept of the restaurant was a far later development.
Also, when any one of them dieth, the lord shall have all the pigs of the deceased, all his goats, all his mares at grass, and his horse also, if he had one for his personal use, all his bees, all his bacon-pigs, all his cloth of wool and flax, and whatsoever can be found of gold and silver.
This seems to imply that practically anything of value that a bond-tenant owned belonged first to the lord, and one seems to be given the "privilege" of ownership and inheritance from their seemingly benevolent lord.
even during the night, and they ought all to come the next day.
This illustrates the level of subservience and loyalty one was expected of by their lord.
Melchisedech
King of Salem, Priest of Elyon (God most high), and is mentioned in Genesis.
granted moreover to all free men
I believe this (and it's unwritten cultural origins) is the origin of the "rights only apply for free men" concept that followed us into the founding of the US
no one durst do anything against his will. He had earls in his bonds, who had acted against his will; bishops he cast from their bishoprics, and abbots from their abbacies, and thanes into prison
This seems to show the contemporary English view of tyranny
By his side stood a warrior not yet full grown, a boy in war
Evidence of militarization of youths
his legitimate daughter (or sister)
This line illustrates that unwed women were expected to be protected by their families, and suggests little autonomy was given to these women, especially regarding relationships with men.
rejoice in the Lord and fix the anchor of your hope on God, for he will straightway give you the reward of eternal salvation
This is a prime example of Christianity's general emphasis on the afterlife's importance over the worldly life.
Abbess
The matriarch of a nunnery.
Almost alone among barbarians they are content with one wife, except a very few among them
Tacitus again makes an Interesting claim, this time singling out the Germans as unique among "barbarians" for their general lack of polygamy. It certainly seems that some aspects of German culture would have undoubtedly been more liberating for women in this time period, however Tacitus' earlier reaction to the lack of effort put in by men in the household, at the expense of mostly the women, shows us that they weren't necessarily on the whole better to or for women.
They all wrap themselves in a cloak which is fastened with a clasp
Likely an annular or penannular brooch, similar to the later Irish example the Hunterston brooch from 700 AD on page 65 of the text book.
They pass much of their time in the chase, and still more in idleness, giving themselves up to sleep and to feasting, the bravest and the most warlike doing nothing, and surrendering the management of the household, of the home, and of the land, to the women, the old men, and all the weakest members of the family
Though most cultures of the past were patriarchal, it seems that the lack of engagement from the able-bodied German man in the household was seemingly somewhat shocking to Tacitus
If their native state sinks into the sloth of prolonged peace and repose, many of its noble youths voIuntarily seek those tribes which are waging some war, both because inaction is odious to their race, and because they win renown more readily in the midst of peril, and cannot maintain a numerous following except by violence and war. . . .
I find this to be a fairly interesting claim, to go so far as to say that the Germans were so fond of violence that peace was in some ways an impediment to the societal structure.
podsolized
I was not familiar with this term, it refers to podsol (or podzol), which derives from Russian, meaning "under ash" since it is characterized by its ashy subsurface. It is also characterized by acidic, and infertile soil. Podzol is commonly found in coniferous forests.