World War Eleven

History Shmistery!

Historians are an interesting bunch. Since success in the profession requires making your mark in the field, they are constantly trying to “complicate” matters or come up with terms to define periods. For example, while you and I might think of the 19^th century as running from 1800 to 1899, historian Eric Hobsbawm came up with the term “the long nineteenth century” to define the 125-year period between the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789 and the beginning of the First World War in 1914.

Why was it necessary?

I don’t know but it’s catchy, isn’t it?

The fact that historians are educated and work in different countries further “complicates” matters. British and American historians for example have different names for different periods of time. For example, to British historians, the American Civil War era (1861–1865) is part of the Victorian Era, the Roaring Twenties (1919–1939) as the Interwar Period, and World War II as... well, World War II, they do however, disagree on the dates. The US thinks it ran from 1941 to 1945, the British and members of the Commonwealth argue it ran from 1939 to 1945. It’s even more messy when other countries are brought into the mix. China says it started in 1931, Ethiopia in 1935, and Italy 1940.

History is messy.

So, when Rep. Ilhan Omar, Minnesota’s favorite corrupt politician referred to World War II as “World War Eleven,” a few possibilities came to mind:

1. She misspoke.

2. I slept through the history class that covered World Wars 3 through 11.

3. She’s a galloping thunder-tard.

I’m inclined to think it’s 1 and 3.

Listen, I don’t hold it against her, she’s not paid to be smart, she’s paid to be a politician. Expecting a politician to be able to think is like expecting a doctor to be able to run a marathon, it’s possible, but it’s not her primary job.

However, Omar’s little gaff presents us with a fun opportunity. Is it possible to identify nine wars in the past that were sufficiently large so that World War II becomes World War XI?

“Wait,” you say, “you can’t just rename wars!”

Sure, we can.

It happens all the time.

OK, maybe not all the time, but it happens.

Take World War I for example. It was originally called “The Great War” because calling it “World War I” would have let everyone living in the 1920s know that a second one was on the way, and everyone hates spoilers.

Let’s lay a few ground rules though:

1. Civil wars don’t count.

2. It has to be big.

I agree, 2 is a bit vague. However, big can mean many things, the geographic range of the war, the population of the combatants, the size of the armies, the number of deaths, etc. Here’s what we’re looking at as a base:

Nothing else really comes close.

However, historians have already done us a favor by setting a precedent in a certain way. Many of them already refer to the Seven Years’ War (1756–1763) as the “first world war.”

Note: Some Americans may wish to refer to this as the “French and Indian War” but that was simply the North American theatre of the broader global conflict which was the Seven Years’ War. If this gets your nose out of joint wait until I get the American Revolution.

We can now expand our list of “world wars” to three:

We still have work to do before we can make Rep. Ilhan Omar look intelligent.

I think we need to focus on what makes a conflict a “world war.”

Most people would probably want to fucus on the number of people killed but I’m less enamored of that stat. The Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire likely killed millions – yes, mostly from disease but those still count – but few would consider it a global conflict. For this reason, I’m going to ignore deaths and score wars using three criteria:

1. 40% for global land area controlled by participants.

2. 40% for global population ruled by participants.

3. 20% for share of great powers involved (strict era-based list)

This gets us to a ranking which includes 14 wars (the table is shown below). However, were interested in the chronological order of the wars, not a ranking.

To reclassify WWII as WWXXI we have to rename the following conflicts:

1. World War I – Mongol Conquests (c. 1206-1279)

2. World War II – Timurid Conquests (1370-1405)

3. World War III – Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648)

4. World War IV - Qing conquest of the Ming (1618-1683)

5. World War V - War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714)

6. World War VI – War of the Austrian Succession (1740-1748)

7. World War VII - Seven Years’ War (1756-1763)

8. World War VIII - American Revolutionary War (1775-1783)

9. World War IX – Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815)

10. World War X – World War I/The First World War/The Great War (1914-1918)

11. World War XI – World War II/Second World War (1939-1945 or 1937-1945 incl. China)

We did it!

Rep. Ilhan Omar is a genius!

Note: The Korean War, Vietnam War, and Iran-Iraq War all just missed the cut. This should give you an idea of how much of a stretch it was coming up with eleven world wars.

Here’s the list ranked using the three criteria I defined above. In case you’re interested it also includes the percentage of global population killed in the conflict:

It’s time for an Ad!

What? Again?

Yes, because here at Hoist the Black Flag we believe in capitalism.

And nothing says capitalism more than an ad interrupting what you had been enjoying to ask for money.

If only I could do what Amazon Prime does, charge you and then charge you again to remove the ads.

Ah, the dream.

Oh well, this will have to do for now.

Hoist the Black Flag is an audience-supported publication which looks at US, Canadian, and World Politics (and anything else I find interesting).

Look, I get it, the demands for money are never-ending. I would write this even if I didn’t make a dime. I honestly would rather have you read my Substack for free than constantly bug you for money, but it also never hurts to ask, so…

If you enjoy my work, please hit the “Like” button, recommending me to a friend (or an enemy, I’m not choosy) and consider clicking one or more of these buttons as well:

If you are not in a position to become a paid subscriber, please share this article so others can read it too.

Who knows, maybe they will be less fiscally responsible than you.

Podcast Recommendations

I’m sad to say that I’ve soured on The Futurists podcast. What started out as a promising examination of the future of technology and how it might change the world has quickly revealed itself to be little more than nonsensical futurism predictions mixed with leftist/Marxist/progressive worldviews.

When I listen to self-described futurists I can’t help but think of flying cars, the new ice age, and Malthusian predictions of mass starvation. That or kumbaya utopianism. They’re the wild guesses of overconfident people and/or those trying to sell books.

So much wasted promise.

Ok, that’s going to count as my first recommendation this month, specifically, I recommend you don’t listen to that podcast. You’re better off just reading science fiction, it’s more honest.

I’m going to take a break from politics in this section... excluding my last comment at least – and recommend a podcast with a more historical focus:

Lex Fridman Podcast - Vikings, Ragnar, Berserkers, Valhalla & the Warriors of the Viking Age

Lars Brownworth is a historian, teacher, podcaster, and author specializing in Viking history, medieval Europe, and the Byzantine Empire. I was surprised to find out how far ranging the Vikings really were.

Comment of the Month

Despite sacrificing the quantity of articles for quality – or at least length – I’m still seeing a lot of great comments. This month was once again focused on slavery and there were many great comments. I particularly enjoyed the following:

Gregory provides some important context to the contentious role that slavery played in the founding of the US, including the 3/5ths Compromise:

“Solid work, per usual, from “our lady of snows” correspondent... continued.”

introspeck furnished some info on trustees of the Georgia colony:

“I was surprised to learn that the trustees of the Georgia colony pitched it to Parliament... continued.”

Bob stepped in to clarify the purpose of “scientific” racism:

“To call something scientific doesn’t make it so... continued.”

This last was in response to a comment by Kevin McLeod who has become something of a favorite troll or someone who brilliantly parodies the lunatic fringe of the left. He has written too many gems to include here, but these are my two are amongst my favorites:

“This is all racist nonsense. This is the Russian disinformation handwave to confuse Europeans and... continued.”

“Can you provide some proof of an identity that you are what you say you are? A link to... continued.”

Kevin, if you are a parody account let me know and I’ll comp you. I promise not to reveal your secret.

Note: if I mentioned you here and you’re not a subscriber, I can’t comp you. If you want the comp, hit that subscribe button and message me and I’ll comp you then.

My thanks to all of you for making the site more informative and entertaining.

Recommend Hoist the Black Flag

For those of you who weren’t lucky enough to win this month you can earn complimentary memberships by referring friends to Hoist the Black Flag from here.

AYPWIP?

Well taxes were due last month, in Canada and the US, and since I’ve worked in both countries I got to do both.

Twice the government is twice the fun, right?

So, why don’t we go with that for our topic this month?

Here is the foundation of our problems:

The problem is not that people are taxed too little, the problem is that government spends too much.

-- Ronald Reagan

We have a system that increasingly taxes work and subsidizes nonwork.

-- Milton Friedman

Laughter is the best medicine so...

The avoidance of taxes is the only intellectual pursuit that still carries any reward.

-- John Maynard Keynes

I’m proud to pay taxes in the United States; the only thing is, I could be just as proud for half the money.

-- Arthur Godfrey

Top 10 Postings

This is here because, well, I like top 10 lists. It’s also here to let you know what other readers have enjoyed.

Substack does its own “Top” list, and while some of my most viewed and liked articles are on that list, there are some omissions. Put simply, I don’t know how Substack comes up with its list, so I made my own using a “secret formula.”

My streak of new articles appearing in the Top 10 list has come to an end. It was a close one though. Help! Help! I’m Being Oppressed! almost knocked Clear, Simple, and Wrong out of the Top 10. Maybe next month.

1. Women Ruin Everything (1)

2. Lies… (2)

3. The White Man’s Burden (3)

4. I didn’t cheat, I just broke the rules (4)

5. NOTHING is Illegal on Stolen Land (5)

6. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me (6)

7. The Emperor Has No Clothes (7)

8. One Lie After Another (8)

9. Canada Is Not Broken (9)

10. Clear, Simple, and Wrong (10)

April’s Best – 11. Help! Help! I’m Being Oppressed! (N/A)

Biggest Jump – 55. “Extra-Special Illegal” (81)

You can find all my posts in my archive.

Top 10 Subscriber Locations

Why is this here? It’s like sports statistics, it doesn’t really matter but I find it interesting and who knows, maybe I’ll find it useful at some point.

1. Canada (1)

2. California (2)

3. UK (3)

4. New York (5)

5. Texas (4)

6. Australia (7)

7. Virginia (8)

8. Florida (6)

9. Pennsylvania (10)

10. Illinois (9)

Note: the US is #1 by far but provides insight into individual states and it’s more interesting to present it that way. No other country can be broken down unfortunately.

Given that Canada is by solidly in the #2 spot I would love to see Substack provide a breakdown at the provincial level. Will they ever do this? I don’t know, but I’ve been posting this for a long time and there does not seem to be any movement on this idea. Sadly.

Final Thoughts

I forgot to include this last month so I’m doing it now.

I was thrilled and surprised to see this, so thanks to everyone for helping me get on the list.

Note: I was on the list for exactly one day.

“Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever.”

-- Napoleon Bonaparte

Last month I asked people if they wanted my next article to be part 3 of slavery or if I should take a short detour into colonialism.

Based on the feedback I will be taking the detour, and my next article will be on colonialism. I hope to post it next week. It will not, however, be short. There’s a lot to cover so it will very likely be a multi-part series as well.

I look forward to your comments.

Until then...

Stay salty, my friends!

And to try and laugh a little if you can.

Phil