How to Look at History and Learn From It

There are a number of reasons I chose the above title for this blog, but the fact is that there is really only one reason. That reason is that history plays out each day and yet the American people don't seem to even consider that today's current events are tomorrow's history. And yet, even as close in our past as these events might be, history has a place to allow one to look at future events and make judgements which are pertinent to forming policy and directions with positive results.

Today I'd like to talk about the history of America's achievements in both the manufacturing and technological arenas, whilst recognizing that the reading of history can resplendently point to these achievements whilst ignoring the requirement for a country steeped in achievement to continue to achieve.

America has become a country where achievement is met first by non-acceptance of new developments, and second by full scale acceptance of new developments to the detriment of other useful achievements of historical value.

Now there are certain techniques used by those who opposed wholesale change in technologies, often by suggesting that one thing is something else. No one can reasonably call a picture of a white horse a picture of a black horse and yet some of our august political practitioners consistently tell us that the vast majority of climate scientists are incorrect due to a few scientists who still use the basic method of denial rather than the basic method of reason.

In the same mode America, through our elected politicians, has learned to finally accept the obvious when no other denials are available, but yet then forget the purpose of previous advancements.

For the purpose of explanation of the above paragraph I'd like to bring forward something of the past 60 years and the implications of America sitting on it's laurels rather than continuing to advance to the next complicated matter.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you President Eisenhower's national highway effort.

Now here is a direct example of what CAN happen when one learns something from the past. As Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe during WWII, Dwight David learned one thing that he absolutely and relentlessly fought to change here in the United States during his Presidency. He saw a lack of a road system which even the Romans would have recognized as lacking, but he saw that lack in Europe as he tried to move large contingents of men and supplies across Europe as our troops chased the Nazis back to Germany.

Once he recognized that lack in Europe, his experience brought forward the idea that America needed a cohesive national highway system whereby not only consumer and commercial trade would be increased within America itself, which indeed did happen, but in the terrible possibility of an even greater war be thrust upon America, a fully integrated system of roads would make the American manufacturing machine that much more efficient and thus more likely to help negate the possibility of a war on our shores.

And so we had the beginnings of a new system of roads, many of which quickly became outdated simply by under-funding of maintenance issues due to vaster use than anticipated. What also started as an effort to have transport of commercial goods, quicker military movements and simple consumer use of said roads ended up being THE ONLY national supported infrastructure for transportation to the point that almost 20 years later our 100 year old infrastructure of rail systems had become dilapidated and under-utilized.

We sat on our hands watching the expansion of a single system of transportation whilst we allowed an equally important system of transportation drop off in importance due to neglect. By choosing to achieve the largest road system in the world, we ignored a system which still supplied a needed service of value, thus we did not achieve the necessary efficiency President Eisenhower foresaw, but rather simply moved the importance of a single system from one form to the other.

Even today our politicians seem to think that we only need to replace what is an older, less efficient system with a newer, more efficient system, thereby diminishing the importance of legacy systems which still present not only areas of value in their current configuration, but we ignore the possibilities of advancing the capabilities of these older systems as if they, in fact, hold no further benefit to the prosperity and well-being of America.

Thus, after almost 20 years of building vast highway systems we had increased the number of gas guzzling vehicles on the roads whilst ignoring, almost to its' death, the rail system. We created a generation of young people who's only methods of getting from point A to point B and back again was the use of an automobile. This wasn't necessarily the point of the road system which grew off of the highway system. At some point walking to a small town store one mile away was replaced with a '56 Chevy cutting time down on a normal 30 minute walk and suddenly the need for large grocery stores arose because people could carry more home in a timely manner, all for the cost of a few cents in gas.

But then people started using their cars to travel everywhere. Train stations closed, and even in my hometown which had provided direct service to Washington, D.C. for federal employees in the suburbs went away. Now my hometown train station is a railways museum rather than being a viable and inexpensive method of moving federal employees from the suburbs to the city with the included increase in road maintenance, new road funding, gas spent idling in traffic backups, and insurance increases due fender benders.

During those old days it wasn't unusual for the family to travel 20 miles to go to a little hamburger joint the size of two telephone booths or 20 miles in the other direction to get to the first McDonald's or Topp's. Hell, even driving kids around who couldn't sleep became a part of the culture.

And to continue on the same line, over time the aging infrastructure of roads added to building new roads without improving existing roads, bridge construction and maintenance became lax and more people were suddenly flying from here to there regardless of whether there was an alternative if people simply planned their trips.

Corporations needed representation in far flung locations even after deregulation caused massive debt loading on airlines, resulting in George W. Bush's $15 billion give-away to the already failing airline industries after 9/11. What was happening in telecommunications during the rise of the airlines? Virtually nothing in terms of the real promise of instant communications, both audibly and visually, although companies were pursuing the possibilities even without government subsidies. Even today travel is more important than communications to many corporations. I look forward to the day when automobile manufacturers don't have to use their private jets or even hybrid cars to appear before Congressional committees because they can do so via video communications links. Each link may well require that two individuals are present in case any type of legal action may ensue, but the cost of two people in a corporation's headquarters testifying in front of Congress is a far smaller cost than transportation and housing during travel.

So, as you can see, America, for the past 60 years, has not been an avenue of conventional and unconventional advancement, but rather a "this fits right now so we support it" type of political shortsightedness that has, time and time again, shown disdain for advancement in favor of antiquated systems or encompassed advancement at the peril of time tested systems with potential for advancement.

We can no longer afford to ignore one thing to look at another. We certainly can no longer look at allowing any system to become antiquated if it may be modernized and automated, providing equal or greater opportunity than if the system died. And we cannot ignore that these systems may well work better as individual portions of a bigger solution than if they were treated as totally disparate commercial aspects.

Some of this system of transportation expansion has come to pass. In Front Royal, Va. there is an inland port, which is supported by rail from Newport News to a system of 18 wheelers rolling up Rt. 81 to far flung businesses. I thought this a relatively innovative methodology towards moving goods from outside the US to the intended destinations, but again we are relying upon older systems to offset the load rather than developing new systems based on the older ones. Fast rail can move people from Washington, D.C to New York in about the same time it takes to check into an airport, board your plane, arrive and claim your baggage. And even the rail industry is touting its' fuel efficiency in advertisements today.

How can we not look at all of our systems as part of the whole of the American achievement? If we can't make the break with the old way of designing new systems and letting older systems go by the wayside, we will loose the spirit of previous advancements our country has made throughout its' history, and those who strove to design these systems. Innovations in telecommunications, audio recording and even movie presentation have changed dramatically over the past 30 years, each based on technologies from previous generations of equipment and technologies, starting with the Bell wax cylinders.

We cannot allow these advancements to be overshadowed by the minimal thinking parameters of our politicians. We need to stand up as a people and end the morass of political acceptability. And it needs to be done now.

Drive off those who would jeopardize our future for political position or expediency. Let them know you won't vote for them if they don't follow your will. Let them know that climate change and health care and education all go hand in hand in developing a new system which gives everyone a chance, everyone a life, and everyone a reason and ability to contribute.

If the politicians pass laws that don't allow everyone to contribute by being healthy, educated and economically able, they are hurting this country, not helping.  And if the politicians pass bills that don't allow the country to be healthy, educated and economically able, they are not to be allowed to participate in the legislative process of the country.