Suchergebnisse

Aus jugoslawischer Sicht

Aus jugoslawischer Sicht

Transcript of an oral history interview with Maurice Homer Smith, conducted by Jennifer Payne at Colonel Smith's home in Northfield, Vermont, on July 30, 2013, as part of the Norwich Voices oral history project of the Sullivan Museum and History Center. Maurice "Moe" Smith was a member of the Norwich University Class of 1934 from Morrisville and Hyde Park, Vermont. After graduating from Norwich University, he taught school in Barton, Vermont, for a couple of years before joining the Army and serving in the military from 1940 to 1956. He later returned to Norwich University as an employee, working many different jobs over eighteen years. At the time of this interview, he was Norwich University's oldest living alumnus at age 102. ; Page 1 Colonel Maurice Smith, NU 1934, Oral History Interview July 30, 2013 112 Winter Street, Northfield VT 05663 Interviewed by Jennifer K. Payne Transcribed by Lindsay J. Gosack, February 4, 2014 Edited by C.T. Haywood, '12, January 13, 2015 Jennifer Payne (JP): This is Jennifer Payne with Maurice Homer Smith. The date is Tuesday, July 30, 2013, and we're at his home at 112 Winter Street in Northfield, VT. So let me start with some of the basic questions. I know we've gone over some of this, but this is just for the people who will hear it for the first time. Um, which class, what are you, what is your Norwich class? Maurice Homer Smith (MHS): 1934. JP: And, ah, your date of birth? MHS: 26 July, 1911. [sound of a door opening and closing in background] JP: Which makes you? MHS: 102 JP: 102 MHS: [Chuckles] I'm being interviewed here, FRIEND OF MHS: Go ahead! MHS: Can you stand by? MHS: Sit down. [Introducing someone] This is my buddy. We play cribbage together. [Friend chuckles] FRIEND OF MHS: We met. MHS: Huh? FRIEND OF MHS: I said we've met. JP: We have met. [Moe chuckles] MHS: Oh you have? Oh I did not know that. JP: Um so, um, do you have any other names you are known by? Page 2 MHS: Uh [slightly clears throat] well Moe is most of the names. I, in the, in the three years I was in Japan I was called Hank 'cause when they asked me what my middle name was, which is Homer, it's ugly. That was my father's first name. So I said Henry, so they called me Hank. And so even the official Commanding General Yokohama command wrote me a letter and they knew they called me Hank so he addressed it (this was official mail): Major Henry Smith [laughs and coughs]. JP: So where were you born, Moe? MHS: I was born in Hyde Park, Vermont. JP: Were you born at home? MHS: Yes, yes, I was born at home, in the home. I guess most people were in those days, yup. JP: Yeah. MHS: Morrisville now has a hospital, has Copley Hospital, and if it had it then I'd have been born there in the Copley, but they didn't have it then. JP: When you were at school, what was your major? MHS: In college, [sighs] it was language was one. I had [clears throat] really three majors. You normally don't have three majors, but my academic advisor, K.R.B. Flint, told me, said, "You've got the equivalent of three majors." So there's language, which was Spanish, language, I think social, uh, history, and political science. So I had three majors. He said, "you have enough credit in each one of those to declare a major." So I had three majors. JP: Wow MHS: Normally you have a major and two minors or some combination. But, he said, "You got three majors." [laughs] JP: What was your… I know you've had a number of different jobs, but what do you consider your occupation? MHS: Well, I would say most of my life was the Army. I went in the Army full time. I was on, day one, I was in Fort Knox, was activated on June 15, 1940. And that's when the Armored Force came into being. I was there four days before that and the—I was assigned to the 37th Calvary Regiment, cavalry regiment. So when I got down there my advisor said, "Calvary is out, Armor is in." So he said, "get yourself a place to live, you can't live on the post, we don't have room for you." So I went to Elizabethtown, Kentucky, which is about seventeen miles from the post. And, uh, [laughs] what was I about to say though? JP: Your occupation was in the military.Page 3 MHS: Yeah, was in the military. So I've been in the military, well, sixteen years. I went in in 1940 and came out in '56. JP: Wow. MHS: So it was sixteen years. So I was going, at twenty years, you can retire in twenty years on fifty percent, so that's what I was shooting for. And I was in Chicago at the time and I wanted to stay in. And I liked it, I liked my job, liked my work, liked the people. And my mother called up and said, "If you want to come home," which I didn't want to do, and said, "Your father will sell his shares of the drive in theaters to you." So she wanted me to come home, and so I came home after sixteen years in the Army. And but I didn't really want to. And so I bought out my father's share of the Green Mountain Drive-in Theaters Incorporated and drive-in theaters. The largest one in the state was in Newport and then one in Morrisville. And so that's what I did. And then, then I came down to Norwich, and so but I still owned the theaters, but I took the dividends. I didn't work, never did work at the theaters, didn't have to, so I just took my dividends. At that time I think we got $10,000 a year, which is pretty good money, separate. So I had five incomes: Social Security, Norwich, and I'm full time at Norwich, what was the job I said I had? And I had five jobs either way. And so I had a pretty, pretty nice income, so I was living high on the hog. Sent Bill to Northeastern, my son. He didn't do anything, and he is smart enough to do it, but he didn't. He didn't like it. He came back. He said one semester and said, "College isn't for me." So he went off in carpentry and did his own thing. And that's what he wanted to do, so. JP: Wow. So why didn't you want to leave the military? MHS: I didn't want to leave the military, because like I said I had sixteen years and at twenty years you get two and a half percent a year. So if I stayed in for twenty years, I would have gotten, I was a colonel, I would have gotten fifty percent of a colonel's full pay. The maximum is 75%. You could stay in long enough to get 100%, but it stops at 75%. And I would have gotten four more years. I wanted to stay in, I did not want to get out, but mother wanted me to get out and so I did. But I, I…Chicago was my last duty station and so I think I made a mistake, but it doesn't make any difference. I probably made more money by getting out than I did by staying in, so [chuckles]. JP: So it was the money, it was the income, the plan, yeah. So you were born in Hyde Park and you moved to Morrisville as a youngster? MHS: One year, I asked my mother when we moved, she said, "you were about a year old when you [moved]." Hyde Park is only about three miles from Morrisville. I was born at Hyde Park and a year later, so I grew up in Morrisville. And graduated from Peoples. JP: Academy? MHS: Academy. JP: Yeah, how did you know, in high school, that you wanted to go to Norwich? Page 4 MHS: Well, I did not have any college picked out and my brother was at Norwich, and my folks were paying the way and they said, "You're going to go to Norwich." So I never questioned it because my brother was here already ahead of me. He was two years older than I was and he was already here at Norwich. And they said, "You are going to go to college, you're going to go to Norwich." My brother had two colleges he wanted to go to. One was Georgia Tech and the other one was University of Alabama, and the folks said, "You aren't going to either one of them. You're going to go to Norwich." So my brother was here and my—the three of us, only five of my graduating class at Peoples, and three of us came to Norwich. And so I guess I was destined [laughs] to be a, a graduate of Norwich. JP: So your brother's, your brother's name was…? MHS: Phillip. JP: Phillip. And he was class of…? MHS: He was, well he would have been, he took a, he was four years ahead of me but he took a PG course in high school so he lost a year there. He was really two years ahead of me. He was two years older than me so two years ahead of me. And we both went to, he went to Norwich too, my brother did. But he didn't graduate. We'd have the quiet hours from 7:30 [P.M.] to 9:30 [P.M.], and at 9:30 we could, all hell would break loose in the barracks. The whistles would blow and we would get dragged into our holes, and dragged into your hole, we would get in our rooms and it was quieted down and during study hours it was very quiet and, uh, I don't know what brought that on. What were we talking about? JP: Your brother, your brother being ahead of you at Norwich. MHS: Yeah, he was two years ahead of me. And but he didn't graduate. But during study hours, what he was doing was playing cards. What I did was studying. I said—I was really driven to study. I said, "If I don't study, if I don't succeed, I'm going to be carrying a lunch basket to work. And if there is anything I don't want to do, it is carrying a Goddamn lunch basket, a lunch box." And you will if you don't succeed so I was driven to, for success, and I was, and I graduated number three in my class. [Laughs] I was driven I had a desire to do it I said, "I can't fail, I just got to do it." I dug in. So my brother was playing cards and I was studying, so he didn't graduate he, well I won't say he failed out but I used to do his Spanish. We took a Spanish class together and he would be playing cards and I was studying during all that time. I said, "Phil, I got maybe ten sentences all translated so you can copy them off if you want to learn this." Same Spanish class together. [laughs] JP: Was he playing poker or what? MHS: Oh yeah he was playing any kinds of cards. Probably poker or anything like that. In the barracks, quiet. It was very quiet you couldn't talk above a whisper and if you did like whoever was on guard could hear you out in the hallway, you were placed on report and given demerits. You had, allowed 9, were given 9 merits and for every demerit, like I guess walking on the grass I guess was 2 demerits. And so you could, so of all the years my brother was working towards, Page 5 all the time he was there shoveling horse manure on the Sabine Field and things like that, walking tours or either working tours off, punishment tours. And I only, I was a corporal. I only—one month I went over, I had 10. So I slept in, I mean I couldn't sign out for home, I normally sign out for noon so I just stayed in my room till 2:00, from one till two to get rid of that 1 tour and then I went home that weekend. And that was the difference between my brother and me. He was, my brother was in CMC, Close Military Confinement. And that's 10 demerits, 20 tours and 30 days Close Military Confinement. And that's pretty rough on a cadet. And a lot of them quit when they get that. You have to do something really bad. My brother was, he was a, he broke his collarbone. Harmon was leading a charge in the stable; my brother was riding a horse named Ham, H-A-M. And they were racing, and the horse stumbled and my brother went over, pitched over his head there and it was a mad rash. They made Pathè News, Norwich did, Pathè News. So my brother went over the, stumbled Ham, and landed and broke his collarbone. So he was in the hospital and on the post, the post hospital there. And he went to the sign out, he didn't sign out, he went to the movies and he got a good, that's a no-no. So he got caught, got 10-20-30, 10 demerits, 20 tours, and 30 days Close Military Confinement. It's pretty pretty rugged. So he was in a jam most of the time and I wasn't. I said I was a corporal and all sophomores are corporals, juniors are sergeants if you are made, you are sergeants, and the seniors are officers. That is the way it works up there now, I think, even now. Was in my day. Everybody was a corporal that was made, you were either a private or a corporal. I do not know what percentage probably 20% maybe, or 15%, were non-commissioned officers. So all sophomores, you cannot be over a corporal. A junior, you can be different classifications of different sergeants. And as a senior, then you are a non-commissioned officer in the militia, not the army, in the militia. So that's how it works. JP: What does Close Military Confinement consist of? What did that mean? MHS: Well you're like a prisoner, it's like being in prison. And when you go to meals you have to, there is a pass book on the floor, there would be a desk there and you would have to sign out for your meals and sign in for your meals, just like a prisoner. And you were a prisoner. And you have to copy where you are at all times and have to check in and it's pretty rough, it's pretty rough. And you can't speak to anybody, and the cadets can't speak to you. You are ignored, completely ignored. And I had one when I was up on the staff and his father was a superintendent of schools in southern Vermont. Quite a big shot. And he got on CMC, Close Military Confinement, and I'll tell you, he said, "It's no fun being ignored by the people you can't speak that way and they can't speak to you, like a prisoner." And it is, I guess, pretty rugged. He said, "I just kinda laugh smiling about it." He said, "It's nothing to laugh about it," I said, "that's pretty rough stuff." [laughs] JP: Do you have other siblings? Brothers or sisters? MHS: No, just the, well I had a sister, three years old, and we were close 'cause I was seven, my brother was nine. And so I was there enough to my sister. So I paid attention to my sister, my brother didn't, he was nine when she was three and she got appendicitis and died. She had appendicitis for a week, her face was flushed and everything and the doctors didn't know what was wrong with her! So they had a consultation of doctors, of 3 doctors. So at the consultation one of the doctors said, "I think she has got appendicitis," and that's what she had. So they put Page 6 her in the car, my father took her to Burlington, over the rough roads. The roads weren't like they are now, they were gravel roads, and he complained, my father, about hitting all the bumps and everything. And well they were too late, the peritonitis set in, she took her. JP: So what did your parents do, you said that he had a theater, did they have a theater when you were growing up? MHS: No no, that came later in life. That was when I was in the Army. And I get out in 1956, yeah 1956, well that's right I came down here. No. JP: So when you grew up what did they do? MHS: Well, I taught high school in the Northeast Kingdom as the, who was it they called it that, one of the, they called it Northeast Kingdom it stuck. And so, what were you about to say?1 JP: Oh, just asking what it was like when you were growing up. MHS: Well, I, ask me that again. JP: What did your parents do when you were growing up? MHS: Well, of course my mother was housewife, my father was real estate, real estate. And he'd sell it either on a commission, like someone would have a farm and turn it over to my father and father would find a buyer for it, he would get commission like 5% or 8% of the sale. And so that's what my father did. Real estate. JP: So, your parents helped you to decide to go to Norwich and you liked it? MHS: They didn't, they told me where I was gonna go. I told you my brother wanted to go to Georgia Tech and Alabama, one of those two. And they said, "No, you're gonna go to Norwich." I guess they figured he needed the discipline, the military, the discipline. And when I went, I was only, in Peoples, there was only 30 in my class, 25 girls and 5 boys. So 3 of us, 3 of the 5 boys all went to Norwich. JP: Wow, that's a pretty high percentage. MHS: Yes it is! [laughs] JP: So who was your roommate at Norwich? MHS: My roommate was, well that time, four in a room. So the—it's a big right room and I lived in Jackman Hall, was the dormitory. And the people I graduated—White, June White, Ross Grey, and I graduated from Peoples. So we were there and the fourth one was Bob Washburn, and he was from Massachusetts.2 1 Attributed to George D. Aiken (1892-1984) Vermont governor and senator. 2 MHS might be referring to Leon Morris White and Charles Russell Graves of Morrisville, VT. Page 7 JP: So the people you went to high school with your roommates. MHS: Yeah, yeah. They were. Yeah. JP: Oh that's great. And how did you decide which fraternity to join? MHS: Well I didn't have to make it, my brother was ahead of me, and he was a Sigma Alpha Epsilon, and so I was just automatically. I guess I did get a bed at one of the fraternities and but I could go—I wanted to go S.A.E. anyway. So I was just automatic, I mean, you have to accept the brother if he wants to go. And so I was S.A.E. And S.A.E. is the largest fraternity, in my day, in the country. And they had I think, I think the number was twenty-eight, I think throughout all the whole United States there were twenty-eight universities that had S.A.E. and the next one was Kappa Sigma they had twenty-five chapters. S.A.E. had the most in the nation, had twenty-eight chapters. JP: Wow, and do you remember the song that you sang for Sigma Alpha Epsilon? MHS: Oh yeah. JP: Would you mind singing it? MHS: [Singing] Oh sing for Sigma Alpha Epsilon, (lets see) Oh sing for Sigma Alpha Epsilon, and to Minerva (that's not a good key). Oh sing, Oh sing for Sigma Alpha Epsilon and to Minerva who will lead us on! And to Phi Alpha with her guiding light. To royal sons who fight, fight, fight, fight, fight! And when some day we will tell our sons, about the very best fraternity, oh sing for Sigma Alpha Epsilon, our dear old S.A.E. [laughs] JP: [laughs] That is wonderful; would you like a drink of water? Are you okay? MHS: Yeah I am okay, sometimes your voice is clear but now it's not. JP: That was great. MHS: So sometimes in bed I'll sing, and I'll just sing myself to sleep. I'll hum, and it's pretty good. And this is one of my off days [laughs]. My voice isn't in the singing mode. JP: [laughs] It was wonderful! That was terrific. Do you remember your uniform at Norwich? MHS: Yes, yes. JP: What was it like? MHS: I had my picture in the yearbook when I was a corporal and yes, we had the War Whoop was the yearbook, and I was in there because I was a corporal. And all the non-commissioned officers get special caption, a picture of you and well that's, well I was a corporal. All, well most Page 8 the people, most of them were privates, but the few, I don't know what, 20, 25 or 30% of them are non-commissioned officers and all. Corporal is the highest you can go as a sophomore. If you are appointed, sophomores are corporals, that is all. Sergeants are juniors, and commissioned officers are seniors. So I was a corporal, and a sergeant, and a second lieutenant in A Troop. We were troops then, A Troop, cavalry, horse cavalry. JP: Tell me about the horse cavalry. MHS: Well we had, I don't know how many horses we had. The stables are still up there, the original stables. We would have to, once a week, just like your classroom schedule would meet Monday, Wednesday and Friday or Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, it was on there. So once a week we had to go out to riding hall, the riding house, they're still down there, think the riding— no the stables, the riding hall is gone. You would go to this riding hall and do all these different formations inside. By the right hand, Hooo! By the left hand, Hooo! [laughs] and that sort of thing. JP: Did you learn how to ride a horse at Norwich or did you know before? MHS: No, I had a pony of my own at home. So I was, I know the head of the horse to the tail of the horse. People came up from Massachusetts and didn't know what a horse was, but I did. I had a saddle horse for two years before I went to Norwich so I was a veteran [laughs]. Most of the people were, didn't know one end of the horse from the other! JP: Do you know what breed the horses were that you had? MHS: Well no, but they were well trained. When you first went for drill, for close order drill, number one, one, two, three, four in a column. For example, so we would be in a line, and they would say, "Fours left, Hooo!" And you, first they would say to you, "Column fours, be one, be in a line. Column one, two, three, four. Column fours turn your head to the right in your line, and now one, two, three," and I would say, "Four, one, two, three, four." The next row, one, goes "One, two, three, four." And the next one, "two, three, four." So when you were in the line, they'll say, like we are marching for chapel they'll say, "Fours left, Hooo!" And we, everybody, the number one would pivot and the other went around and we went around in a column. There was nothing to it, a piece of cake. JP: It must have looked wonderful. MHS: Yes, it was good, it was a, it got the job done. JP: Did you drive a car on campus? MHS: I had a car my senior year. Yes I had a Buick Coupe. You had to be a senior. Underclassmen could not have a car, but that was a senior privilege. You could have a car, so my dad [telephone rings in background for a few minutes] had a Buick Coupe that he gave me. So I had a car which was nice. Because we could go from the barracks to downtown which was, Norwich was about a mile. We would pile in, go down to the movies, then come back. It came in Page 9 kinda handy. And when we got home weekends, we didn't think of hitchhiking, I had a car right there. So with four from Morrisville we would pile in the car and go to Morrisville [laughs]. JP: That must have been grand. MHS: It was good. You had to be a senior to have a car. JP: Now I noticed in the War Whoop that you were an expert swordsman, an expert pistol, and an expert rifle shot. MHS: I was. I think I was a marksman as a rifle, sharp-shooter as a pistol, and an expert in the saber. And the saber course was be these dummies, would be men, you would come galloping down, like a column, and you'd just, you would lunge forward. I said "Geesh, I'll probably break my arm, but well I'll do it because it was what we were supposed to do." Worked like a piece of cake. So it was on a pivot, like a row, and so we go galloping down, we gallop past, take the saber, and jam the dummy and follow it right around. And when we went past it, we would pull it back. And it worked like. JP: Was it a real sword? MHS: Huh? JP: Was it a real sword? MHS: A real? JP: Was it a real sword or like a wooden sword? MHS: Oh oh, it was real, I mean it was-- JP: It was sharp. MHS: Yeah, it was, you got a medal for it. I said I was a marksman with a rifle, a sharp-shooter, a higher class, as a pistol, and an expert in the saber, in the saber course. JP: And you all learned those things at Norwich? Or did you practice as a kid? MHS: At Norwich, yeah. JP: So they taught you all that, they taught you how to be all that. MHS: Yep, learned it at Norwich. You got it at Norwich. So I had on my tunic, I had those medals, three different kinds of medals on my tunic. JP: Very good. So what was it like to be a Rook, I know you've talked about being a senior, but what was it like to be a Rook?Page 10 MHS: Ooh boy was that bad. It really was. You were not supposed to haze, but it was, it was mild hazing, mild hazing. For example, they would say, "alright get the rooks on the floor like a row boat, you are rowing a boat." It was hazing, you were not supposed to haze, but they did. About two weeks, the first game of the season was Dartmouth we always played at Hanover. They never came here, but we went, the whole Corps marched at Dartmouth. We would march, line up on the street there, and then march onto the field. The whole Corps for the game. We were there for two games. We did that with Dartmouth for the first game of the season, and we did it in the state series. Middlebury, Vermont, Saint Michaels, and Norwich. And we'd marched. If we played Middlebury, we would march at Middlebury. Middlebury, I think there, most everybody came here. I know we went there. The whole Corps went to Coast Guard. Had a special train for the whole Corps. The whole Corps went down to New London, Connecticut to play the Coast Guard Academy in football. JP: On a special train? MHS: Yep, a special train yep. JP: That's always been a big rivalry for the Coast Guard. MHS: Yes, it has always been a good rivalry we have had with the Coast Guard. We always had, we have a nice, nice relationship with the Coast Guard. JP: Now you were quite a jumper. MHS: Yes I was. In the pole vault particularly. Well when I went there, in high school we had track and the coach, Coach Baker was my chemistry professor but he was also the track coach.3 And I went out for track, and I had the no form. It was just jump over, jump over any way you can get there, it was no form. He called it no form. He said, "I'll teach you the eastern roll or the western roll." He told me exactly how they went. So [he asked], "Which one do you think you will like to go on." And I said, "Let's try the eastern roll." That is: you don't come charging really fast, you've got to take a little hop, then take six or eight steps so it comes out just right. You know exactly where, and you go to the bar, you kick up like this, over the bar. With this foot, you twist it around so that the bar hits your body instead of your butt. You aren't dragging your butt, and knocking it off with your butt. So you kick up, with the eastern roll, and then do that, and twist your body right around and the bar passes your body. You want to get your butt out of the way. So I was a high jumper and in the pole vault, I did the 12 feet. The standards only went up to 12 feet and I guess they didn't think that anybody could do it, but I did. So I was the, and the broad jump. So every year, from freshman to senior, I got a little more as a sophomore, more as a junior, and more as a senior. I kept going up. So I was quite the track star. JP: You were, you were. MHS: And P.D. Baker was my chemistry professor and he was like a father to me. A wonderful, wonderful man. So he taught me all those things. He knew how they went. I stopped to think 3Perley Dustin Baker, NU 1920 (1897-1995), was dean from 1950-1957, worked from 1920-1962. Page 11 about it, I said, I think if I had chosen, he said, "you can have your choice." He explained how it was and I think if I had taken the western roll, I think I could have probably gotten, I just got a feeling, I could have probably gotten one or two more inches higher with the western roll. But he taught me the roll anyway. I liked P. D. Baker. He was dean there, and it might have been later, anyway, he was like a father figure to me. I guess that about covers it doesn't it? JP: That's great, what did you do for entertainment? MHS: Well we had, I was an S.A.E., as I told you it was the largest fraternity in the country. It had more chapters than any other college [fraternity], of all the colleges. We would have Freshmen Week, which would be around January. Classes were suspended and we would have 3 days, 3 days, on the weekend for just parties, dancing, and doing anything you wanted to do. It was dancing mostly and you would get your date there. And you would look around downtown get a rate or rent if they couldn't travel, if they were out in like Massachusetts. Then the cadet would get a room for their date, for like Freshmen Week or Junior Week were the two big weeks. Freshmen Week and Junior Week. Freshmen Week was around January, Junior Week would be around May I think. So I had, I had a girl, Cotting her name was, Emma Cotting, and I had her down for the weekend. And of course a lot of them, I would say probably about a fourth of the cadets had dates on those big weekends. The others didn't have them. Either they couldn't afford it or didn't do it for one reason or the other. But I did, I had a date down. And she lived right there during those three days, probably like Friday, Saturday, and Sunday or something like that for Junior Week, for Freshmen Week and for Junior Week in May and Freshmen Week was in January I think. And all the classes were off, and the parties were in. I remember I had some money, and I get through the fraternity and they made us, something, your boaters, not the boaters in something. We didn't want them in. So I went down there, this was during Prohibition, picked up a pint of whiskey and I paid $4.00 for it. I got to thinking, I said, "My God, I can't really afford four dollars." That would be quite a few trips to the theater, pay for a lot of the theaters. So I bought it for four dollars, I didn't have a date and so one of the cadets who did have a date said, "I'll give you $3.75 for it, and I said "Sold." So I lost twenty-five cents but I could go to more movies [laughs]. JP: So movies were a big thing? MHS: They were downtown, you had to get downtown. JP: So where did one procure liquor during Prohibition? MHS: Well I didn't ask, we just, we got it through the fraternities. The fraternities would, you would sign up for it and they, somebody would get a bootlegger or something and they got good liquor. Probably went up to Canada I presume, probably and got it. So I said, $4.00 for a pint, or half a pint, or a pint and I, like I said, I said "I can't afford that. I would rather spend the money on movies." So I sold it for $3.75, sold my pint for somebody that had a date. It was worth it. I remember we used to go to Lake Eden, during the summer time. Lake Eden was 2 hours, 17 miles I guess, 15 miles. And Eight Guide Dunbar, a wonderful band, 8 piece orches—geez, they were everywhere, they were from St. Johnsbury, Eight Guide Dunbar. We would go there every week, Lake Eden, to dance. The men would go up separately; the girls would go up separately. Page 12 Almost everybody took a date. The girls would get up there by bus or any way they could get there. And they would sit on one side of the room, and the men would stand up in the back. When they would wind up the music then we would go over and we'd pick out somebody or for dancing on the floor. I remember I was dancing with this girl, probably could have been my date, I don't know, I was dancing with this girl. Anyway, and a lot of stags went up there. So I would see this girl, and she would shake her head no, too. I said the next dance? No. The second dance? [laughs] While we were dancing, you have these singles. So like I said, the girls got there by bus or I don't know. They got there, they got there anyway. [laughs] JP: What kind of dances did you do? Do you remember? MHS: Most of them were, in those days we used to Jump the Hop. We did a lot of turning around. We would dance around or we would dance, dance, and we would dip. Or at Lake Eden we actually jumped. We would have your partner jump right in the air, jump, jump. It looked good from the outside. I said, gee that looks like great fun, so I learned how to do it and we would jump. Just jump with the steps rather than glide. Supposedly we would jump and twist in the air. It was good. JP: And you were a good jumper. MHS: We thought we were hot stuff! [laughs] JP: Do you remember any slang? MHS: Any what? JP: Any slang? Did you guys use slang? MHS: Slang? JP: Slang. MHS: S-L-A-N-G? Slang. JP: Correct. MHS: Oh, yeah I guess we did. The people from Massachusetts used to rip on the Vermonters for the way we, for the slang, for the way we talked. And the New Yorkers talked different, the Massachusetts talked broader. Vermont talks a lot flat, flat and hickish really, and Massachusetts were a little different and New York was different than them, just a little bit as a group you know. The rest of the states, you could tell, you could almost tell a state a man was from, whether he was from New York, Massachusetts or Vermont by just talking to them. And of course we were hicks. Of course, the Vermonters, we would usually take a ripping from the cadets from Massachusetts for the hickish way we talked. We probably did talk like hicks. [laughs]Page 13 JP: Did they call you hicks or anything else? MHS: No, not that I know of. But we, well they might have, might have called us hicks. If they did, they were right. We were hicks. [laughs] We wouldn't deny it. JP: Now was Mike Popowski one of your roommates? MHS: Yes, Mike was a—when you're—all sophomores, if you are promoted in the Corps. I think about probably 25% maybe are promoted, maybe not quite that maybe 20% are promoted. So you are supposed to live, not officers live with officers, if you are officers. Privates, senior privates, lived together. Juniors were sophomores were sergeants, and sophomores were corporals, juniors were sergeants, and seniors were officers. Now what did you ask? JP: About Michael Popowski. MHS: Oh, oh, well so well my room— I was an exception. I came to Norwich as a private. I had been there only one week. The very first week I was called into the commandant's office. You're promoted at the commissioning ceremony in the spring when, before you break up. You have a promotion parade and I wasn't on the list. Well when I got back, the first week of school I was called into the commandant's office and was promoted right there. And of course a corporal had to get his stripes sewn on. All sophomores are corporals, privates, and privates. You are a corporal, you are a non-commissioned officers, juniors are sergeants, and seniors are officers. First lieutenants through, well my day the highest rank was a major, was the highest rank. Later on they became a colonel was the highest in the Corps. But in my day it was a major, one major. Then there would be about four or five captains. It would be A Company, B Company, C Company, and Headquarters Company. They were commanded by a senior, by a captain, a senior cadet captain. They would have a captain of the company, command the company. A first lieutenant would be the second in command. Then you have your, like I was in A Troop, and we would have two, two second lieutenants. I was one of the second lieutenants as an A Troop when I was a cadet there. JP: Was Harmon the commandant when you were there? MHS: Harmon was a commandant my first year and then it was his last year there. My sophomore, junior, senior year was a, Harmon was the, my sophomore year. And, who was it? I can't remember his name now, I'll have to remember it, but my sophomore, junior, senior year, it was a new man that came in. They are Regular Army people. That was a duty. They are Regular Army, and it was a duty assignment. And, let's see, Harmon was a, well he was a captain when I came in there and he yeah, he was, he controlled the—the Army furnishes officers for each, each company, for the whole Corps I think there was 17 officers. We could appoint 17 officers, cadet officers. And they're appointed by a, well, a commission. I don't know as a group, I don't know who picks them out. I never did understand who picked them out. Well I was a corporal as a sophomore, and that's all. You are either a private or a corporal. Sergeants, you are either a private or a sergeant if you are made. And a senior, you are either a private or an officer. In other words, a company would have one captain, one first lieutenant, and two second lieutenants. Now I was in A Troop, so A Troop was in Jackman Hall. We had a captain, a first lieutenant, and two Page 14 second lieutenants in the company. Or then there was a, they didn't call them companies. They called them companies later on— we called them troops. We were a troop, troopers, cavalry. Cavalry called them troops. Infantry called them companies. So my freshman year we were troopers. Now they changed it to companies in the Corps. JP: So did you go on the ROTC Hike of 1932? MHS: Did I do what? JP: Did you did the ROTC Hike of 1932? MHS: The, um, no. The uh, that was the one year they did not have it. But the year before they had the summer hike, and I think the year after. But my year they had to cancel it so we went to Fort Ethan Allen. Before you would arrive in the post, [then] ride horses from the post to Fort Ethan Allen. Well this year, they could they were tight on money or something so they, we did not have that summer ride. I think ours was the only class that didn't. I think the class after us did. So we drove to the fort on automobiles and our parents dropped us off. But all the classes before and after us, they rode. They took this secured route from Norwich to Fort Ethan Allen. But my year we didn't take it, we drove in cars and rode our horses when we got there [laughs]. Or whatever it was we did, I don't know what we did. JP: So when you left Norwich, and you graduated, and you went in to the military? You went straight in? MHS: No, not immediately. I think it was only, it was hard to get in. As I remember only two people in my class got a Regular Army commission. You went into the Regular Army when the rest of us went into the Reserves. So for 95% went into the Reserves, we were reserve officers. We went down every two weeks out of, we didn't get a chance to go on active duty. So we didn't actually get our commissions. We didn't see much active duty. JP: What did you do after you graduated? MHS: Well I taught high school up in Northeast Kingdom in Barton. I taught there for four or five years. Well from '34 through '39, and then in '40 I went into the Army. JP: What caused you to go into the Army in 1940? MHS: Well, I, thank you [someone passes Col. Smith a drink]. Well I wanted to get in, you couldn't get in. It was good pay. So in 1940 apparentlyWashington got some money together and so those who wanted to could volunteer for active duty. That was 1940. So I jumped, and it was good pay. It was a lot better than teaching high school. I started at $900 at Barton, Northeast Kingdom, $900, then $1,000, $1,100, and then $1,200. I got a hundred dollar bump each year so my fourth year of teaching I got $1,200. When I went into the Army, I got a hell of lot more than that. When I was getting $1,200 I was getting $4,500 to $5,000, I got about four times as much in the Army. So I went in the Army, and the activation of the Armored Force. My order said the Page 15 37 th Calvary Regiment. When I put in for active duty they came through. When I got there and reported to the officer in charge, the Regular Army officer in charge, who was a lieutenant colonel I think he was, he said well. I said, "Mine said that I was assigned to a cavalry unit." He said, "Cavalry is out. Armor is in." So on the activation the Armored Force came into being on the 15 of June, 1940. The 1st Armored was at Knox, the 2nd Armored was at Benning. I was the 1st Armored Division on the first day of the activation of the Armored Force. On the ground level. JP: Ground floor. MHS: I was assigned to a, well, reconnaissance company. The recon company, the recon battalion, A Troop. A Company was armored cars. B Company was scout cars, C Company was tanks, which I was assigned to C Company. And D Company was half-tracks. Everyone had their own division type of vehicles and we all had cycles, motorcycles. That's what I was in. I remember we had old horse sheds that had no horses, and that's where we kept the tanks. So when we went to pick up our tanks they said, "Alright, anybody that has ever driven a tank, step forward or turn your name in." You were here to pick up some tanks. There was just a few handful had driven a tank, and so I was not one, but some of the old Army people had driven a tank. So they got enough tanks. They came out of a depot somewhere and so the people who had driven tanks stepped forward and drove the tanks into the motor park which were really converted horse stables. They were, now [instead of] horses there were tanks in there. Same place but different vehicle [chuckles]. JP: What kind of motorcycles did you ride? MHS: What kind of what? JP: Motorcycles. MHS: Oh, I think we had the Indian motorcycle, I think. It was Indian. And well they had the, the first ones we had, oh God it was a pleasure to ride. They were down, you sit right down, you had controls, sit right down. Well I'll be goddamned if they didn't give those up. They got the new ones and they are up in the air. Well Jesus, it's like learning to ride all over again. On those low ones you just sit right down, sheesh, you could just feel it, you melted right into the cycle on the road. You melted. Now you sitting up here and by god, I never did like them. They were hard, and if you got off balance, you would go down, you would fall down on the ground. Then you would have to get up shame-facedly and pick up your cycle and mount it again [laughs]. I remember one exercise we had, we were out in the field and we come riding into this spot and dismount. And somebody on the team would throw you a Tommy gun, through the air. I don't know where it would come from, but they would throw it to you, and you would have to catch it in the air, the Tommy gun. You would blast a couple [gun noises], it would rise up [gun noises], bring it down, you would take 3 or 4 shots and it rises on you. You do not try to hold it down. You know it is going to, so you do it, you let up on the trigger, then get out 3 or 4 more rounds. Page 16 Then it gets to ride up. Just the force of it forces the Tommy gun up. Then we, when we would finish that I would take the rifle and the submachine gun and toss it to the instructor, jump on the motorcycle, and you are gone [chuckles]. That was a test, I mean, I guess all the officers went through it. It was fun, it was fun. I liked it. It was good. JP: What other weapons did you carry? MHS: We didn't carry anything. We, uh, I'll tell you, in Germany General Harmon had the Constabulary. So when I went outside in Heidelberg and yellow, we had yellow shoelaces. We were special. Constabulary was a special group of soldiers. And we were hot stuff, I guess, under Harmon. And was everybody assigned, a quite few. Well I made the cavalry in Germany and uh, is that it? Does that answer? JP: So you were part of Ironsides? And did you take part in any combat action? MHS: Um, you mean real combat? Or, or, we had maneuvers and it was just like combat. I mean it was, it was. Well you are in a war! I remember I was in the recon battalion, reconnaissance battalion. We were deployed down on the line in a big field. We were there, nothing was happening. We were up front cause— we reconnaissance battalion is the forward most unit of a division, of an armored division, is the reconnaissance battalion. And I was a recon battalion. They lead the entire division. The reconnaissance battalion, and I was in recon bat. So we got here on this field here, nothing was happening and we were just holding there, waiting for something to happen. All of a sudden all hell broke loose and tanks just covered that field. I stood there and said, "My god, it was a maneuver." And that field was covered with tanks! I guess, I never saw so much tanks in my life! And I, uh, "Holy Jesus what am I seeing?" I was really captivated by it, I was a, it was a maneuver, it was maneuvers. JP: And where was this? MHS: Jesus. Well I can't remember. I was the 1st Armored and the 1st Armored was at [Fort] Knox. The 4th Armored, I think, was Drum, Fort Drum. 10th Armored was, I was the 1st, 4th, and 10th Armored as they were building up the divisions. They would send the cadre, a pit crew, to form a new division. They were forming new divisions. So I started out in the Armored, the 1st Armored, the very first beginning, the 1st Armored was in Fort Knox where I was. The 2nd Armored was activated on the same day. The first day of the activation of the Armored Force was the 15 of June, 1940. The 2nd Armored was at [Fort] Benning. Then they grew, so they had 18 armored divisions. They have cadre as a shell for the making of all the key positions of a unit. Then they send in recruit fillers, to fill it up to full strength. That's how they would increase. They had an outline, just an outline of key people who would be assigned as the cadre staff. I was the 1st Armored but I was picked as a cadre for 4th Armored Division. So it's a shell of the officers and non-commissioned officers and then the fillers come in and fill it up. And they go on and do it that way with the 18 armored divisions I think. So I was the 1st, 4th, and 10th Armored Divisions. Page 17 JP: So you were stateside. Were you overseas? MHS: Oh yeah, yes I was. That's, that's something. I went, I was overseas. Where the hell was I? Jesus. Goddamn [whispered with frustration]. I was overseas. Europe? FRIEND OF MHS: Moe, What did you train on tanks in Hawaii? You were a trainer, what did you train people [on]? MHS: My job there was to train Marines on the tank mounted flame-thrower. Hell, that was it. That was a school. Each Marine Division had one tank company or battalion, I can't remember which. They would send a whole unit of Marines over to—I was the head of the school at Kolekole Pass, that's where the Japanese flew in, over that cut in the mountains when they bombed Pearl Harbor. And uh, where was I now? FRIEND OF MHS: You were training Marines. MHS: Yeah, I was training Marines and we would set up trebles on the guns, on the flamethrowers. The flamethrowers were co-actually mounted. You would have a 76 sticking on the tank a big rifle, a big, long tube, a 76. And co-actually mounted to that was a flamethrower right beside it, or below it. So you could have your fire power. You're in the tank, you would have the ammunition in the tank. It was underneath the turret floor for your stored ammunition. So they were independent. They could fire, I can't remember how many, rounds of 76 you could fire or you could use the flamethrower. Either one. And we would make our own napalm. It is like a sawdust, soap, chips, I guess like soap. It's like sawdust, looks like sawdust. You can't get it, even a drop of water, or it breaks it down. So you have to be careful that the drums are dry and you had this napalm, that's the sawdust-like stuff, and mix it up, and it's rubbery. And you reach in there and pull it out like that and hold it and let it go a little snap back to base. It was heavy, it was elastic, like elastic. Now that's your flamethrower stuff. And it has to be that way so you can back off your tank, and that thing we couldn't throw a flame and it works out. They would, I wouldn't happen to be with the unit at that time. But the Japanese would hole up in these caves, so we'd get these flamethrowers and since it was almost impossible to dig out, 'cause the side was like a mountain, all rocks. They were inside with peepholes and everything. Hard to dig those people out. So we get these flamethrowers in there and course they had the aperture, they had it open so they could fire. And we would put the flamethrower and probably shoot it, probably, a couple hundred yards. If it was mixed just right, just right, it was like rubber, like rubber, and you could back your tank off and we would, they would, it had to be that particular action. But then they would fire these flamethrowers in these apertures, or whatever you call them, the rock where they fired. And they would put the flamethrowers in there and burn up the oxygen and those Japanese would be dead. D.E.D. Dead [laugh]. And not a mark on them, they wouldn't have a mark on them, but they'd be dead. It would burn up the oxygen in the air in these caves and kill them all. Just, just, just asphyxiated. JP: Where were you during, where were you when Pearl Harbor occurred? Page 18 MHS: I was in Hawaii. I was in Hawaii and I had a school there. I was the head of the school. Head of school on the tank mounted flamethrower and as I said, we work with; we made mostly Marines, training Marines. Those Marines, I couldn't sing their praises enough, the, the [fades out] FRIEND OF MHS: Moe, when Pearl Harbor was bombed, where were you located? Were you still in the States or were you elsewhere? MHS: No, no, no, when Pearl Harbor was, no, no. When Pearl Harbor was bombed I was in Hawaii with the, with the tank mounted flamethrower - FRIEND OF MHS: So you were training Marines. MHS: training Marines. When the peace came they dropped the bomb and so they gave us 48 hours. We had these big, these 55 gallon drums. We had like a mountain of them, just a heap of them. Gasoline rations for the states they sent it to us to burn up in the flamethrowers or whatever it was. It was hard to get gas for use here for the civilians during the war. So we, when the armistice, when they dropped that bomb they sued immediately for peace, so they gave us 48 hours to clear the range. So we had a veritable mountain of 55 gallon drums, long and high, filled with this napalm. And we opened those drums just as fast as we could open them. And we had a veritable pond of that napalm, that rubberized stuff there, and we would back a tank off, put a flamethrower on it and you would have thought the whole island was going up in flames. I mean it was some fire, I'll tell ya. That was the Kolekole Pass. It was a plateau. It was a low cut in the mountains, I said when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor they came through that pass and I had been there at that time. They flew right over where I had my school. FRIEND OF MHS: So what did you do in Japan? When you went to Japan after the war? MHS: Let's see, I was, Oh! Here is a funny thing. I was, I was an obs-, obscure, obscure major. I'd been there 3 days. Nobody knew me. Hell, there probably a thousand, probably hundreds and hundreds of majors there. It was all in the Far East Command under General MacArthur's Far East, Far East Command. And I'd been there just 3 days and my name came up to be on the General Staff. And I said, "How in hell can I be made? They don't know me!" I said, "I'm the new man here! I am one of hundreds and hundreds of majors and they picked me out. There was a feather in my bonnet and God was with me. God appointed me. God had something to do with that." Three days I was on the General Staff. Seemed pretty good. It was about 18 or 17, we'd have a staff meeting every day. I would be there and it was under, we had reports that came into me and I had a guy in my division that wrote them up and all I had to do was sign them. So I signed them as if they were my reports because I was the head of the division. So, so I signed it, I signed it. I didn't change a word. Call McCarthy, I signed it, sent it up to G3 with my signature. G3 took my name off, put their name on it and sent it up to GHQ Far East Command, General MacArthur's headquarters. It went through all those chains, everybody put their name on it, and I didn't do a thing. I just, tt was all prepared, I never, in all the time I was there, only Page 19 one time there was a paragraph in there that was way off, and I took that out. I said, "By god that's not going to go into the report, that's for goddamned sure." So I took that out. When I said that was my report, when they get it, it was their report to GHQ they passed the line. It was a, I didn't do anything, no really, all I did was look at the reports and send them on up. I did not do anything. But I, it was important because it went to GHQ and the GHQ, when they got through with them, sent the reports to Washington. JP: And after the war what did you do? MHS: After the war I, well I was in Chicago Headquarters, Fifth Army. My mother called up and said, "If you want to come home, your father will sell his shares of the drive-in theaters to you." And I really didn't want to come out, I liked Chicago and I liked my job. I just, I had a good job, and I did not want to leave. I had it made. I had 16 years. All I needed was 4 more years to retire at 50%. Well, mother said, "Your father will sell," So I said, "Well I guess she wants me to get out," so I get out. I really did not want to go, but I got out after 16 years and went home, and bought out my father's shares of the Green Mountain Drive-in Theaters. There was a theater in Morrisville and the largest in the state was in Newport. And we got half. The trade was Canadian trade. They would come down because they did not have any, any, Canada could not have 'em. It was state law, they could not for quite a while, they couldn't have drive-in theaters. So we had a sell out every night and that was a, that was a good payment, but of course we didn't make as much money in those days as they do today. I got $10,000 a year sitting on my butt and doing nothing. [laughs] JP: When did you meet Isabel? When and where did you meet your wife? MHS: I met her before I went into the Army. For 4, 4 or 5 years from '35 to '40, I taught high school in Barton in the Northeast Kingdom. And I taught, coached, I coached and taught for four or five years, I can't remember. 1935 to 1940, and then in '40 I went into the 1st Armored Division at [Fort] Knox. JP: But how did you meet her? Where did you meet her? MHS: Oh my wife? Well we were teaching, teaching school. JP: She was a teacher. MHS: Right. And Issy [Isabel] was home economics, home economics. She graduated from uh, I can't remember the name of the school now. I did know that it was in Massachusetts. She had her degree from a school in Massachusetts. I know where it is but it doesn't come to mind right now what it was. So that's where I met Issy. So Issy was a, we were both teaching school there and we both, we got married. We skipped out one New Year's Eve and got married, came back, didn't tell anybody about it because we weren't supposed to be married, I guess. And we weren't supposed to be I guess. I don't know how they could keep a teacher from, from they could take a Page 20 married teacher or a single teacher. But either way, we got married and didn't tell anybody. Then, then we got out in 1940 and went into the Army. JP: So she couldn't tell she was married because they didn't want women who were married to be teaching. That's why you didn't? Was that it? MHS: I don't know. I don't know. I could never could figure out why didn't want, why they didn't want it. Never could figure that out. But they didn't, anyway, for some reason or another. So then we went to, that's when we were stateside, I was, we were teaching in Barton. So we got married, dropped out of teaching, and I went into the 1st Armored Division at Fort Knox in 1940. JP: Yeah? FRIEND OF MHS: Did you talk about how we ended up at Norwich? JP: No. I'm curious as to how you got from post-World War I [interviewer said one meant two], to Korea and then to Norwich. How did you get to Norwich? And what did you do in Korea? I know those are big questions. MHS: I was in the, ah, I, I, I got out of the Army. Oh! I got out of the Army to buy the theaters, that's why I got out of the Army. Mother said, "If you want to come home, your father will sell you [the theaters]." I didn't want to do it but I did. I got out of the Army and went home and bought out my father's share of the drive in theaters. So I was sitting one day when I got the Norwich Bulletin. I don't know what it's called now. It's a bulletin. It said they are looking for somebody for the commandant's office. It said, "apply to Colonel Black." I said, "Bull, bull, bullshit," I said "I'll jump in my Cadillac and go down and let them see me. I can see them and they can see me." And I did, and I was told by Black that I was one of the, there was only one other, a year later, putting in for my same job and I got it. So I report in as, to Black. Black went up to Harmon and said, "We got a man here on our plea for an assistant commandant." And he said, "He's a Norwich man." And Harmon goes. "Well sign him up and give him three days to get in and get down here." So I was home, I had to clean up and move and everything. So I did and I came down here and reported in in 1940, 1940 1st Armored Division. FRIEND OF MHS: No you started at Norwich in 1950, didn't you? MHS: I started at Norwich… [trails off] FRIEND OF MHS: '56? '54? MHS: In 1940… FRIEND OF MHS: You were in for sixteen years. It would be '56. MHS: Oh yeah. Uh huh. Page 21 JP: You worked seventeen jobs at Norwich for eighteen years, right? MHS: Yeah, yes, yeah. I was— oh here is a funny thing, but it's not really very funny either. One day we had the—I was registrar. I was the first registrar in Norwich history. And Bob Guinn, I knew him, he was a professor when I was cadet. And he wrote the history of Norwich and he said that, "Smith was the first registrar in Norwich history." See before they had the registrar duties, but they partialed all them out amongst different faculty. So they get them all together for the first time and I was the first. And this is in the history. I was first full time registrar in Norwich history. And that was in 1940, yeah 1940, wasn't it? FRIEND OF MHS: It couldn't have been '40, that's when you went into the Army. Sixteen years after that would have been '56 MHS: This was 19… [trails off]… this was, uh, '56 yeah. '56. Yeah '55. '56 was the first year I came to Norwich. Yeah '55-'56 was my first year at Norwich. JP: So, you, you were working on a master's at Columbia before you— MHS: I was uh, yes. I started in and that was, that was a funny thing. I went to one section at Columbia and Columbia had a new deal. It used to be you go to 5 years or 4 years and a thesis. You go to 4 summer sessions and then write a thesis and that was it. Or 5 years without a thesis. Then they finally said, they cut it out and said, all right, you can go 4 years, you can get it in 4 years without a thesis. So I was working towards a Master's Degree at Columbia when I, when I ah. So I got to the next summer, I was waiting to see if I was going to get called into the Army, that was in '39. See if we were called into the Army, I said, I have to make up a decision because after the 4th of July if you go to Columbia, you don't get any credits. You have to be on or before the 4th of July for a full, for the full term. You can miss 2 or 3 days but that was all. And after the 4th of July you could go if you wanted to, but you wouldn't get credit for the Master's Degree. So, where was I now? JP: What was your major? What were you getting a master's degree in at Columbia? What were you studying? MHS: Probably education, I'd imagine. Education. I remember, I remember two of my professors—one was a woman, Doctor Spesicka at Columbia. The other was Doctor Hunt. The one that was the most popular one, he had a theater. We had small classes, 7 or 8 of in the class, but there was this one big class and he was the big, we had it in the theater, about 2 or 3 hundred were in his class. And I can't remember his name! But I remember Spesicka and Hunt. And Issy was there and I took her to class with her one time, when I was working for a master's degree. But it helped, because ah 4, 4 sessions, there used to be 5 and they cut it down to 4. So I was waiting, I said, "Gee I don't want to lose out all around," and I was biting my fingernails wondering whether to – what was it? To decide whether I was going to do something or go back to Columbia? Can't remember what it was. My choice was go to Columbia or Army I guess it Page 22 was. And I said, "I got to make up my mind before the 4 th of July," and it went by. And anyway I went to Columbia anyway, and I got a full year at Columbia. JP: You've had a lot of experience in education. A lot of life experiences with teaching people things and - MHS: The courses that you take in education was dull, dull and meaningless in education. They did not carry any weight, there was no substance to it, education courses. I mean they were stupid, they were dumb. And you had to take 18 hours, you were supposed to have 18 hours to get a, I guess a degree. And ah, I took 2 or 3 courses, and they were stupid! A waste of time! There was a misnomer calling them education courses. They prepared you, they didn't prepare you for anything but took them because they were required and so I went just that one time, and then I went into the Army. I was debating between, I didn't want to lose out on the second term for Columbia, I was biting my fingernails, and I said, "Well it's too late now I have to take what I get," and then my orders came through for active duty. So I played that right. I was lucky [chuckles]. JP: Do you want to take a break now or are you okay? MHS: Oh I'm okay. FRIEND OF MHS: I gotta go along, Moe. Your checks are all set there you have to sign them. MHS: Oh uh, oh the bills. Yeah, okay… come tomorrow, will ya? Okay, you are learning something about me. [chuckles] FRIEND OF MHS: You should tell her all the stories you have about the different generals you have worked for. MHS: Oh yeah, that's right. I have worked for, here is a funny thing. General Newgarden4 had the 10th Armored Division. I was in his division, well he came to the Armored School, and I was, I was something in the Armored School. I was a big, kinda a big wheel. Big wheel. I was a department head and he, everyone, they go to class and then they have to take a 10 minute break and then they go back to class for 50 minutes then 10 minute break. He was a tactics guy, tactics class. So I came up to see him, he didn't know me, I said, "General Newgarden." I said, "You probably don't remember me," (cause he had a division, he didn't know all the people). I said, "I was in your 10th Armored Division!" I said. "I was under your command at one time." So we had a nice chat. I remember his stars were—a pep they call it, a little round thing that clips to your collar, it was gone. And I said, "Gosh I should have fixed that but I didn't." I said, I should have said something, what I should have said was, '"General, your general thing is askew, you lost your pep." And I'd take my pep, "Here take my pep I got another one." That's what I should have done but I didn't do it. I was kind of scared so I let him go with his U.S. dangled Major 4 Major General Paul Woolever Newgarden (1892-1944) Page 23 General. And we talked but he didn't know who I was, so I told him, I said "I was in your division." A lot of officers in a division, you don't get to know them all. FRIEND OF MHS: So you did a lot of, you were in charge of Army training for a lot of , a lot of your career. MHS: Oh yeah, and in Hawaii that's all I did do. And I was the head of the school. FRIEND OF MHS: Who were those, the Spaniards that came, or Spanish speaking group that came? MHS: Oh, well we'd have tourists from all over the country. Colombia, for example, sent two or three different groups at different times. But the colleges all around would send their handpicked people to study our system of education, which was, ah, you could see it! It wasn't that you read something in a textbook and then recite it, but you could see it. It was all hands education. We would take an engine apart and put it together again. Assemble it right on the floor so we, we had engine cells and we would set up engine troubles, trouble shooting, and then the class would come in. We had a little, we had this big dynamometer, a big dynamometer engine in the middle and little cells around there. And we divided, about six officers or noncommissioned officers to a cell and there would be an instructor in there. And depending on whether, maintenance 1, maintenance 2, trouble shooting, so forth and they'd go through that and that'd be one week at each section. And I had the trouble, trouble shooting for over 1 week. So there's 6, 8, I think 8, different sections and then they'd graduate either 6 to 8, they'd graduate after about 2 months. I didn't do it exactly because I can't remember but about 2 months. They would have it on their records that they were graduates of the Tactics Department. The Armored School was the Tank Department, armored cars, tanks, wheeled vehicles, and motorcycles. There were five divisions of the Armored School. It took every, every week, 100, every third class was an officer class. We had an enlisted class, an enlisted class, an officer's class. Enlisted class, enlisted class, an officer's class. So there are 1,200 students at all times in the Armored School. 1,200. So 100 would graduate, 100 would come in. And every third company was an officer's company, so it'd be 300 at any one time, be 300 officers and 900 enlisted men in the Armored School. I had the Trouble Shooting Division. We would have these engine cells, we'd set up troubles on the tank, tank wouldn't start and so they'd figure out why it wouldn't start. And for motorcycles, wheeled vehicles, tank, and halftracks. FRIEND OF MHS: So what happened when the Colombians came to visit? MHS: Well that was, that was a good thing. They, ah, they spoke in English. They came through and they could with just what they could see. I found after, they didn't know what the hell was going on. They didn't! We spoke English and while they could see something, but the instructor - Maintenance 1 or Maintenance 2 or whatever it was - would talk in English and they told me, they [the Colombians] didn't know what was going on. And when they got down to the engine task, I knew that in Spanish, because I took Spanishm, I majored in Spanish in college. So I had Page 24 a corporal, god he was good, he was good. So I had no English-Spanish/Spanish-English dictionary so I had my speech in Spanish. So this, and I had been, I majored in it so I knew quite a few of it but I needed some help in polishing up. So I called this corporal in, he was, god he was a whiz-bang, I'll tell you. So I said, "What's the, what's the word for troubleshooting?" And he said, "There is no word for troubleshooting. It's busca fias look for troubles, that's trouble shooting." And so he helped me with my speech and I memorized it, because I majored in it so I knew quite a bit of it and he filled in the gaps for me cause I had no dictionary. So when the, when the Colombians, when the Brazilians - particularly Eurico Dutra, Chief of Staff of the Brazilian Army - came around, they didn't, they told me, they didn't know what was going on. We just spoke in English. Well when they got up to my place, I delivered it in Spanish they went for their notebooks and started writing like mad. Of the 16 stations, mine was the only one that meant anything to them because they didn't know. My people didn't know Spanish and they'd deliver it in Spanish [means English] but it went over their heads so when I started my speech in Spanish, boy they whipped out their notebooks. I tell you they were writing furiously so it wasn't a complete failure [laughs]. It made me feel pretty good. JP: Thank you. MHS: Any other questions? [laughs] FRIEND OF MHS: Oh. Mike Popowski downtown, his father, what was his association with you? MHS: We were at Norwich together. [At] Norwich noncommissioned officers lived with noncommissioned officers, commissioned officers lived with commissioned officers, privates lived with privates. FRIEND OF MHS: So how did you know Popowski or Pop? What was his nickname? MHS: Well as a sophomore, at commencement the end of my freshman year, my name wasn't on, I was a private. Well I had been there just a week and I was called into the commandant's office the very first week of school and was promoted to, made a corporal. So I was already living with privates. Popowski was a private. There was four of us: Sullivan (an Irish man), Uthenwoldt (a German), and me (English), and Polish, Popowski. We were in Jackman Hall, A Troop, A Troop. We were troops then, now they are, later became companies. It was A Troop and uh… [trails off]5 FRIEND OF MHS: Now did you stay with Popowski all through your school? MHS: So I was a private up until the very first week of school. I wasn't promoted at commencement. So I had my roommates, so when I was promoted to corporal I think I was the only one rooming with privates. All the others were noncommissioned officers with 5 Michael Popowski, George Patrick Sullivan, both Class of 1934 and Fred William Uthenwoldt, jr., Class of 1935. Page 25 noncommissioned officers. And they would keep the privates with their group so they didn't break it up. So I stayed where I was, but I was a corporal. I guess I was the only corporal, noncommissioned officer, who was in with privates, and Popowski was a private. FRIEND OF MHS: So but did you stay with him when you became a junior or a senior? MHS: No, just my sophomore year. And then my junior year it was just two of us. Sullivan, Sullivan I guess it was. I roomed with him from New Hampshire, Berlin, New Hampshire, was my roommate from, to junior and senior year at Norwich. Troops. I can't remember if we were troops. I think they went from, I think my sophomore year they went from troops to companies. They used to be troops for cavalry, cavalry troops. Same number pretty much, and makeup, but they would call them troops. So the band leader, I would take reports, I would be the officer of the day, and I would say, "Report to reveille." And they'd say "A Company present and accounted for. B Company present and accounted for. C Company." And you would say, "Dismiss your troops," if you were the officer of the day. And they would dismiss their troops. Well the band leader, I can't remember his name now, he wanted to call them troops and they were companies. They went from troops to companies. Well he wanted, the Band Company, he wanted to call 'em troops. So when I go out to take a report I say, "Report!" for if you are on duty, if you are the officer on duty for the whole regiment. And then "A Company present and accounted for. B Company present and accounted for," so on and "Band Company present" and, uh so this guy I can't remember his name now said, called it troop, said "A Troop present and accounted for." Well I could have called him on it and say, "Hey look, we are companies now. You will report as a company not a troop." But said, "My god if he wants to call them a troop, I'm gonna let him call it a troop." So he was the only one in the regiment that called his Band Company a troop. Everybody else was a company, and I let it go. I said, "Hell, I don't give a damn if he wants to call his band a troop, I'll let him." Any other questions? FRIEND OF MHS: I can't think of any right off there, chief! MHS: Well, we'll… FRIEND OF MHS: We'll catch up tomorrow. JP: Thank you very much. FRIEND OF MHS: I'm Dick Brockway JP: Brockway, that's right, we met before. I've got a, I can leave a card if you want, I gave Moe a card. Thank you. MHS: You know that, that helped me, that Colombia deal, it was on my, on my record so I got some wonderful assignments. I was, I was on the Armored, I was an obscure major, and I do not know how many majors there were in the Far East Command. I mean hundreds of them, and in three days they picked me out to be on the General Staff. And I said, "By god, I said God is with Page 26 me, God made that appointment." I mean all these majors, and I was an unknown major and they put me on the General Staff. I never could figure that out. [Moe's friend says goodbye] JP: So let's see, you were in, third overseas assignment was the Japan Logistical Command after the war. You were on the Commander General's Staff and you wrote reports that went up to General MacArthur's Headquarters in Tokyo and then to Washington. MHS: It went through channels, through channels. JP: Through channels. So you worked… MHS: In the final, in the Far East Command, MacArthur, MacArthur's headquarters, he was in, so it went to MacArthur's headquarters because he was the Far East Command. He was command of all, all the post caps and stations in the area, Far East Command. MacArthur, and then to MacArthur, my report went to MacArthur's headquarters, Tokyo, and he sent them on to Washington and what they did with them I don't know. JP: So then you went to Chicago? You were in Chicago during Korea. MHS: Chicago was my last duty station. JP: Last duty station. MHS: I was in Chicago. Oh, Headquarters, Fifth Army. I got it in my hat. Headquarters, Fifth Army, and I lived uptown from Chicago. I wasn't down in the loop, I lived a few blocks north, but it was still Army Headquarters. So I was in Fifth Army Headquarters in Chicago. JP: And what did you do there? MHS: I was a, I was a - Command Reports, I managed Command Reports. In other words, feeder reports came into me and I'd give it to my Division Commander whose business it was to write a report. So he wrote up the reports for me. Ah. Month, weekly or monthly reports, I can't remember which, I can't remember if they were weekly or monthly. So they would come across my desk. He would, he was the head of the—I had 4 divisions, 3 or 4 divisions in my company. And his division was to write up what went on in the Fifth Army Area. So they came to me, and I'd read 'em and there was one time that I changed something. I took out a paragraph that didn't belong, I took it out. So they came to me, I signed it as if it were my report, and sent it on to the next echelon of maintenance. And he would read it, and then he would sign it, that means it was his report then, and then it would go on to GHQ, to General MacArthur. And somebody in Special Services, I was in Special Services, in Special Services in the Far East Command would sign it, and then it is his report! Then it went on to Washington. JP: So what was it like when you worked under Harmon at Norwich? Page 27 MHS: I was, it was pretty good. It started out pretty rough, I guess I told you that something was happened. JP: Yes you got in the elevator and it was slow but Colonel Black… MHS: It was good, it was good under Harmon. We went to the uh, we had something at White River Junction, Dartmouth, and uh, at White River Junction, Dartmouth. And I had a big Cadillac and Harmon, I had a carful in my Cadillac there, and I drove with the wives. We drove to White River somewhere, we drove to some headquarters. And uh, [pause] and we met, we had a meeting, a big meeting somewhere. I don't know if it was White River or if it was Dartmouth, could've been Dartmouth. We had a meeting and Harmon rode in. I had Harmon, Mrs. Harmon and the director of admissions and his wife. And I had Issy. Six of us and we went to this, this meeting for the Area Command or something. I can't remember what it was. And Harmon, he was, he could swear quite a bit and he was a, so he made a speech using pretty rough language. Well the Norwich wives knew he spoke that way, and they expected him to speak that way, but the people outside our command didn't, youknow They had their wives there, they were civilian college wives or something like that. And so Harmon said something using his salty language and they sucked in their breath, you know. He could be pretty salty. And Harmon, so on the way back Harmon knew he made a mistake, "Oh god," he said, "I could cut off my tongue for saying what I said." I said, "Well gee General Harmon," I said. "People know you, they expect you to talk that way. If you didn't, you wouldn't be General Harmon. They'd be disappointed." He said, "Yes, they weren't Norwich wives. They weren't all Norwich wives, means there are some Dartmouth wives in there and they're the ones who sucked in their breath at his language." And I had no reply to that, he was right! JP: So you heard quite a bit of salty language. MHS: Huh? JP: So you heard quite a bit of salty language [louder]. MHS: Oh, oh yes. He was a…I remember one time, we were right here, I think I may have told you already. Women were sitting in here, Mrs. Harmon was sitting right here, and maybe not in this chair but in this place. The men were out around here, was it the Norwich community? I guess it was, yeah, high ranking people, Norwich department heads. And so I looked at him and Leona was sitting here, and Harmon you could hear him, god he had a booming voice. And he said, I guess I told you, "I've thrown my leg over many a French lad!" And I said, "My gosh you can hear him!" How you could hear outside and over here, he had a booming voice. Leona sat there and didn't, she knew Harmon, she didn't flick an eyelash. And he didn't care if she did hear, and he was true. He was quite a, as you call it, cocksman? [laughs] JP: I guess when you live in the military and you work with people closely you get to know their personalities. You get to know their good sides and their bads. What is it about Norwich, you Page 28 seem to really love Norwich and the training and the education that you've got. What is it about Norwich, you think, that makes people so loyal and so attached to it? MHS: Well it's the esprit de corps. It's the spirit of the corps. It's the, it's a, now in my day only, I think 2 graduates were accepted into the Regular Army. The rest including me were reserve officers but two, every year, they would take two for the Regular Army commissions. And then I think they dropped that rule. I don't know when they did go about the Regular Army. Oh I know, the reserve officers, I think it was at [Fort] Knox, they had, we were a lot of reserve officers. So they had a special course, and it turned out not to be much, it was a week of special training for the small group that wanted to go into the Regular Army. So a few reserve officers went. I didn't, I wish I had. But it was a short course, it wasn't demanding at all. It was a piece of cake really, and those people who went to that get a Regular Army commission. I was in the whole time on a reserve Army commission. I could just as well done that, and I thought, I said it was gonna involve a lot of work and isn't probably worth it. What I thought, what I heard, it wasn't hard at all, it was a piece of cake really for that week there was nothing to it. You'd get your Regular Army commission. So I went through all those years as a reserve commission. But, got the same pay. Get promotions just the same as everybody else. JP: And you have lived across from Norwich after you retired. So you've been close to Norwich for, gosh… MHS: I was at Norwich for I think 16 years. JP: I think 18, 16 or 18. MHS: I will tell you one thing really gripping. I was registrar. It is recognized that the registrar's duties were fanned out, or under - when I came in it was all coordinated. I was the first registrar as such, full time registrar in Norwich history. Guinn who writes the history told me that. And now where were we? What did you say? JP: Oh, you said you were going to say something gripping about being a registrar. I said you had lived here a long time. MHS: I was the, I was the first registrar in Norwich history. And, well, Dean Perry, and I loved him. Registrar comes under the Dean, he was the Dean and Registrar is under the Dean.6 So the Dean was my boss. So he came in one day. I had the best office in Dewey Hall with a fireplace on it. It was for the Dean but the Dean didn't want it, he wanted to be off the beaten path 'cause he didn't want to be where people were going by his office. He wanted the privacy, so he took the office way down at the end of the hall and I had the spacious office as Registrar, fireplace and everything! Now where was I? 6Col. Lewis Ebenezer Perry, (1899-1963) died on June 7, 1963 on a Friday, at the Cadet Corps Commencement Parade on Sabine Field. Page 29 JP: A gripping story about being registrar. MHS: The Dean came into my office one day and I liked Dean Perry, I guess I loved him really. He was a wonderful, man wonderful man. [Takes sip of water] And he said, "Let's get down to the," he said, "C'mon," I guess I was a colonel, "Colonel," I might have been a lieutenant colonel. "C'mon and we'll go and go down for the alumni parade." I looked at my watch, and I was pretty busy there. And he said, "I know it's early," he said, "but I thought we'd take our time." I said "okay," it made sense to me. So we started out, he started to take his car. I thought, "What the hell is he taking his car for? Jeesh all we have to do is, Jackman Hall is just down the steps and you are there." But, I thought, "Well, we're early, that's why we are taking it." I said to myself, I was talking to myself. "Oh we're early that's why we are." And so we'd go down and take a step, and stop. Take another step, and stop. And we would talk. And what's he going so damn slowly floor. Then again I said, "Well we're early of course." Now there was a reason for us doing that. He didn't feel good, Well, I didn't know that. So two or three different things I didn't question, I said "Oh, well were early we don't have to hurry about anything." So we got down there and I thought, "I'm gonna have some fun today." The Academic Board is the all-powerful board. The Academic Board is the big thing, academic board, department heads mostly make up the Academic Board. So I said, "I'm gonna have some fun with these guys," 'cause I was a colonel, I was a full colonel and they were lieutenant colonels, the department heads were lieutenant colonels. Now they're colonels, but at that time they were lieutenant colonels and I was a colonel. So I said, "I'm gonna have some fun with these guys." So we had to, we were out on Sabine Field, standing back where the tank is, milling around. So we had to march on to the field and they had a seat for us right in the middle of Sa-Sabine Field, seats. So I was to march them down on. I was the Registrar, so I said, "I'm gonna have some fun with these guys." I said, "I'll treat them like recruits." I said, "Alright Academic Board," I said there to the all-powerful board and department heads. I said alright "Academic Board, fall in!" Like they were a bunch of Rookies. I said, "Fall in!" And they fell in, they fell in, they knew what I meant. So we marched in and "I said, 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4," but I didn't shout like "1! 2! 3!" Just timed it, 1, 2, 3, 4, so we would be on step but the rest of them aren't supposed to hear necessarily. So we marched on the field, I halted them, and I said, "Fall out" and they fell out and went to the seats. Well, we were, I looked out at the men and the wives were there in the, in the, in the seats, you know out in the stadium, you know, and I looked around and they were laughing. I said "Boy, the girls are having a wonderful time." The wives of the department heads and everything, they were laughing and having a nice afternoon, they were laughing and everything. Well this cadet came up, he got some award, a corporal, he got some award. And it was the awards parade and they had some special academic awards or whatever awards they were. The Dean was pinning them on, Dean Perry, he went out with me, I took him down. I mean I walked down with him. And so he was a, this corporal I guess came up and he was pinning an award on him at the awards parade. And he turned as if to go back, as if he is going to go up into the stands then he Page 30 whirled around again to get back to where he was and he went down in a heap. And I said "Oh God," and I was looking, before that happened I looked and said, "What's that on the back of the dean's neck." It looked like an hourglass of red. I said, "What the hell is that on the Dean's neck?" I said, well, I don't know. So Lillian, his wife, came down crying cause he, I guess he had a little heart trouble but he tried to do, skate, ice skate and everything to stay in shape and to exercise his heart, you know. I didn't realize that till later on. So she came down crying, after they had been sitting there laughing and having a wonderful time. And all of the sudden [snaps] the switch turned and now she was crying. We didn't know it, but he dropped dead, dead on the parade ground. So they got the ambulance, loaded him into the ambulance and took him down here I guess. And ah, so when they went on with the awards parade, finished the parade, I couldn't tell you what happened, I don't think anybody. To hell with this parade, they just took our minds off worrying about the Dean. So when the Public Relations Officer, I didn't know his name, came to the gate we all rushed over to see how the Dean was and he said, "Well he is dead." Oh my God, what a shock. I tell you that, that, that whole summer we went up to Maine, to Popham Beach, and I didn't have any fun at all, really, I couldn't get him off my mind. Oh God, it was terrible. I had a terrible summer. And I remember this time, I went first day registering for classes and everything and I went there, and all of a sudden I got involved, I was in the midst of organizing something, my position there had me organize. And I swear the Lord put his hand on me and said, "Son, forget it." That's how I figured it out, just like turning on the switch I went from a miserable summer thinking about the Dean, I couldn't get him off my mind, and I went there and still felt bad and then bingo, I rolled up my sleeves and went to work. The weight just dropped right off and I said, "My God, the Lord just answered my prayer, I'm healed, I am ready to go to work." It was that fast. And that is when I began to believe in God. And that's how that went. JP: What was the hourglass on his neck? You said there was an hourglass on his neck. MHS: Well I don't know what it was. It was—showed up from the stands. It was red like an hourglass and I said, "I don't know if anybody else noticed it, probably did." I noticed it when I was sitting back there with the Academic Board. And you see, I was on the Academic Board as Registrar, without a vote. Well I didn't give a goddamn whether I voted or not, but I was on the Academic Board without vote, because of my position as Registrar. And so I sat there and looking for anything in particular and I did see that on his neck, and it was bright red, like an hourglass, spider. What's that spider that has an hourglass and is poisonous? JP: Oh, it's a black widow. MHS: Yeah, looked like a black widow spider and I didn't think anything of it, but it showed up and I was kind of, I sat in back and uh, I could see that. Then I poo-pooed the idea, I said, "Oh that's, that's nothing." But then he dropped, of course we didn't know whether he fainted or what it was, he dropped dead, and that whole summer I was, spoiled my summer, spoiled my whole summer. Page 31 JP: Was it a spider on his neck? MHS: I don't know what that was. I don't know what it was. Bright red. And I said "What is that on his neck?" I wasn't going to ask that. Then he dropped, and course we didn't know he died, we thought he could have just fainted, you know, but he dropped dead. And when the Public Relations Officer came through after the parade, I couldn't tell you what went on the parade, I don't think anybody else did either, paid attention to the parade. But they had the awards parade, and then I remember everybody rushed to the gate because the Public Relations man went up the ambulance that picked up the Dean. He came back and we knew he'd have the story on the Dean. So we all rushed to him to see how the dean was, and he said, "He is dead." JP: Oh my goodness. MHS: And let's see. And I remember so plainly. I of course spoiled my summer. That first day I, so I rolled up my sleeves and went to work and it was, I said, "It left me. It stayed with me all summer and bang!" so I turned on a light switch, and I said, "I'm done, I'm through with it, it's done, it's over with it. And I won't grieve no more. I won't grieve anymore." And I didn't and I marveled at what happened because I was—had such a miserable summer and I guess it was just to work, but like turning on a light switch. I went feeling miserable to I said, "I'm healed now, God made that, made that for me," that's what I said [chuckles]. JP: That's nice, that's nice, is there anything else you want to add about Norwich or your service? MHS: I really can't think of, it was important that I almost quit before I started [chuckles]. And Black, Black was—the Corps played tricks on Black7because Black was deaf. He had a hearing thing. He was pretty deaf. He had this hearing thing, he was always twisting it in his ear, everyone knew he was deaf. So they played a trick on him. One time the band was down at the end of the parade so they decided that they wouldn't play it, take their instruments and make believe they were playing and he wouldn't know the difference. So he walks out of here the band appeared to be playing and they weren't and he figured it was his hearing piece and cadets will do those things, you know, when a weakness, they're good at springing in there. [chuckles] They're clever that way JP: They are resourceful. Did you, when you rode horse, at Norwich, in the cavalry training, did you ride Roman style? Did you stand? Did you guys do that thing where you stand on the two horses? MHS: No, they had, no we didn't do that trick riding. We had, it was scheduled like a class, but, or the classes was every other day, meets 3 times a week, this equitation, everybody had to, was 7 LTC John W. Black, USA (ret) Commandant from 1953-1957 Page 32 a class, you got credit for it or met once a week, and that was in the, I guess the riding hall is still down there. Or the stables are there, I guess, not the riding hall is gone, and what you say now? JP: Did you get thrown at all? Or did everyone get thrown? MHS: Oh [clears throat] No. Once we were, we had a night ride and my horse we ended up in a ditch and it just wide enough for a horse and I was—I straddled the horse and I could get out, my feet were pinned in the trench, you know. It was a deep, deep trench, and it was dug, it was a trench I don't know what the purpose of it was. And I kept my feet out because it was wet in there and I got out but my horse couldn't get out. And they got, I don't know how, they got out, I've gone, but they had probably had to dig to get a pathway out, he was wedged right in there and all you could see was his head, [chuckles] head and his rump, with little bit of his rump. And just room enough so he filled that trench right up, you see? So I didn't see what they went through to get him out, of course they finally got the horse out. Now what did you say? JP: Did you get thrown? But it sounds like everybody… MHS: One time I did. I didn't get thrown, but we were galloping toward the, toward the stables and it was a free-for-all and we were going wide open. Well I was riding a horse named Ham, H-A-M, he slipped and he fell, and it landed probably by—my feet were in my stirrups but landed on my leg, but it didn't hurt me. It was a body, you know, soft, just soft and it didn't hurt me at all, didn't even make me lame, it didn't hurt me at all. And I don't know how it did get to stab- going into the stables. And well I was dismounted, because the horse stumbled and fell, so I went with the horse. That was the only time I ever fell off. JP: But the horse fell, yeah, wow. [pauses] You've done a lot of interesting things from flame throwing to… MHS: Probably, you know if you talk long enough, one things leads to another, and you, maybe one or two of them, most important things I probably haven't even mentioned yet, but I, like anybody else, like you or anybody else, you have certain experiences. And if you go off to visit and you come home, your parents want to know what you did, or somebody wants to know what you did and you try to recollect what you did. Things that impressed you. And I said so many things can happen in the situation I was in. I can, one thing can lead to another, probably two or three funny things that happen that I can't remember right now. The art, I went to theater in Morrisville, we called it Bijou Theater and they'd, before the main figure, they needed a comedy, short comedy. One reel, a comedy or a news. So this time I was sitting in the theater the Pathè News came on. It was a Norwich scene, and I said, and I said, I was so surprised, I remember the scene, I said, "I was there!" I don't know if anybody heard me in the theater. And here I was in the theater and here was a scene "I was there! I was there, "I said, "My God, I was there!" It was Pathè News and it was a big news company, worldwide, Pathè News, and somebody like Pathè, P-A-T-H-E, and everybody knew what Pathè News was. And they'd have either that or a comedy. [inaudible] I don't think anybody heard me when I said, "I was there," but I was. Page 33 JP: Where was, what was Pathè News covering? Was it overseas? MHS: It was, it was, they showed the events of Norwich, showed them coming down a steep hill, very steep hill and they're, horses were fighting, you know, as they went. Horses are well-trained, and I guess they have they trust the rider, he knows what he's doing, and they do, they have to trust the rider, so they knew didn't throw anybody, they knew they had to get down, and they were scooting, sliding, they couldn't walk or down or they had to slide down, down they went, dutifully down the steep hill. And Pathè News, which was a big news in those days, it was the big news and they recorded that scene, so that's why I said, "I was there." [chuckles] I was surprised, small world. Well as you try to recollect things, one thing leads, leads to another. If you ask me something, I go off on a tangent and probably have some remarks, yeah [chuckles]. JP: So you worked at Norwich and then you then retired, what did you do after you retired from Norwich? MHS: Let's see now. I retired, oh, I was in, oh I retired from Norwich… JP: In '70….? MHS: Oh I was Norwich for, oh I retired from Norwich, oh I guess went to, let's see. I retired from Norwich, where was I? Where was I living? I was in Chicago when I came home, I was in Chicago and [pauses] oh well I guess I retired. I just retired. Yeah I just retired. JP: So you retired here? MHS: Yeah, I had several incomes. I had 5 incomes, I can't remember all of them—TIA-CREF, a pension, Norwich salary, working at Norwich. And I remember I had 5 incomes. I had a rental income, so I had 5 incomes. So I had a good income, and when I— JP: Did you travel with Issy? Did you and Issy travel to the places? MHS: Well I, when in the Army, yes. Issy went with me. Took about 5 months for a dependent wife down in Japan. A dependent could not go to Japan. They could go to Europe, because that was all settled, but in Japan that came later on. So the wife, so after the war was over in Japan, it took about 5 months to get your dependent wife over. So I was in Japan and Issy joined me in Japan. Well she had a, it was a Washburn, it was teaching school, teaching American schools, just teaching Americans in schools in Japan. No Japanese, American dependents, children. And Issy, they were waiting, Washburn, her husband, she worked in the school system and she knew Issy was a teacher so they desperately need teachers. So I [she] said, "Has Issy got here yet, when's she coming and everything?" So Issy got there 11:00 in the morning and 1:00 she was teaching school, American children [chuckles] and so what we did, we lived—Issy she had a GS-7, that's a federal rating, you know the ratings? And she was a GS-7, which is officer, I mean, so Issy on her own, if she wasn't married to me, well that job she could go to an officer's club. IfPage 34 she was GS-5, she couldn't, but with a GS-7 she could go on her title to an officer's club. So now what were? JP: Issy traveling and teaching in Japan MHS: Yeah. She taught a—I think a graded school, then she had a special class of Japanese. And I didn't think Japanese were very goodly people but by golly, Issy, well she was at the wheel, she had this meeting and she passed out certificates. They passed a certain field in education, she trained them—she was the head of the school system, of that particular school system. And so Issy ran that show and I'm pretty proud of her and by gosh and I sat there and they'd come get their diplomas and oh they were so pleased those Japanese to get their diploma, and I look at them and for the first time I saw a beautiful Japanese girl. Most of them aren't very pretty, but by golly they were that day, I said, "By God, what a beautiful, beautiful girl, they came by me." The Japanese you have to get used to them, they have kind of a flat look like somebody slammed the door on their face or something there they, I couldn't see a pretty one there, but after I'd been there awhile there were some pretty Japanese girls. We had a maid, we were allowed two but we only wanted one. We had a male, he was a handsome Japanese man, young man, but he was a really handsome guy. He wasn't dependable so we let him go, he didn't show up when he felt like it. So we fired him. All we wanted was one anyway, and our quarters was just where we wanted it [phone goes off]. Our quarters were on a block. You could look down south of the yard and see all the shipping in the port. Oh it was a beautiful thing, we were up high and we'd look down and we were, my office was right down at the customs, customs building port of entry in Japan. And we'd, we'd, many a time there would be a cloud, you couldn't see anything, and you'd drive about a quarter or half mile, quarter or half mile, you'd be riding that cloud, when you're in it, you couldn't see much, but it was like a heavy fog. Then you'd come out of it, come out of it there's the blows all laid out for it. It was the headquarters, it was the port of entry for Japan, for commercial shipping, commercial shipping. And I had an office down there. JP: You liked Japan? MHS: I was up on the bluff. Oh I had a real, it was quarters and 388. "Oh I want those quarters." Well what they do, they post them as they come available. I knew 388 had, of all of quarters up on the bluff, way up, looking down, I said, "That is the one I want." Well they'd post - be 5 or 6 housing be available - and when your name got to the top, you got a choice, you take second place, second choice of those say ten or dozen available. And if you didn't take it, you're holding up someone, then your name went down to the bottom of the list. So you, so you couldn't get top and stay in the top. If you didn't take something, holding up for something better, you went down the bottom. So they said you couldn't do that. So I, my number didn't come up and wasn't my time to choose yet and I said, "Oh geez I hope that number doesn't come up too soon." And so my number came up, a group of people for housing, you like to stay there, at such time that you can get housing for you, you had to be there a little while before you got housing, say 10 days or something like that to get housing and that's it, oh man I said, 'Oh God, I Page 35 hope that 388 is there, if isn't I'm screwed, 'cause that's the one I wanted,' and it hadn't been on the list at all, my name was on it, that's where my lame name come up, then you got to choose, and if you don't, then you get down the bottom of the list, so you got to choose, and 'Bam' me, 388, and 'Bam,' just I wanted so I was high on the bluff and I could look down at the shipping and the port, it was way up high on the bluff, oh God it was nice. JP: What port was it, what was the name of the port, do you remember? MHS: The port? JP: Yeah, what town was it? MHS: I think it was the main port of entry, had a big huge beautiful brick building. JP: Was it Tokyo? MHS: Yeah, no, no Yokohama, Tokyo was about 17 miles I think it didn't take long because it had a beautiful, I think, 2 way highway between Yokohama and Tokyo. So you can get to Yokohama, you can be in Yokohama, and you can be in Tokyo in 20 minutes, you couldn't drive very fast. It had this beautiful road but the—I think you're limited 25 miles an hour, and I got stopped once I thought I was staying, and the GI, GI's they wrote me up I guess for speeding, I think I was going probably 26 miles an hour, something like that, and I got a ticket from a GI but he was authorized to do it, he was an MP. JP: What did you drive, what kind of car were you driving? MHS: I had a, I had Buicks, I had a new Buick, I bought a new Buick and two weeks after I bought it, I got my call to report to, I was in New England, in Vermont, to get, Seattle I think it was, a certain time no San Francisco, be in San Francisco. Then when I got in San Francisco, then Roosevelt directed me to Seattle, I got to San Francisco, then for two or three days, then they sent me to Seattle, so I shipped out of, originally it said San Francisco, but they sent me to San Francisco, I waited then they sent me to Seattle and I shipped out of Seattle for Japan, does that answer your question? JP: That's good, so you liked Japan? MHS: Yeah, so my—your car follows you by about 2 weeks so they ship your car but you have to wait about 2 weeks, before your car catches up with you. So I did, so I had a new Buick and I traded every year for a new Buick with the Japanese people, they're nice people and what I did was I'd buy a new Buick after a year I turned it in and they'd give me another new Buick. No deprecation or anything, so I got 3 brand new Buicks at no cost, and when I got home, I sold it for what I paid for it, you couldn't raise the price on a new car. That was a Japanese law, you couldn't raise a price on a new car, you could on a used car. So what they would do is buy a new car, and if you didn't want put it up on the market, then they'd probably double the money, you Page 36 couldn't sell a new car beyond the market price. Well I wanted a, they had 4 Cadillacs, well I guess I was—I was outranked or something another, I didn't get the Cadillac anyways, they only had 4. So I said to the Japanese, I said, 'Don't you now wished now you sold me the Cadillac, because I said I would sold it back to you?' that's what I did with my new Buick. I said I sold it back to you, double your money, and said, 'Yes we could have.' That was—I was too late. [chuckles] Background voice: I'm sorry to interrupt, we're about to leave, and we're about to pull out of the garage. JP: Oh, sure, well, do you have anything else you want to add Moe? MHS: Not unless, you have any questions. JP: I just want to thank you, truly for giving me the time and all this wonderful information. MHS: I like to rehash old times and I have to stop to think, to, you forget these things, but I was, I remember I felt like, I said, 'God's with me and I was an unknown major, and I had been there 3 days, and I was named the General Staff and I said, 'Uh huh,' I said, 'there must be hundreds of majors that would give their ITs to be on the General Staff,' and I was a new major, and somebody God, somebody lead me to them or me, and after 3 days I got a job on the General Staff, and I thank God for that, I said, 'God had a hand in that.' [chuckles] JP: That's certainly true, well you must have been good, [both interrupt] MHS: Oh well, I don't know…

In his recent address concerning the wars in Gaza and Ukraine and U.S. involvement in both, President Biden quoted the famous line by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, that America is "the indispensable nation." This is indeed the belief by which the U.S. foreign and security establishment lives and works. As Biden's speech reflected, it is one way in which the establishment justifies to American citizens the sacrifices that they are called on to make for the sake of U.S. primacy. It is also how members of the Blob pardon themselves for participation in U.S. crimes and errors. For however ghastly their activities and mistakes may be, they can be excused if they take place as part of America's "indispensable" mission to lead the world towards "freedom" and "democracy."It is therefore necessary to ask: Indispensable for what? Empty claims about the "Rules-Based Order" cannot answer this question. In the Greater Middle East, the answer should be obvious. I suppose that a different hegemon might have made an even bigger mess of the region at even greater cost to itself than the United States has succeeded in doing over the past 30 years, but it would have had to put some really serious effort into the task. Nor is it clear that the absence of a superpower hegemon could have made things any worse.In this time, not one beneficial U.S. effort at peace in the region has succeeded; few were even seriously attempted. And more than this, the U.S. has not even fulfilled the core positive role of any hegemon, that of providing stability. Instead, it has all too often acted a force of disorder: by invading Iraq and thereby enabling an explosion of Sunni Islamist extremism that went on to play a dreadful role in Syria as well; by pursuing through 20 years a megalomaniac strategy of externally-driven state-building in Afghanistan, in defiance of every lesson of Afghan history; by destroying the Libyan state, and thereby plunging the country into unending civil war, destabilizing much of northern Africa, and enabling a flood of migrants to Europe; by repeatedly wrecking or abandoning possibilities of a reasonable deal with Iran; and most gravely of all, by refusing to take an even remotely equitable approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict, and failing through the greater part of the past thirty years to make any serious effort to promote a settlement.Over the past generation, successive U.S. administrations turned a blind eye, not merely while the Likud governments slowly killed the "two-state solution" and stoked Palestinian and Arab rage through its settlement policy, but while Prime Minister Netanyahu deliberately helped build up Hamas as a force against the Palestine Liberation Organization, so as not to have to negotiate seriously with the latter. This strategy has now proved catastrophic for Israel itself. It was also carried out with no regard whatsoever to the interests of the United States or its European allies in the face of Islamist terrorism.And what have the American people themselves gained from this? Nothing at all, is the answer; while the losses can be precisely calculated: More than 15,000 soldiers and contractors killed in Afghanistan and Iraq; more than 50,000 wounded, and often disabled for life; more than 30,000 veteran suicides; 2,996 civilian dead on 9/11, an attack claimed by al-Qaida as a reprisal for U.S. Middle East policy; some $8 trillion subsequently expended in the "Global War on Terror."Elsewhere in the world, the U.S. record has not been so disastrous, but nor has it remotely justified claims to the necessity of U.S. primacy. The only area where this has been broadly true is in Europe. In World War II and the Cold War, the United States liberated western Europe and defended democracy there; while in the rest of the world, all too often it stepped into the shoes of European colonialism. After the Cold War, populations in eastern Europe genuinely welcomed U.S. protection — though Biden's claim that if not stopped in Ukraine, Putin will invade Poland is baseless. Russia has neither the will nor the capacity to do so; and in any case, if NATO membership is not a sufficient deterrent, what was the point of offering NATO membership to Ukraine?Outside Europe, the only region where the United States can truly be said to have played a largely positive role to date is East Asia (the Vietnam War obviously excepted), and for the same reason: that Japan and South Korea welcome alliance with the United States. And while other states, like the Philippines, wish to balance between America and China, they do not wish America to leave. This role however requires U.S. presence, not U.S. primacy. Since China cannot invade Japan and South Korea — let alone Australia — the United States can perfectly well stand on the defensive behind its existing alliance systems, while sharing influence elsewhere with Beijing.As to Africa, countries there do not have conflicts with each other that America has to control or mediate. Africa's problems are internal, and the U.S. has done very little since 9/11 and the Global War on Terror to help. The recent increase of U.S. interest in Africa is mainly a reaction to Russia's and China's growing commercial stake there.Strangest and most striking of all is the U.S. role in its own backyard, in Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, whose problems really do affect the population of the United States. As in Africa, the United States does not need to suppress local conflicts between states, for these have long since ceased. Once again, the threats are internal, but are also driven to a very great extent by the demand for illegal drugs in the United States. One result of the internal decay of these countries is the huge flow of migrants to the United States, which is causing blowback and political discord in America itself.Faced with this threat, and concerned with the interests of U.S. citizens, it might be assumed that the regional hegemon would prioritize this region and devote serious resources to its development. This would also be in tune with the "foreign policy for the middle class" that Biden promised in his election campaign.In fact, the comparative figures for U.S. aid are positively grotesque. Total U.S. development aid to Mexico and all of Central America since 2001 comes to $12.21 billion. This compares to $64.8 billion to Israel and $32.8 billion to Egypt. Even Georgia has received almost twice as much aid as Mexico ($3.9 billion to $2.1 billion) — and Georgia is 6,000 miles from the shores of the United States with a population less than one thirtieth that of Mexico. Faced with problems from Mexico spilling over into the United States, some leading Republican politicians are now calling not for more assistance, but for the U.S. military to be deployed in Mexico to fight drug traffickers — an insane idea that reveals the moral and practical bankruptcy of U.S. primacy on its own continent.The neglect of America's neighbors to the south reveals something else about U.S. primacy: that whatever a region's problems, the U.S. only becomes engaged if it sees a real or alleged danger that a rival power is taking an interest. This could be called the approach of the dog in a manger elevated to a basic strategic principle. It is well summed up in an article by Suzanne Maloney of the Brookings Institution about the previous — and disastrous — attempt of the Biden administration partially to pull back from the Middle East without solving the basic problems there:"The White House devised a creative exit strategy, attempting to broker a new balance of power in the Middle East that would allow Washington to downsize its presence and attention while also ensuring that Beijing did not fill the void."If the U.S. really wants to pull back from the Middle East, it should welcome other states trying to play a positive role — as China has done by promoting détente between Iran and Saudi Arabia.The pursuit of global primacy is also intellectually and morally corrupting for Americans themselves. To justify its costs and sacrifices to ordinary Americans requires on the one hand vastly overblown claims to the promotion of democracy, on the other a colossal exaggeration of both the threat and the evil of other states. The result is a public discourse that all too often resembles baby food spiked with cyanide — the pap being the language of America spreading freedom, and the poison being that of mistrust for other countries and their peoples. Even if a successful — if not "indispensable" — U.S. global primacy were possible, it could not be based on a foundation as corruptive as this.

Hamas's horrific attacks last weekend and the subsequent Israeli bombings of Gaza have put the entire world on edge. Beyond concerns for the fate of the 2.2 million Palestinians trapped in Gaza with nowhere to flee, there is also a palpable fear that the conflict will escalate into a region-wide war. None of the main actors — with the possible exception of Hamas — want or benefit from such a war, yet all sides are acting in a manner that increases its risk by the day. There is little to suggest that Israel or Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seek to widen the war. The chaos in Israel and his government's failure to not only prevent the attack but also manage its aftermath defies the idea that he was preparing or yearning for a larger war. Israel would indeed find itself in a precarious situation if it ends up in a two-front war with Hezbollah attacking Israel from the north.There is also nothing to suggest that Hezbollah desires a war with Israel either, despite the Wall Street Journal reporting that Hamas had coordinated the attack with Hezbollah and Iran. Hamas alone attacked Israel, and there was no simultaneous or subsequent large-scale attack from the north. Given Lebanon's dire economic situation — it is in its fourth year of a deep economic and political crisis, with inflation at 350% and 42% of the total population facing acute food insecurity — war with Israel would risk bringing the entire nation to a breaking point. Similarly, there is no evidence that Tehran would benefit from a larger war. As a European diplomat put it to me, "Iran prefers a low-intensity conflict with Israel, not open warfare." The regime in Tehran has just survived one of the greatest challenges to its rule and appears relieved that the anniversary of the killing of Mahsa Amini did not reignite these protests on a large scale. Its economy is also in dire straits, and its focus has mainly been on reaching a de-escalation understanding with Washington that would secure the release of Iranian funds and the softening of the enforcement of US sanctions on Iranian oil sales. Rather than coordinating the attack with Hamas, Tehran was taken by surprise, according to US intelligence. Tehran has also taken the unusual step of sending a message to Israel through the United Nations, stressing that it seeks to avoid further escalation. It has, however, warned that it will be compelled to intervene if Israel continues bombing Gaza.If there is any rationality in the Biden administration's Middle East policy, it too will oppose further escalation of the fighting. Between the war in Ukraine and a potential crisis with China over Taiwan, the Biden administration simply cannot afford a broader war in the region. The administration's focus — however misguided —has instead been on securing a normalization agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia. The White House has been so obsessed with this idea that they have even begun considering offering the Saudi rulers a security pact as well as nuclear enrichment technology. War in the Middle East has not been on Biden's agenda. Finally, the Arab states in the region, from Egypt to Syria to Saudi Arabia, have nothing to gain and much to lose from a larger war. Egypt fears a massive influx of Gazans into the Sinai that, in the words of David Hearst, has the "potential to tip Egypt over the edge after a decade of economic decline." Syria's Bashar al-Assad has been focused on normalizing relations with Sunni Arab states and re-entering the Arab League — critical both for his political rehabilitation and Syria's economic rebuilding. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman — who was on the verge of normalizing relations with Israel and throwing the Palestinians under the bus — felt compelled to revive Saudi Arabia's traditionally pro-Palestinian profile given the wider Arab world's immense anger over Israel's bombing of Gaza. His call this week with Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi — the first time the two ever spoke — was at least partly motivated by a desire not to cede leadership on this issue to Tehran. Both a bloodbath in Gaza and a broader war will severely complicate his ambition to assert himself as the undisputed leader of the Arab world, given his neglect of and disdain for the Palestinians. Despite clear interests on almost all sides against a regional war, all sides are acting in a manner that makes such a war increasingly likely. If Israel's invasion of Gaza proves successful in terms of decimating Hamas, Hezbollah may feel compelled to intervene — not necessarily to save Hamas, but to save itself. A successful Israeli campaign against Hamas will tilt the balance in the region, with Israel having freer hands to go after Hezbollah. An attack from the north by Hezbollah may not save Hamas as much as it will make it too costly for the Netanyahu government to extend the war into Lebanon after Hamas has been defeated. Hezbollah may not be able to prevent an Israeli victory, but it will have a compelling interest to turn it pyrrhic. Hezbollah's involvement, in turn, will bring Iran much more directly into the conflict. While declaring its opposition to a wider war, Iran's Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian has warned that unless Israel stops its attacks, the war will be widened and that Israel will suffer "a huge earthquake." With Iran and Hezbollah drawn into the conflict, the Biden administration will be under tremendous pressure to intervene militarily despite clear U.S. interest in staying out. There is little in Biden's conduct thus far that suggests that, in this scenario, he will prioritize America's long-term strategic interest over what is politically expedient for him in the immediate term. Direct American military intervention in Gaza, or against Hezbollah and Iran, is all but certain to generate major attacks against U.S. troops and interests throughout the Middle East by armed groups supported by Tehran. Militias in Iraq and Yemen have already issued stern warnings of a multi-front response to any American intervention. The White House is well aware of these escalation risks. At a meeting earlier this year between two senior American officials and a high-level representative of the Iranian government, one of the Americans warned Tehran that if it enriched uranium to 90% purity, the U.S. would strike Iran militarily. Without skipping a beat, the Iranian official responded that Iran would respond immediately by destroying fourteen American bases in the region by raining thousands of rockets on them within 24 hours.It is in this context that the Biden administration's refusal to call for de-escalation and a ceasefire — or to practically pressure Israel to exercise its right to defend itself within the confines of international law — is so problematic. It is not just the moral bankruptcy of the Biden White House to stand in the way of efforts to end the crisis (shocking internal emails have revealed that State Department officials have been prohibited from using terms such as de-escalation, ceasefire, ending the bloodshed, and restoring calm). It is not the blatant disregard for human life shown by the White House when its spokesperson blasts Democratic lawmakers advocating for a ceasefire and calls them "repugnant."It is also the strategic malpractice of giving Israel a carte blanche to act as it wishes despite knowing and understanding the tremendous risk that Israel's unrestrained actions in Gaza can drag Washington into a wider regional war that neither serves the interest of the U.S. nor Israel. The combination of issuing warnings to Hezbollah and Iran to show restraint, while demanding no restraint from Israel, may be politically expedient for Biden, but it is likely to produce the very nightmare scenario Biden presumably seeks to avoid. As Ben Rhodes from the Obama White House put it in his podcast this past week, counseling restraint and calls "to follow the laws of war, are not to show a lack of regard for what Israel has gone through. On the contrary, it's kind of what I wish someone had done for the United States after 9/11."But Biden is not only giving Israel bad advice. He is giving Israel bad advice that risks getting thousands of Americans killed in yet another senseless and preventable war in the Middle East. If he lacks the humanity to call for a ceasefire to prevent the killing of thousands of Palestinians, he should at least not abdicate his responsibility as President of the United States to keep Americans out of the killing zone.

The city has been the political unit of organization in the international system for long periods of history. As actors in international society, cities have left irreplaceable classics: Athens, Imperial Rome, the Hanseatic League or Machiavelli's Florence. However, the dominant school of thought has diminished the role of the city on the international scene. The Westphalian model consolidated the nation-state as the axis and macro-political unit object and subject of study. Following this logic, cities' capacity for international action was limited and, as a field of study, was reduced to cultural activities or of little diplomatic relevance (e.g. twin cities). This state-centered approach, both in theory and practice, finds its place in the legal approach over the political one in the development of international society and international relations theories. However, the global dynamic has changed substantially, and it opens the door to new structures or vectors of transnational analysis. The Westphalian system loses weight in the face of the concatenation of phenomena and transformations of international society. Taking this to be the case, the current international structure opens avenues of research in the international political activity of the city, diplomatic practice, global and economic hub relations, or the rise of city brands as a marketing strategy. Of course, the nation-state will not disappear in the short term, but it does seem that new actors and dynamics are emerging in the construction of the post-liberal order. Above all, the city emerges as a new point of reference for solving globalization problems: climate change, migrations, diversity, or identity. The effect is relevant to the epistemological bases of a transversal discipline: the city is incorporated as a reference subject in the reformulation of the general theory of International Relations. The consensus around the liberal order, born after 1945, has been broken. The current theoretical doctrine only agrees on one element: there is no new consensus on the foundations of the international system. The global architecture of institutions, the effective capacities for the exercise of power, the decline of multilateral practices, or the difficulty in establishing a common economic agenda are symptoms of a change in global power structures. With or without legitimacy, cities act in the international sphere with the aim of influencing, modifying knowledge, behavior, or judgment. In this context, the institutionalization of the city as an actor in international relations is one of the most relevant fields for studying the new organizing principle of international society. The city lacks the normative and institutional instruments, but it does promote principles that later become public policy practices that affect the international order. The theoretical approach emphasizes the economic aspects of the global city, since the economic and industrial capacity has reinforced the ability to influence the transformation of the international system. From a methodological point of view, urban cosmopolitanism is not a theory closed by the very diversity of global cities. Therefore, the areas of interest of each city can vary from one to the other, as well as the global action repertoire. Working in collaborative networks and alliances of a political and economic nature is facilitated. In its relationship with the State, the global city poses agency problems that are relevant to the future of theory: will they be cooperative or competitive? In what disciplines? The asymmetry of interests can deepen dissonances and accelerate the theoretical basis of development. The proposed methodology affects the impact of climate change on the reformulation of the theoretical bases of international studies. It is theorized from practice. The institutionalization of urban diplomacy refers to the search for practical solutions of a collective nature. There are networks such as C40, the Clean Air Coalition or We are Still In that are led and organized from urban practice. The climate issue gives moral strength to the city as an international actor insofar as it does not deal with political borders, but with the consequences of climate change on the lives of residents. It fits in with the cosmopolitan tradition insofar as it affects all individuals, without discrimination of origin, gender, or nationality; and it is a matter of universal status, because it impacts all territories and human life conditions. There is no arbitrariness in Anthropocene reason. The article studies the succession of changes in the international political structure before the reconfiguration of the sources of power. It establishes three aspects in the theoretical bases of urban cosmopolitanism. The first indicates what the foundations of a theoretical elaboration should be. The international city contributes to the reconfiguration of the structure and the exercise of interstate power by occupying or creating new spaces that contribute to the plurality of international relations. The second aspect analyzed is the growth of the city as a unit of measurement in the global economy. Capital flows circulate and operate on a local basis with global destinations. It is the cities and their metropolitan areas that benefit from the economic system. Large pockets of internal inequality appear and, above all, with a rupture between cities within and outside the economic order, including the relational inequality that is generated in the least populated territories. Finally, anthropogenic reason is stressed, that is, the impact of human action on natural conditions and its consequences on the world order. Climate change changes the main substrate of international relations, which is the physical environment and geography. On these two tangible dimensions, the bases of power and the basic theory of international studies are ordered. By changing the strategic board, the city conquers positions of non-coercive power, facilitating collaboration through networks and structures. The military and security aspect are not relevant to urban diplomacy, which focuses on aspects of economic and social power. The results indicate that the new cosmopolitanism has urban bases and offers a framework for interpreting the tensions between the center and the periphery of foreign action, economic globalization, and new public policies in the fight against climate change. Urban cosmopolitanism emerges as a theoretical reference in the post-liberal order. The present work seeks to establish the foundations of urban cosmopolitanism, a theoretical approach to the current world organized around urban areas, be they cities, megacities, or metropolitan regions. Cities have become structural axes of international society with consequences in the political, economic, and social spheres. There is no closed conclusion, a kind of theory that replaces the previous ones. On the contrary, urban cosmopolitanism aspires to reflect a change in the paradigm of international relations. Thus, climate change is a transforming element of the global scene and opens new avenues for international politics, which can end with a substantial change in the modes of government, representation, and citizen participation. Be that as it may, this first paper addresses difficulties, raises research questions, and supports elements for change. ; El artículo estudia la sucesión de cambios en la estructura política internacional ante la reconfiguración de las fuentes de poder. Establece tres vertientes en las bases teóricas del cosmopolitismo urbano. La primera indica cuáles deberían ser los fundamentos de una elaboración teórica. La ciudad internacional contribuye a la reconfiguración de la estructura y el ejercicio del poder interestatal ocupando o creando nuevos espacios que contribuyen a la pluralidad de las Relaciones Internacionales. El segundo aspecto que se analiza es el crecimiento de la ciudad como unidad de medida en la economía global. Los flujos de capital circulan y operan sobre una base local con destinos globales. Son las ciudades y sus extensiones metropolitanas quienes se benefician del sistema económico. Aparecen grandes bolsas de desigualdad interna y, sobre todo, con una ruptura entre ciudades dentro y fuera del orden económico, incluyendo aquí la desigualdad relacional que se genera en los territorios menos poblados. Por último, se incide en la razón antropocénica, esto es, el impacto de la acción humana en las condiciones naturales y sus consecuencias en el orden mundial. El cambio climático cambia el sustrato principal de las Relaciones Internacionales, que es el medio físico y la geografía. Sobre estas dos dimensiones tangibles, se ordenan las bases del poder y la teoría básica de los estudios internacionales. Al cambiar el tablero estratégico, la ciudad conquista posiciones de poder no coercitivo, lo que facilita la colaboración mediante redes y estructuras. El aspecto militar y de seguridad no es relevante para la diplomacia urbana, que se centra en aspectos de poder económico y social. Los resultados indican que el nuevo cosmopolitismo tiene bases urbanas y ofrece un marco de interpretación de las tensiones entre centro y periferia de la acción exterior, la globalización económica y las nuevas políticas públicas en la lucha contra el cambio climático. El cosmopolitismo urbano emerge como referencia teórica en el orden postliberal.

Botulinum neurotoxins (BoNT) are among the deadliest known toxins, are relatively easy to produce and have been incorporated into military weapons. Therefore they have been ranked as an agent with highest priority concerning threats of bioterrorism. In addition to the potential deliberate misuse of BoNT, natural outbreaks in farming and food manufacturing also constitute a typical point-of-care (POC) scenario for BoNT detection. In such a scenario fast (< 1 h), portable and automated, on-site detection of unknown BoNT types and forms is required. Existing POC systems for BoNT detection are suitable in specific fields of applications but are of limited use in such a scenario for several reasons. Possible disadvantages include: (i) the assay format does not allow for detection of a broad range of BoNT type and forms; (ii) the stage of developments are proof of concepts rather than thoroughly developed platforms; (iii) they are non-automated or (iv) have been developed on immobile laboratory devices; (v) important engineering aspects such as the reagent pre-storage or fabrication methods are neglected. In this thesis all these limitations are addressed, starting with the long-term storage and fabrication method: Reagent storage presents a major challenge, not only for BoNT detection but for POC detection in general. On-chip pre-storage and automated release of reagents would circumvent on-site pipetting steps which are otherwise necessary. This challenge is first addressed in this thesis with an ultrasonic welding parameter-study that allows for sealing reagents in aluminium / polyethylene (PE) composite film. These seals can be designed to open at defined burst pressures to release the reagents. The sealing time, pressure and amplitude were varied within the range of 100 – 400 ms, 50 – 250 kPa, and 12 – 24 µm, respectively. T-peel tests and electron micrographs revealed four different peel regimes, depending on the parameter combination: (I) Interlaminar peeling at low peel strength with uniform peeling along a weakly bonded PE lamination layer; (II) transition tearing at intermediate peel strength showing areas of interlaminar peeling and translaminar tearing; (III) translaminar tearing at high peel strength showing tears through the entire film; and, (IV) undefined tearing at varying tear strength occurring when vibration effects during welding lead to insufficient contact of the films or high pressures lead to a displacement of PE. This study allows the systematic adjustment of ultrasonic welding parameters for PE films. The parameter study was subsequently applied to tubular-shaped foil pouches called stick-packs. Stick-packaging has become a popular technology for food and drug packaging. In this study this technology has been miniaturized for use in lab-on-a-chip (LOAC) systems to pre-store and release liquid and dry reagents on-demand in a volume range of 80 – 500 µl. An integrated frangible seal enables the pressure-controlled release of reagents and simplifies the layout of LOAC systems, thereby making the package a functional microfluidic release unit. The frangible seal is adjusted to defined burst pressures ranging from 20 to 140 kPa. The applied ultrasonic welding process allows the packaging of temperature sensitive reagents. Stick-packs have been successfully tested applying recovery tests (where 99 % (STDV = 1 %) of 250 µl pre-stored liquid is released), long-term storage tests (where there is loss of < 0.5 % for simulated 2 years) and air transport simulation tests. The developed technology also enables the storage of a combination of liquid and dry reagents. It is a scalable technology suitable for rapid prototyping and low-cost mass production. In the final development a POC platform is presented that detects BoNT type A and E and all their subtypes and forms. A highly sensitive luciferase reporter assay has been automated by the centrifugal microfluidic LabDisk platform. The assay is based on the detection of BoNT's proteolytic activity and generation of a bioluminescent signal. This signal is caused by the release of luciferase which is pre-bound to microbeads via a peptide linker cleaved by BoNT. It detected purified BoNT holotoxin, BoNT in complex with neurotoxin associated proteins, and the recombinant enzymatic BoNT light chain in buffer and whole milk in the concentration range of 8 pM – 6 nM with a limit of detection of 6 – 14 pM. The intra-disk, intra-day and inter-day variability were in the range of 1 – 13 %, 1 – 7 % and 10 – 13 %, respectively. The developed LabDisk assay correlated well with the conventional microwell plate assay. It is superior to the conventional BoNT assays in terms of portability, lesser sample requirement, lesser number of working steps and detection of broad spectrum of BoNT types and forms. It takes only 30 minutes for 7 tests in parallel, which is ideal for POC detection of BoNT in case of security threats and food monitoring. The developed microfluidic chip has further potential to perform more tests in parallel or even to incorporate additional sample pre-treatment. With the cleavable linker that is sensitive to serotypes A, E and all their subtypes and forms, the LabDisk already detects a broad range of the most common types causing human botulism. An additional cleavable linker for further serotypes could enable the detection of the entire BoNT spectrum. This would not require changing the fluidic design or handling of the LabDisk. Furthermore the platform developed in this study is not only a proof of concept but has been validated under conditions that reflect real POC requirements. ; Botulinum Neurotoxine (BoNT) gehören zu den stärksten bekannten Toxinen, sind relativ einfach herstellbar und wurden bereits in militärischen Waffen integriert. Daher finden sich BoNT in der Kategorie von Toxinen, von denen die größte Bedrohung durch Bioterrorismus ausgeht. Neben der möglichen vorsätzlichen Freisetzung von BoNT treten auch natürliche Ausbrüche in der Tierhaltung und Lebensmittelherstellung auf, in denen Vor-Ort-Analysen benötigt werden. In solchen Szenarien werden schnelle (< 1 Stunde), tragbare und automatisierte Analysen von unbekannten BoNT-Typen und -Formen verlangt. Bereits entwickelte Vor-Ort-Systeme für die BoNT-Detektion haben zwar ihre Berechtigung in spezifischen Anwendungsgebieten, sie sind aber in einem der beschriebenen Notfallszenarien nur bedingt brauchbar: (I) Entweder erlaubt der Assay nicht die Detektion eines breiten BoNT-Spektrums, (II) das System wurde lediglich als Konzeptstudie beschrieben und liegt nicht als umfänglich entwickelte Plattform vor, (III) es sind nicht automatisierte Systeme, (IV) sie basieren auf stationären Laborgeräten oder (V) wichtige technische Aspekte, wie die Reagenzienvorlagerung und Fabrikationsprozesse wurden nicht berücksichtigt. Im praktischen Teil dieser Arbeit werden diese erwähnten Beschränkungen ausgearbeitet, beginnend mit der Reaganzienvorlagerung: Eine große Herausforderung in der Entwicklung von Vor-Ort-Analysen ist die langzeitstabile Vorlagerung von Reagenzien und deren automatisierte Freisetzung in Lab-on-a-Chip (LOAC) Systemen. Eine in dieser Arbeit durchgeführte Parameterstudie für das Ultraschallschweißen erlaubt die Verpackung von Reagenzien in Aluminium/Polyethylen-Verbundfolie. Die Siegelnähte der verschweißten Verpackung können so ausgelegt werden, dass sie bei einem definierten Druck delaminieren und die Reagenzien freisetzen. Die Siegezeit, der Schweißdruck und die Ultraschall-Amplitude wurden im Bereich 100 – 400 ms, 50 – 250 kPa und 12 – 24 µm variiert und deren Einfluss auf die Siegelstärke untersucht. Mit T-Peeltests und elektronenmikroskopischen Aufnahmen konnten vier Delaminationsbereiche in Abhängigkeit der Siegelparameter identifiziert werden: (I) Interlaminares Delaminieren bei tiefer Peelstärke mit einheitlicher Rissfläche entlang der Polyethylen-Schichten; (II) der Übergangsbereich mit mittlerer Peelstärke, in dem teilweise interlaminares und translaminares Delaminieren auftritt; (III) translaminares Delaminieren bei hoher Peelstärke, wobei sich die Risse nicht mehr entlang der beiden Folienschichten, sondern durch das ganze Polyethylen ausbreiten; (IV) undefiniertes Delaminieren wenn Vibrationseffekte während des Schweißvorganges zu ungenügendem Kontakt der Folien führen oder zu hohe Drücke das Polyethylen während des Schweißvorganges verdrängen, was zu unterschiedlichen Peelstäken führt. Die durchgeführte Studie erlaubt eine systematische Anpassung der Ultraschall-Parameter für Polyethylen-Folien, um definierte Peelstärken zu erhalten. Die Parameterstudie fand ihre Anwendung im Verschweißen von Folienbeuteln, sogenannten Stickpacks, in denen Reagenzien vorgelagert werden. Die Stickpack-Technologie wird bereits im Bereich der Lebensmittelverpackung und der Pharmazie vielseitig eingesetzt. In dieser Studie wurde die Verpackungstechnologie für den Einsatz in LOAC Systemen miniaturisiert. Dies erlaubt die Vorlagerung und definierte Freisetzung von Flüssig- und Trockenreagenzien in einem Volumenbereich von 80 – 500 µl. Die integrierte peelbare Siegelnaht ermöglicht eine druckgesteuerte Freisetzung der Reagenzien. Somit ist in die eigentliche Verpackung ein zusätzlicher Freisetz-Mechanismus integriert. Der geringe Wärmeeintrag des Ultraschall-Prozesses erlaubt dazu, auch temperaturempfindliche Reagenzien zu verpacken. Die Siegelnaht wurde für Delaminationsdrücke im Bereich 20 – 140 kPa eingestellt und untersucht. Die Stickpacks entleeren sich nahezu vollständig (99 % ± 1 % STDV bei 250 µl), besitzen eine hohe Barriereeigenschaft (Verlust < 0.5 % bei simulierter 2-jähriger Lagerung) und widerstehen standardisierte Flugtransport-Tests. Die Verpackung erlaubt zudem auch die kombinierte Vorlagerung von Flüssig- und Trockenreagenzien. Die Technologie wurde bereits auf einer industriellen Verpackungsanlage entwickelt, was einen direkten und kostengünstigen Transfer in die Massenproduktion erlaubt. Abschließend wurde eine Vor-Ort-Plattform entwickelt, die alle Subtypen und Formen von BoNT/A und E detektiert. Ein hochsensitiver Luciferase Reporter Assay wurde in einen mikrofluidischen Chip integriert und mit einem zentrifugalen System, der LabDisk Plattform, automatisiert. Der Assay detektierte die enzymatische Aktivität von BoNT über ein an Mikrobeads gebundenes spaltbares Polypeptid, welches Luciferase freisetzt und ein Biolumineszenzsignal generiert. Der Assay reagierte auf das isolierte BoNT Holotoxin, die mit assoziierten Proteinen komplexierte Form (BoNT complex) und die rekombinante enzymatische leichte Kette von BoNT (BoNT-LC) im Konzentrationsbereich von 8 pM – 6 nM mit einer Nachweisgrenze von 6 – 14 pM. Die Intra-Disk-, Intra- und Inter-Tages-Variabilitäten lagen im Bereich 1 – 13 %, 1 – 7 % und 10 – 13 %. Der entwickelte LabDisk Assay liefert vergleichbare Daten zu dem laborbasierten Mikrotiterplatten-Assay und übertrifft konventionelle Systeme für BoNT hinsichtlich Portabilität, kleinerer Probenmenge, geringere Anzahl an Arbeitsschritte und der Detektion eines breiten Spektrums an BoNT Subtypen und Formen. Eine LabDisk prozessiert sieben individuelle Tests parallel in 30 Minuten. Diese Leistungsdaten machen die LabDisk Plattform ideal für die Vor-Ort-Detektion im Sicherheitsbereich oder in der Lebensmittelüberwachung. Die mikrofluidische LabDisk bietet weiteres Potenzial, noch mehr Tests parallel zu integrieren oder eine zusätzliche Probenaufarbeitung vorzuschalten. Mit dem spaltbaren Polypeptid, welches auf die Serotypen A, E und alle entsprechenden Subtypen und Formen reagiert, detektiert die LabDisk bereits ein breites Spektrum der meist verbreiteten Typen, die den humanen Botulismus verursachen. Mit einem zusätzlichen Peptid, welches auf weitere Serotypen reagiert, kann die Detektion des gesamten BoNT Spektrums ermöglicht werden. Diese Änderung hätte jedoch keinen Einfluss auf die bereits entwickelte Fluidik der LabDisk oder deren Handhabung. Eine solche LabDisk kann direkt angewandt werden, da das entwickelte System keinesfalls eine bloße Machbarkeitsstudie darstellt sondern bereits unter Bedingungen validiert wurde, die den Anforderungen einer Vor-Ort-Detektion entsprechen.

Die Zielsetzung der Arbeit ist eine Bewertung der Demokratien in vier Ländern: Deutschland, Frankreich, Spanien und Portugal. Innerhalb der Demokratieforschung gab es in den letzten Jahren eine Entwicklung weg von der Einstufung der politischen Systeme in Demokratie-Autokratie zu unterschiedlichen Abstufungen von Demokratie bzw. der Qualität von Demokratie (Pickel/Pickel 2006:152; Fuchs/Roller 2008:77; Schmidt 2000, 2002, Lauth 2004; Berg-Schlosser 1999). Anhand von Indikatoren und Messindizes wird versucht, die Demokratiegrade von vier unterschiedlichen Ländern in vergleichender Weise herauszufinden. Der Vergleich zwischen bereits etablierten Demokratien stellt dabei eine besondere Herausforderung dar. Anhand der Darstellung der verschiedenen theoretischen Konzepte innerhalb des Forschungsstandes der Demokratieforschung, wie z. B. von R. A. Dahl (1989, 1998), David Beetham (1993, 1994, 2003), Merkel et al. (2003) und Leonardo Morlino (2004) wird gezeigt, dass alle Konzepte von einem Mindeststandard ausgehen, um von Demokratie sprechen zu können. Der Ansatz von Merkel et al. (2003) der "Defekten Demokratie" liegt unterhalb des Schwellenwertes. Die Ansätze von Beetham (1993, 1994, 2004), der "Democratic Audit" sowie der von Morlino (2004), ",Good' and ,Bad' Democracies: How to Conduct Research into the Quality of Democracy", erfassen die Qualität von Demokratien, womit sie oberhalb des genannten Schwellenwertes liegen. In der vorliegenden Forschungsarbeit wird das Konzept der "Defekten Demokratie" von Merkel et al. (2003) herangezogen, da nicht ausgeschlossen werden kann, dass in den ausgewählten Ländern Defekte vorliegen. Morlinos Konzept (2004) wurde aus zwei Gründen ausgewählt: Erstens zielt es im Unterschied zu dem Ansatz der "Defekten Demokratie" auf die Ermittlung der Qualität von Demokratien ab, d. h. also von politischen Systemen, die zweifelsfrei eine Demokratie sind, und zweitens handelt es sich um ein sehr systematisch entwickeltes Konzept. Anhand der Ansätze von Merkel et al. (2003), Morlino (2004) und deren Fallstudien, die im Rahmen dieser Forschungsarbeit analysiert werden, müssen geeignete Indikatoren gefunden werden, um die Defekte und die Qualität der Demokratien der Länder Deutschland, Frankreich, Spanien und Portugal messen zu können. Hinsichtlich der Indikatoren ergab sich ein etwas überraschendes Problem: Obwohl Merkels Ansatz (2003) Defekte und Morlinos Ansatz (2004) die Qualität von Demokratien bestimmt, gibt es viele inhaltliche Überschneidungen zwischen den Ansätzen, d. h. dass zum Teil gleiche Indikatoren innerhalb der beiden Konzepte verwendet werden. Dieser Sachverhalt nötigte zu einer genauen Festlegung, welcher Indikator welches theoretische Konstrukt messen soll. Bei einigen dieser Indikatoren mussten Ergänzungen als auch inhaltliche Modifikationen, sowie bei einigen wenigen ein Ausschluss vorgenommen werden. Bezüglich der Messung der Demokratien haben beide Konzepte Vorschläge unterbreitet, die in vorliegender Forschungsarbeit zuerst aufgeführt und anschließend diskutiert werden. Da aber beide Konzepte zu keiner vollkommen zufriedenstellenden Lösung führen, wurde ein kombiniertes Messinstrument entwickelt. Dieses beruht auf einer dichotomen Bewertung bezüglich jedes Indikators beider Konzepte, d. h. die Indikatoren bei Merkel et al. (2003) werden als "defekt" oder als "nicht defekt" sowie die Indikatoren bei Morlino (2004) als "Qualitätsmerkmal" oder als "kein Qualitätsmerkmal" bewertet. Dabei werden alle Indikatoren als gleichwertig behandelt, um mögliche Probleme bezüglich der Gewichtung zwischen den Teilregimen bzw. den Dimensionen, die z. B. bei Morlino (2004) auftraten, auszuschließen. Anhand der Summe der Defekte und der Qualitätsmerkmale der jeweiligen Länder kann hinsichtlich deren Qualität der Demokratie eine Abstufung erfolgen. Die empirischen Ergebnisse zeigen, dass in allen vier Ländern sowohl Defekte vorliegen, aber auch Merkmale, die für die Qualität der Demokratien der jeweiligen Länder sprechen. Unter Verwendung des kombinierten Messinstruments ergab sich, dass Deutschland am besten abschnitt. Danach kann mit einem signifikanten Abstand Portugal, anschließend Frankreich und zuletzt Spanien positioniert werden. Positiv bewertet werden kann in allen vier Ländern das Wahlregime, die Assoziationsfreiheit, der politische Pluralismus sowie die effektive Regierungsgewalt bezüglich des Verhältnisses Politik und Militär. Weitere besondere Stärken liegen bei der Bundesrepublik Deutschland hinsichtlich der Unabhängigkeit der Justiz und des Bundesverfassungsgerichts, der Souveränität des Rechtstaates sowie der Souveränität der Verfassung vor. Positiv konnte für Spanien und Portugal die Einhaltung internationaler und europäischer Vorgaben bewertet werden sowie die Durchsetzung von Antikorruptionsmaßnahmen. Frankreich fiel insbesondere durch einige demokratische Qualitätsverluste auf, die sich vor allem in der Verletzung von Bürger- und Menschenrechten mit einhergehenden Defiziten innerhalb des Justizapparates und bei den Polizei- und Sicherheitskräften ausdrückt. Trotz dieser Ergebnisse muss festgehalten werden, dass alle vier Länder Defekte vorweisen, zum Teil mit steigender Tendenz. Besonders hervorzuheben ist, dass in allen vier Ländern sowohl Einschränkungen der Meinungs-, Presse- und Informationsfreiheit, der Menschenrechtsverletzungen, Einschränkungen in den Justizrechten und Korruption vorzufinden sind. Die Unterschiedlichkeit der Eingriffe und Intensität spiegelt sich in den Endergebnissen der Bewertungen der Demokratien wider. Nicht zuletzt erleiden insbesondere Portugal und Spanien aufgrund der aktuellen Wirtschaftskrise tiefgreifende Einschränkungen in ihrer Souveränität. ; The aim of this dissertation is to assess the democracies of four countries: Germany, France, Spain and Portugal. In recent years there has been a development in democracy research away from categorizing political systems along the lines of the democracy-autocracy model towards classifying them according to their different degrees of democracy or rather their quality of democracy (see Pickel/Pickel 2006:152; Fuchs/Roller 2008:77; Schmidt 2000, 2002, Lauth 2004; Berg-Schlosser 1999). Basing itself on specific indicators and measuring indices this study paper aims at identifying the degrees of democracy of four different countries by way of comparison. In this process, comparing democracies which are well-established has proved to be particularly challenging. This paper introduces the different theoretical conceptions currently prevailing in democracy research, such as the conceptions of R. A. Dahl (1989, 1998), David Beetham (1993, 1994, 2003), Merkel et al. (2003) as well as of Leonardo Morlino (2004), and shows that all conceptions base themselves on a minimum standard in order to classify a political system as a democracy. The approach of "defective democracy" put forward by Merkel et al. (2003) refers to a level below the minimum democratic threshold. The "democratic audit" approach of Beetham (1993, 1994, 2004) and the approach of Morlino (2004), elaborated in his article ",Good' and ,Bad' Democracies: How to Conduct Research into the Quality of Democracy", both deal with the quality of democracies, therefore referring to a level above the minimum democratic threshold. The conception of "defective democracy" developed by Merkel et al. (2003) has been included in this research paper as it cannot be precluded that defects in the selected countries do in fact exist. Morlino's conception (2004) has been chosen for the following two reasons: Firstly, and in contrast to the "defective democracy" approach, it aims at identifying the quality of democracies, i.e. of political systems which are democracies beyond doubt. Secondly, it represents a conception which has been developed very systematically. Based on the approaches of Merkel et al. (2003) and Morlino (2004) it was necessary to find appropriate indicators for measuring the defects and the quality of the democracies in Germany, France, Spain and Portugal. In this process, a somewhat unexpected problem arouse with regard to the use of indicators: Although Merkel's approach (2003) is geared towards determining the defects and Morlino's approach (2004) towards determining the quality of democracies, there turned out to be many content overlaps between both approaches. It meant that to some extent both conceptions make use of identical indicators. It therefore became necessary to exactly define the specific theoretical construct that would be assessed by each of the indicators. Some indicators had to be either complemented or modified with regard to their content, and a few of them had even to be excluded. This research paper takes into account the proposals on how to assess democracies put forward by both conceptions. These proposals are first introduced and then discussed. However, as no completely satisfying result can be reached using either of these two conceptions, a combined measuring instrument has been developed. This instrument is based on a dichotomous assessment with regard to every indicator of both conceptions, i.e. the indicators of Merkel et al. (2003) are assessed as "defective" or "non-defective" and the indicators of Morlino (2004) are assessed as "with quality feature" or "without quality feature". All indicators are thereby considered equal so as to avoid problems which could arise in the weighting process between the regime elements or the dimensions which were e.g. introduced by Morlino (2004). Based on the number of defects and quality features of the respective countries a scale can be worked out with regard to their quality of democracy. According to the empirical findings, all the four countries show both defects and, at the same time, features which stand for the quality of the democracies in the respective countries. Using this combined measuring instrument Germany showed the highest performance. Significantly lower were the results for Portugal, then France and finally Spain. In all four countries the electoral regime, right to association, political pluralism and effective governance with regard to the relationship between political bodies and military can be given a positive rating. Apart from this, the Federal Republic of Germany shows further special strengths with regard to the independence of the judiciary and Federal Constitutional Court, the sovereignty of the constitutional state as well as the sovereignty of the constitution. Spain and Portugal proved eligible to be given a positive rating for complying with international and European requirements as well as for implementing anti-corruption measures. France notably stood out for quality deterioration in several democratic aspects, which manifested themselves above all in the violation of civil and human rights and included deficits within the judicial apparatus and among the police and security forces. Notwithstanding these results it must be noted that defects have been identified in all four countries, partly indicating a growing tendency. Especially to be emphasized is the fact that in all four countries restrictions of the freedom of opinion, press and information, violation of human rights, restrictions of judicial rights and corruption have been identified. Differences in the type of interventions and intensity are reflected in the final results of the assessments on democracy. Last but not least, as a result of the current economic crisis it is especially Portugal and Spain which are subject to drastic restrictions of sovereignty.

Two weeks ago was the 40th anniversary of President Nixon's dramatic resignation. He did so against his own will, in order to avoid the certainty of impeachment as a result of the Watergate case. This event, together with the traumatic defeat and withdrawal from Vietnam that preceded it, resulted in a dramatic loss of trust in the Executive, followed by strong legislative action to limit its powers. It also revealed the growing partisan polarization that has characterized the politics of the following four decades.Today we may be living the climax of this polarization, as Congress is unable to pass badly-needed legislation on immigration, energy and infrastructure funding, to name a few. Indeed, not even the presence of 40,000 unaccompanied Central American children at the border is sufficiently dramatic to bring about some kind of consensual action. At the same time, President Obama is being sued by the House leadership for abuse of power, and the media are irresponsibly talking about possible impeachment, the ultimate use of legislative power against a democratically elected President.The transformative President has fulfilled or at the very least addressed most of the platform under which he was elected in 2008 and re-elected in 2012. Obstruction in Congress, his own bad foreign policy decisions and constant complaints from the left wing of his own party have resulted in low approval ratings (around 40%) by a frustrated public that has, for the most part, tuned out of politics. This will no doubt have consequences for the coming mid-term elections, when the majority of voters will stay home, giving an advantage to the militant extremes on both sides of the ideological spectrum.Gridlock in government is nothing new. In fact, the fathers of the Constitution preferred Congress to "muddle through" rather than being too pro-active. Incremental, slow change was preferable to sweeping reforms. Yet this 113th Congress, now in its long August recess before its return to a full-fledged electoral campaign in September, is probably unique in its paralysis. There are not only deep divisions between the two Houses, each dominated by one party, but also within the House of Representatives itself, where the GOP has a majority of seats but is so internally divided that it has had to withdraw many of its own leadership-introduced bills for lack of votes from its own party.This Do-Nothing-Congress that left town on August 1st for a five-week recess is the least productive in History: Congressional productivity is down from 151 in the previous 112th Congress to 142; the originally "Do-Nothing Congress" of 1947-48 passed 906 laws.Nothing seems to be sufficiently urgent or dramatic enough to bring the GOP legislators to a consensus, not even the unprecedented border crisis, where 40,000 unaccompanied migrant children from Central America are amassed in military bases and other government agencies at the southern border, awaiting due process. The House leadership was ready to pass a bill to provide a small part of the funding the President had requested to help him address the surge of newly arrived immigrants, but it did not have the votes. The Tea Party, on the other hand, opposed the funding and wanted to introduce its own bill to speedily deport the children and to rescind the President's authority to decide whether to deport or not certain undocumented immigrants from earlier waves of immigration.Late in the afternoon of their last day in the Capitol when all bags were packed and representatives were ready to leave, Speaker John Boehner announced he was ready to withdraw his bill since he didn't have the votes, and let the recess begin. But Tea Party favorites Steven King and Michele Bachman demanded a vote on both measures. Finally, at the eleventh hour, Boehner compromised: both bills were introduced and passed by a narrow vote. They are at this point insignificant, and very unlikely to become laws since the Senate will not consider them. But the point was made: the Tea Party's main goals is not solving any problems, but instead keepconstraining presidential powers to the point of total ineffective government. They are succeeding to a large extent, even if Obama has been quite deft at using his executive authority of implementation to break free from the imposed legislative shackles.Dysfunction in government is the new normalcy in the nation's capital. These bills were only a modest attempt to deal with the crisis of the day, but the acrimonious debate brought into relief a bigger systemic failure: the inability of Congress, since 2007, to pass a comprehensive overhaul of Immigration law. Once the Senate passed it last summer, it was expected that the House may come up with its own proposal, which would have been a series of smaller bills to solve the problem piecemeal, thereby satisfying different constituencies with a mixture of more border security, more workers' permits and other special visas, and the granting of legal status to the 11 million undocumented.Unlike the year 2007, when G.W. Bush had expressed support for Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation but could not muster enough consensus, this time around (2013-2014) it was supposed to be different. For the first time the concept had widespread support from all the very powerful interest groups concerned: corporations, labor unions, the Christian Evangelical right and immigration advocates. But it was halted by the Tea Party in the House and no legislation was passed.It is this vacuum, among others, that the Executive has been trying to fill through administrative measures and executive decrees. The President used his prosecutorial discretion to solve some aspects of the enormously complex issue of dealing with 11 million undocumented immigrants, most of whom have lived and worked in the US for ten, twenty, or even thirty years. One example is the President's policy directive that provided temporary relief from deportation and study/work authorization to young people brought here illegally by their parents between certain dates, and under certain conditions (DACA). Lately, Obama has expressed some interest in extending DACA to the children's families, causing more Tea party outrage and increasing their attempts to stop him.To strike a balance and to give more legitimacy to his unilateral decision to solve that part of the problem, the President has applied to the letter the pre-existing immigration law to deport (other) immigrants through the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency. He has deported more immigrants than any other president before him (360,000 in 2013 alone), earning him the sobriquet of "Deporter-in-chief" and the antipathy of immigrant advocate groups.During the latest crisis of children at the border, Speaker Boehner expressed his "frustration and his concern" with the situation, and quite cynically called on Obama to "take steps to secure the border and return the children to their home countries", adding that the President "didn't need Congressional action to do that". Given that the Speaker is suing the President (just a political gesture, since he has no legal standing to do so) for over-stepping his Constitutional powers, his hectoring makes even less sense. In any case, his frustration was misdirected: Obama had asked Congress to approve funding for this operation and a Republican bill was ready to be introduced, but the Speaker himself was struggling to get the Tea Party votes he needed to pass it. This sort of dysfunction is a weakness the Republican Party will need to address in order to succeed in future elections.The November mid-term election will be critical: according to the latest polls, Republicans have around an eighty per cent chance to win the six seats they would need for a majority in the Senate. With both Houses in Republican hands, the President will not only lose the minimum control he now has to shape the agenda but he will also find it very hard to keep in place the policies that he is already implementing.If we add to that the problematic challenges he is now faced with on several foreign policy fronts, none of which can be solved in the short term, a Republican win becomes almost certain, not only in 2014 but also perhaps in the 2016 presidential election. But in order to seal those wins, Republicans will need two fundamental elements they lack now: party unity and a positive agenda. Professor Maria Fornella-Oehninger, Old Dominion UniversityVirginia, U.S.A.

Author's introductionThe process of globalization can be defined in neutral terms as the increasing cross‐border flows of goods (e.g., coca‐cola, cocaine), services (e.g., McDonalds, prostitution), money (e.g. family cash, corporate banking), people (e.g., migration, vacation), information (e.g., internet, movies), and culture (e.g., fashion, religion), resulting in greater economic and political interdependence. Defined in this way, globalization appears rather benign – even positive. But in truth, the 'interdependence' that is being created is not one of equality or hope for most people in the world. Multinational corporations are certainly benefiting from globalization, but ordinary workers are not. In this article, I explore the way in which globalization is altering social identities in ways that are both exploitive and liberating.Author recommendsJoseph E. Stiglitz, Globalization and its Discontents (New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Company, 2002).This is an important and influential critique of globalization written by a Nobel Prize winning economist. During his career as an academic, Stiglitz was a strong advocate of economic globalization, but after serving as a White House advisor and Chief economist at the World Bank, his opinion changed. He wrote this book in an attempt to publicize the devastating effect of globalization on developing countries. Written for a general audience, Stiglitz explains how globalization managed from the top down must be radically revised before the poor will benefit from global economic policies.Barbara Ehrenreich and Arlie Russell Hochschild, Eds, Global Women: Nannies. Maids, and Sex Workers in the New Economy (New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company, 2002).This research anthology offers extensive documentation of the real world impact of economic globalization on women and their families. Fifteen chapters cover a range of penetrating investigations of women from across the globe who migrate, suffer and sometimes surrender in their quest for economic security. A common theme is the immense sacrifice made by mothers and children who are struggling to carve out a life amidst the powerful forces of a new global economy. The studies provide heart‐wrenching evidence that economic policies managed from the top, serve to exploit the poor, alter women's lives, and change the meaning of family.Jan Nederveen Pieterse, Globalization and Culture: Global Mélange (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2004).The potential impact of globalization on world cultures is explored in this brief but highly instructive book. Jan Nervenn Pieterse offers an accurate summary of competing theories of cultural globalization and artfully guides the reader through important intellectual debates. Does globalization lead to greater cultural integration? Are unique cultural identities and practices dissolving under the pressure of globalization? Is the world becoming uniform, standardized, and homogenized? There are no certain answers to these questions, but the author argues forcefully that globalization is leading to hybrid cultures with greater diversification and cultural mixing – a global mélange.Jeremy Brecher, Tim Costello and Brendan Smith, Globalization from Below: The Power of Solidarity (Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 2000).The worldwide movement of resistance to top‐down globalization is reviewed, defended and advocated in this powerful little book. This inspirational volume is much more than an academic analysis of the anti‐globalization movement; it is an answer to all those who ask, 'What can be done?' The historical power of social movements is a guiding theme from start to finish. Chapters examine a global program for change, practical policy initiatives, and opportunities for participating in grassroots democracy. This is an outline for hope and a pragmatic strategy for how globalization can be altered from the bottom‐up.Hubert J. M. Hermans and Giancarlo Dimaggio, 'Self, Identity, and Globalization in Times of Uncertainty: A Dialogical Analysis', Review of General Psychology, 11(2007), 31–61.This is an excellent review article that examines the psychological consequences of globalization. According to the authors, the social, cultural and economic changes associated with globalization have disrupted traditional life patterns and have called in to question normative expectations. As a consequence, many individuals are left with a powerful sense of psychological uncertainty that motivates individuals and groups to find local niches to construct a stable identity. The organizing argument is that the processes of globalization and localization (globalization's counterforce) require a conceptualization of self and identity in which global and local voices are involved in continuous interchanges and negotiations.Jan E. Stets and Peter J. Burke, 'A Sociological Approach to Self and Identity'. In: Mark Leary and June Tangney (Eds), Handbook of Self and Identity (Guilford Press), 128–152.In this review article, the authors present a nice summary of a particular sociological view of self and identity. George Herbert Mead influences their approach, which falls within the theoretical tradition known as 'structural symbolic interactionism'. A key insight is that our conceptions of self are organized by larger social structures, while at the same time, social structures emerge from individual actions. The review includes an examination of different types of identities, the influence of social roles, and the impact of emotions.Online materialsGeorge Herbert Mead http://www.iep.utm.edu/m/mead.htm Mead is one of the most influential theorists of the self. His life and work are reviewed in detail at this site.Global Capitalism: The World Trade Organization http://www.wto.org/ The World Trade Organization (WTO) is one of the most powerful economic institutions in modern history. It is the organization through which top‐down, capitalists, and powerful nation states implement global economic policy. At this site, the WTO defends its goals and explains its operations and strategies.Fundamentalist Responses to Globalization http://www.jihadunspun.com/index.php This controversial web site represents the political and cultural interests of some Islamic fundamentalists. A significant portion of the site is devoted to news stories from the Middle East where Islamist groups are engaged in political and military battles with competing political parties and nation states. This particular web site illustrates both a fundamentalist response to globalization and the global communication tools employed by some fundamentalist groups.Democratic Responses to Globalization http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/index.php?cd_language=2&id_menu= The World Social Forum is an excellent example of how democratic resistance to top‐down globalization is global in scope. At this site, one can see evidence of bottom‐up, grassroots organizing. Learn how social movements, NGOs, and other civil society organizations come together to debate ideas and formulate proposals for ending top‐down globalization. http://www.globalexchange.org/index.html Global Exchange is another organization committed to resisting the destructive effects of globalization. This site provides a bottom‐up perspective on international trade and a wide range of resources for democratic activists. Video links also offer illustrations of some recent protest actions. http://www.topics‐mag.com/globalization/page‐resist.htm This simple but instructive site gives a basic introduction to globalization and provides several examples of local people from across the globe who are working to resist the homogenizing and harmful effects of capitalist globalization. Examples include campaigns to protect regional cuisines in Korea, France, and Brazil by protesting fast food chains and advocating for a 'slow food' movement.Sample syllabus Globalization from Above and Below Week 1: The Sociology of Globalization Anthony Giddens, Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives (New York, NY: Routledge, 2003). Weeks 2–6: Globalization from Above Joseph E. Stiglitz, Globalization and its Discontents (New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Company, 2002).Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise and Fall of Disaster Capitalism (New York, NY: Metropolitan Books, 2007).Barbara Ehrenreich and Arlie Russell Hochschild, Eds., Global Women: Nannies. Maids, and Sex Workers in the New Economy (New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company, 2002).Video: China Blue (Teddy Bear Films, 2006).This breathtaking documentary of life in a Chinese sweatshop is an excellent illustration of how globalization from above connects and exploits workers from across the globe (88 minutes). Weeks 7–10: Globalization and Culture John Tomlinson, Globalization and Culture (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1999).Jan Nederveen Pieterse, Globalization and Culture: Global Mélange (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2004).George Ritzer, The Globalization of Nothing (Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press, 2004).Video: Wal‐Mart: The High Cost of Low Price (Brave New Films, 2005).This is a penetrating documentary that exposes the dark side of Wal‐Mart's ruthless global expansion (95 minutes). Weeks 12–15: Globalization from Below Jereny Brecher, Tim Costello and Brendan Smith, Globalization from Below: The Power of Solidarity, (Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 2000).Leslie Sklair, 'Social Movements and Global Capitalism', Sociology, 29 (1995), 495–512.Walden Bello, Deglobalization: Ideas for a New World Economy (London, UK: Zed Books, 2005)Video: This is What Democracy Looks Like (Big Noise Films, 2005).Here, we find remarkable documentary examination of the 'Battle in Seattle' when 50,000 activists from across the globe effectively shut down the ministerial meetings of the World Trade Organization in 1999 (72 minutes).Notes
* Correspondence address: Peter L. Callero, Western Oregon University, 345 North Monmouth Avenue, Monmouth, OR 97361, USA. Email: callerp@wou.edu

"Yearbook of Eastern Studies" has been established as a forum for the debate on the multifaceted nature of transformations in Central and Eastern Europe and Asia, with particular focus on the post-Soviet area. The conceptual content of the periodical was born thanks to the professors Zdzislaw J. Winnicki and Walenty Baluk, who edited the first three volumes, which were published formally as separate monographs, but already under the banner of "Wschodnioznawstwo". Since 2010, the Yearbook has the status of a scientific journal, and two years later it has been listed on the journals of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education. In addition, the periodical is indexed in national and international databases such as Index Copernicus, Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, BazHum and Polska Bibliografia Naukowa. The scientific profile of the periodical, which has consistently been implemented since the beginning of the activity of "Yearbook of Eastern Studies", focuses on the field of social sciences, with particular emphasis on the science of politics and science of safety. Its great advantage is its internationalization, which manifests itself both in terms of composition of the scientific council, reviewers, and authors of texts published in the "Wschodnioznawstwo" in Polish, English and Russian languages. Up to now, researchers from Poland, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Czech Republic, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Macedonia, Russia, Slovakia and Ukraine have published on the cards of the journal. ; Wydawany przez Zakład Badań Wschodnich od 2007 r. rocznik "Wschodnioznawstwo" powstał jako forum debaty nad wielowymiarowością przemian w regionie Europy Środkowej i Wschodniej oraz Azji, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem obszaru postradzieckiego. Koncepcja merytoryczna periodyku zrodziła się dzięki profesorom Zdzisławowi J. Winnickiemu oraz Walentemu Balukowi, którzy redagowali wspólnie pierwsze trzy tomy, wydane jeszcze z formalnego punktu widzenia jako odrębne monografie, ale już pod szyldem "Wschodnioznawstwa". Od 2010 r. rocznik posiada status czasopisma naukowego, a dwa lata później trafił na listę czasopism punktowanych Ministerstwa Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego. Ponadto periodyk jest indeksowany w krajowych i międzynarodowych bazach, takich jak Index Copernicus, Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, BazHum czy Polska Bibliografia Naukowa. Profil naukowy periodyku, który konsekwentnie jest realizowany od początku działalności "Wschodnioznawstwa", koncentruje się wokół dziedziny nauk społecznych, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem nauk o polityce i nauk o bezpieczeństwie. Ogromnym atutem rocznika jest jego umiędzynarodowienie, które przejawia się zarówno w aspekcie składu rady naukowej, recenzentów, jak i autorów tekstów zamieszczanych na łamach "Wschodnioznawstwa" w językach polskim, angielskim i rosyjskim. Do tej pory na kartach periodyku publikowali naukowcy z Polski, Azerbejdżanu, Białorusi, Czech, Gruzji, Japonii, Kazachstanu, Łotwy, Macedonii, Niemiec, Rosji, Słowacji, Ukrainy i Węgier.

Crime and violence impede development and disproportionally impact poor people in many countries across the world. Though crime and violence represent serious problems in many countries, less-developed countries experience particular concentrations, especially those that are characterized by fragile or less-trusted government institutions and pervasive insecurity. Under such circumstances, human, social, political, and economic development suffers. Research across the globe has shown that holistic approaches that focus on the entire spectrum of a government's crime response chain, ranging from crime prevention to enforcement, tend to have better outcomes than isolated interventions involving only the police or other individual government agency. To date, most of the Bank's investment in efforts to reduce crime have focused on crime prevention in the form of urban and social development programs. Investment and policy lending that support the improvement of police operations to reduce crime and develop stronger neighborhoods are more limited. To assist country teams and client counterparts in their efforts to develop effective, holistic responses against crime that include the police, justice reform staff in the Governance Global Practice teamed up with internationally recognized experts to compile evidence-based good practice information for developing effective police responses to crime. The resulting three part publication, titled Addressing the Enforcement Gap to Counter Crime: Investing in Public Safety, the Rule of Law and Local Development in Poor Neighborhoods outlines the impact of crime and violence on development and the poor in particular and explains a proven three-pronged approach to creating police agencies that work in collaboration with communities and other government and private service providers to identify crime problems, develop holistic and inclusive solutions the apply a restorative justice approach. The publication also outlines how such approach can be integrated into Bank projects and client country reform plans.