March for Ukraine on Ben Franklin Parkway in Philadelphia

 

More than a thousand people gathered on the famous steps of the Philadelphia Museum of Art today to support Ukraine in its war against the Russian invasion on February 24, 2022. 

The Philadelphia Inquirer wrote about the event today. A very good article. 

The marchers lined up with three long flags forming a procession that stretched several hundred meters along the Benjamin Franklin Parkway between the art museum and the Franklin Institute.

More than Two Thousand Mark the 2nd Anniversary of Russia's Invasion of Ukraine at the Lincoln Memorial

 

Today more than two thousand people gathered at the Lincoln Memorial on the Capital Mall in Washington DC to mark the second anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.  

The event celebrated the courage and tenacity of the people ofUkraine in their struggle against Russian invasion and atrocities.  

It was clear from the signs, that while the majority of Americans, more than 70%, support Ukraine in its defense of its own nation, Trump and the cowards who worship him want to abandon Ukraine and all other American allies.  

Glory to Ukraine!!!

President's Day Standing with Ukraine at the Pennsylvania State Capital

Today I went to the Human Chain of Solidarity with Ukraine on the steps of the Pennsylvania State Capital in Harrisburg.

We stood from 5-6 p.m. facing the setting sun in the west.  The Capital dome was lit in rose and amber by the setting sun as the assembled group sang the Ukraine National Anthem.  

Many of those attending are Ukrainian, some refugees, some American citizens working help Ukraine from here.  

On Saturday and Sunday this week, many of us will be in both Washington D.C. and Philadelphia at events marking the second anniversary of  the Russian invasion.  

 

I am re-reading "War and Peace" by Leo Tolstoy. I am 300 pages into the 1996-page Pevear and Volokhonsky translation.

Tolstoy was a lieutenant in the Russian Army during the Crimean War (1852) and writes about war with the horror and humor of a combat veteran.

In the first war section of the book, the Russian army meets the French in Austria just after the Austrian army is smashed by Napoleon. The Russian general Kutuzov has beats Napoleon in the first battle, but is forced to retreat. One of the cavalry squadrons attacking the French includes the young cadet Nikolai Rostov.

Rostov draws his sword and rides to the attack with his squadron in his first combat action. In moments his horse is shot from under him and falls on him. Rostov's arm is bruised and possibly broken in the fall. His arm is numb. He struggles to his feet holding his limp arm. He sees French soldiers running toward him. He realizes they are going to capture of kill him. His thoughts are a swirl. He thinks, 'Everyone loves me. My mother, my sisters. My friends. How could they want to kill me. I have a happy life.'

He snaps out of the reverie and runs, escaping in trees and shrubs at the edge of the battlefield.

In that swirl of confused thought, Tolstoy captures the crazy extremes of combat. One moment the young soldier is riding to glory, the next he thinks of his mother on the point of death.

I cannot judge the veracity of the scenes in Moscow parties and dinners, but they come alive for me in the backstabbing intrigue of the powerful.

Tolstoy is amazing.

David Bentley Hart in 2011: "the devil is probably eerily similar to Donald Trump—though perhaps just a little nicer."

David Bentley Hart, Eastern Orthodox Theologian

From 2003 to 2020, the Eastern Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart wrote a column for First Things magazine.  

In 2011, Hart ended one of his columns with a comment on Donald Trump.  Hart continues to hold his low view of the former President. The essay ends with a 46-word sentence comparing The Donald to The Devil.   

By the way, First Things magazine now leads the worship of Trump for conservative Catholics.  

Here is Hart on Trump:

... Donald Trump... You know the fellow: developer, speculator, television personality, hotelier, political dilettante, conspiracy theorist, and grand croupier—the one with that canopy of hennaed hair jutting out over his eyes like a shelf of limestone.

In particular, I recalled how, back in 1993, when Trump decided he wanted to build special limousine parking lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, he had used all his influence to get the state of New Jersey to steal the home of an elderly widow named Vera Coking by declaring “eminent domain” over her property, as well as over a nearby pawn shop and a small family-run Italian restaurant.

She had declined to sell, having lived there for thirty-five years. Moreover, the state offered her only one-fourth what she had been offered for the same house some years before, and Trump could then buy it at a bargain rate. The affair involved the poor woman in an exhausting legal battle, which, happily, she won, with the assistance of the Institute for Justice.

How obvious it seems to me now. Cold, grasping, bleak, graceless, and dull; unctuous, sleek, pitiless, and crass; a pallid vulgarian floating through life on clouds of acrid cologne and trailed by a vanguard of fawning divorce lawyers, the devil is probably eerily similar to Donald Trump—though perhaps just a little nicer.

 

Six Easy Pieces by Richard P. Feynman

 

Reading Richard Feynman gives me the feeling that I can understand a little bit of the mystery and beauty of science.  I thought I would read the short introductory paperback before deciding whether I should attempt the three-volume Feynman Lectures on Physics.

After reading QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter, I wanted to read more of Feynman and again have that feeling I could really comprehend modern physics. It is like riding in a strong tailwind on a bicycle.  I am zipping along above 25mph and can think for a moment I am really that strong, at least until I turn into the wind and feel merely human again. 

Feynman give me a science high.    

In the first lecture, Atoms in Motion, he says, 

    Each piece, or part, of the whole of nature is is always merely an approximation to the complete truth, or the complete truth so far as we know it. In fact, everything we know is only some kind of approximation, because we know that we do not know all the laws as yet. Therefore, things must be learned only to be unlearned again, or, more likely, to be corrected.

On page 2, I know what science is. Two pages later the section titled Matter is made of atoms begins:

If in some cataclysm, all of the scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one sentence passed on to the next generation of creature, what statement would contain the most information in the fewest words? I believe it is the atomic hypothesis (or the atomic fact whichever you wish to call it) that all things are made of atoms--little particles that move around in perpetual motion, attracting each other when they are a little distance apart, but repelling each other upon being squeezed into one another. In that one sentence, you will see, there is an enormous amount of information about the world, if just a little imagination and thinking are applied.

Entertaining and brilliant.  The rest of the book bubbles with insights, elucidating basic physics, showing the connections of all the sciences to each other, then a chapter on energy in its many forms, followed by gravity--the weakest force, ending with quantum mechanics. 

I am going to read another Feynman book this week. 

How General Erwin Rommel Rationalized Supporting Hitler

I am reading a book about the careers of the of the most well-known generals of World War II. All of them were decorated young officers in World War I. They made the army their career, serving in diminished armies until the late 1930s when war put all three in command of great armies.  

Rommel is known as the Desert Fox, really his worst performance as a commander, and for joining the failed plot to assassinate Hitler after in 1944.  But he was for Hitler before he turned against him.  His path to making peace with Hitler has chilling parallels with today.   

From the book:

In 1932, the Nazi Party's achievement in becoming the largest party in the Reichstag was not greeted with concern by the Army Officer Corps, but with hope. Although I do not like their methods, wrote Oberst Karl Kuhn of the General Staff in his diary in November 1932, most of my acquaintances see developments as good for Germany and good for the army.  

Most of the soldiers seemed to agree, although most seem more concerned with the implications for their pay and accommodation. The officer corps had reservations about the Nazi Party and its leadership, the tub-thumping rhetoric of Adolf Hitler feeding widespread distrust of the former First World War corporal, but many were willing to see what the Nazis could come up with to solve chronic German problems.  

Berlin based Oberstleutnant Paul Uckleman wrote in his journal that he thought Hitler is no gentleman and described his colleagues as brutes, thugs, and men on the make, using vile tactics and supporting questionable policies. Nevertheless, Uckleman also wrote that perhaps Hitler is the man to destroy the Communists and help revive Germany and the army.  

It was a view that seems to have reflected Erwin Rommel's own thinking about the Nazis. Hitler and his party were distasteful, but they were better than the alternatives in their offer of an enticing vision to end internal crises, bolster the economy and provide a muscular nationalism that would break the Versailles Treaty shackles reinvigorate the armed forces and redraw Germany's borders. As Rommel’s biographer Ralf Georg Reuth has argued, the most influential part of the army hoped that Hitler would become vanquisher of the discord that had traumatized German society since 1918.