The Tale of Two Headlines, Abused to Death, or Sad Tragic Accident?

July 12, 2011

On July 10, at 6:39 ET, the BBC ran a story with a headline that stated, “Pony ‘beaten’ into Hampshire lake dies“.I am sure millions around the world had the same reaction as I did when I first read the accounts as reported by the BBC. We really do owe a debt of gratitude to the nameless reporter who informed us of this heinous act. Well, that is what many must have thought as they read the story first thing Monday Morning before they headed off to work. Then again, what if the reporter was telling a tale that was wrong? What if the “facts” reported to the world early Monday morning are totally different from what actually happened?

Well the truth of the matter is actually 180 degrees opposed to what the nameless reporter stated in his story. The truth is that I would not even have a story if it were not for the BBC’s correcting its nameless reporter’s misguided lies. That’s right, 27 hours after the BBC allowed a lie to be posted on its news site, the truth came out. That’s better than the Daily Mail which still stands by its misleading story. The incident was not an act of animal cruelty as was reported. It was, in fact, a tragic accident that almost took the life of a man who attempted to save the horse from drowning. So 27 hours after the lie was allowed to circle the globe, the BBC ran this story, “Man kicked helping drowning pony in Hampshire“.

Read the rest of this entry »


What Many Politicians Need Today

September 23, 2009

While I believe children should be punished for the bad things they do, I also think it is high time many politicians are taken to the woodshed. Starting with Obama.

Rise of Western European Feudalism

July 2, 2009

feudalismThe rise of Feudalism as it is known today, began in the late 8th – early 9th Century A.D. in Gaul (France). The Frankish Empire had been dissoluted recently, and it was now a collection of squabbling Barons, Lords and Nobles, warring for land and attempting to unite the Empire beneath them. Charlemagne, an ambitious young Noble, saw this squabbling and had a desire to end it. However, Charlemagne was faced with a problem: the Frankish civilians were unwilling to be united, and the Barons, Lords and Nobles would listen to no one man. How then, was Charlemagne to secure their loyalty?

After the collaspse of the Roman Empire, the money system as it was known collapsed, and thus money was a useless commodity. Hence, Charlemagne could not buy the loyalties of the Barons. Charlemagne devised a plan and raised an army. He marched into a Baron’s lands, defeating him and gaining control. However, rather than leaving it at that and marching onwards, he offered the land back to the Baron in return for his loyalty, some revenue and more troops for his army. The Baron accepted, and onwards Charlemagne marched, his army bolstered and backed with funds. The next Baron fell, and was offered back his lands, accepting once again, and so on… soon he had united the lands beneath with a Feudal system keeping things under control. Hence, the previous money based economy was replaced with a land based economy.

With Charlemagne being successful in his consolidation of all the lands, he now lorded over the entire realm of the Franks and had hardly any work to do. However, the Barons were now presented with the same problems, similar to Charlemagne: how to keep the populace under control, and how to recruit troops without causing dissent. The solution: Lords; but again, the Lords were faced with problems of their own, and so the Feudal chain was created:

  • King/Emperor: The King/Emperor was at the top. He owned all the lands in the realm and controlled the armies.
  • Barons: Barons were given a fiefdom by the King/Emperor, and although they did not own it, they controlled it and could do what they wished with it. In return, they recruited troops for the King’s/Emperor’s army and were required to give the King a place to stay as he travelled.
  • Lords: Lords, Knights chosen by the Barons, were given a castle to live in, and dominion over the area around them. In return they sent the Barons one of their best Knights (that would in turn be sent to the King/Emperor), and would appoint tax collectors for the Barons. They were required to collect the taxes of produce from the peasents and send them to the King.
  • Villeins: Villeins were serfs chosen by the Lords to live on a plot of land near their castle. They did not own the land, and could not sell it, but they had a better life than your average serf. In return they worked on the Lord’s manor.
  • Serfs: Serfs were not given any land, they were tied to the land they were born on and they were required to work for their Lords. During times of war they were conscripted into the peasent militia with little more than some leather armour (if any) and a common farming implement as a weapon.

At the top, the King/Emperor lived an easy life, often travelling the country side to make his presence known, he never stayed in one area long however. The Barons prospored, Lords were fairly well off, but Villeins were downtrodden, and Serfs were utterly oppressed. In principle, the Feudal system worked because it was a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” system. The Lords were generous enough to allow Serfs and Villains to live on their lands, so they had to work, the Barons were generous enough to give the Lord’s castles, so they had to keep control and send money and knights, and the King/Emperor was generous enough to allow the Barons’ fiefdoms, so they had to bolster his army and pay him his dues. Since all the lower classes did was work for the upper classes, they were supposed to be provided for by the upper classes. This usually wasn’t the case, however.

Serfs were expected to go to war, and their Lords were expected to outfit them. The only problem was, it is much easier to outfit hundreds of peasents with old leather armour, than newer ring mail or chain mail. Similarly, rather than spending time to ensure that the Serfs’ did not live in squalor, it was much easier to simply ensure they had a dwelling, and to leave it at that. Thus, the Feudal system only worked for short periods of time, and wasn’t very productive. Over time, the lower classes would become restless unless something was done to keep them in control, and there was always problems with succession in a Feudal system. This is shown with the collapse of Charlemagne’s Holy Roman Empire and its division into three kingdoms.