2022: "On the one hand, invading Ukraine is bad. On the other hand, cheap gas from Russia keeps the UK economy working."

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose…

This is an incredible book. I knew very little about the American Civil War - this is a thorough history of that bloody event told from the perspective of the UK.

The UK was officially neutral. But that didn't stop hundreds of British subject from joining up to fight on both sides. It also didn't stop frenzied diplomatic efforts to turn the tide in the UK's favour. And that led to incessant lobbying, fake-news, and skulduggery within the realm.

Dr Foreman's book is long and detailed. Perhaps a little too detailed. There are some excellent discussions of battles which - though important to the war - don't really entangle with the British side of the story. The book occasionally gets bogged down in what I consider irrelevant details and diversionary footnotes.

She avoids making moral judgements about the actions of the participants. That isn't to say she "both sides" the war - the South were running an empire based on slavery - but she convincingly points out multiple examples of the moral failings of the Union and the UK.

What I found stunning is just how relevant the events are to the politics of today. Here are a few of the excerpts I found interesting:

he had been so certain that the British and French would intervene as soon as their cotton stocks were low. ‘Ah, yes,’ Benjamin replied, ‘I admit I was mistaken! I did not believe that your government would allow such misery to your operatives, such loss to your manufacturers, or that the people themselves would have borne it.’

and

The US Consuls’ descriptions of the suffering in Lancashire convinced Seward that the British would not hesitate to interfere in the war if the alternative meant starvation across wide swathes of England.

This seems to be exactly where we are with Russia. Will people of the UK continue supporting Ukraine in the face of the economic hardship? It's also interesting to see how President Lincoln used the media to shore up support:

Lincoln had written an eloquent letter to the ‘Workingmen of Manchester’ thanking the cotton workers for their patience and sacrifice. ‘Whatever misfortune may befall your country or my own,’ declared the President, ‘the peace and friendship which now exist between the two nations will be … perpetual.’

Again, very similar to the messages we see from President Zelenskyy.

With regard for the need for propaganda:

With one half of what he threw away in odious espionage I could have bought the British Press … every newspaper writer in London can be purchased, from those of The Times down … I do not mean to say that each would openly take cash; but each will take a consideration suitable to his taste.

and

One of Hotze’s favourite methods was to supply an acquaintance with fresh information, in the shape of a pro-South editorial that required little editing. If the article was printed, Hotze would always insist that the submitter should keep the 10 guinea fee.

I wonder where we are today? Which editors and writers will gladly take foreign emoluments?

The Times newspaper has been publishing for so long, it isn't surprising to find it neck-deep in the bloody bowels of history.

The Times went further and accused Lincoln of inciting the slaves in the South to kill their owners, imagining in graphic terms how the President ‘will appeal to the black blood of the African; he will whisper of the pleasures of spoil and of the gratification of yet fiercer instincts; and when blood begins to flow and shrieks come piercing through the darkness, Mr Lincoln will wait till the rising flames tell that all is consummated, and he will rub his hands and think that revenge is sweet’

This is a repeated theme throughout the book.

It was the news of Stonewall Jackson’s death, however, which made the Confederates spring into action. They were amazed and delighted by the spontaneous outpouring of public grief in England. Newspapers carried long eulogies to the fallen hero; The Times even compared Jackson’s death to Admiral Nelson’s at Trafalgar. Flags flew at half mast at many cotton mills.

Their assessment of the Gettysburg Address was similarly unfavourable

The Times, thought that Lincoln’s speech had been a total failure. English readers were told that the ‘imposing ceremony’ was ‘rendered ludicrous by some of the luckless sallies of that poor President Lincoln’

Of course, at the assassination of Lincoln, the papers went full Princess Diana

The British press was united over the tragedy of Lincoln’s violent death. Newspapers that had routinely criticized the President during his lifetime rushed to praise him.

There is also a look into the psychology of the confederates.

One bag contained the Confederate flag and a pouch filled with Virginian soil. Georgiana intended to give birth with the flag draped symbolically above the bed and the soil placed underneath to ensure that the baby was a true Virginian.

The modern revisionist history that the Civil War wasn't about slavery is undermined by the actions of those at the time:

‘Address to the Christians throughout the World’. Signed by the ninety-six clergymen of Richmond, Virginia, the ‘Address’ urged fellow Christians to protest against Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation.

There's all sorts of modern parallels. Especially when it comes to hate speech directed at public figures.

Mrs Adams was already pining to leave London when an anonymous letter arrived at the legation: Dam the Federals Dam the Confederates Dam you both Kill you damned selves for the next 10 years if you like; so much the better for the world and for England. Thus thinks every Englishman with any brains. NB.PS. We’ll cut your throats fast enough afterwards for you if you aint tired of blood, you devils.

While I make no comment on the state of modern politics, there are some… interesting echoes through the ages

The British government’s majorities in both Houses were so slim that Palmerston was desperately casting about for allies. He was furious with Gladstone, who gave a speech in the Commons on 11 May that deeply antagonized the conservative wing of the Liberal Party.

And

There was a national uproar after Palmerston and Russell announced that Britain would not fight alongside the Danes after all. Whether the government’s course was right or wrong mattered less than the obvious fact that it was a complete reversal from the one originally proposed.

Of course, history doesn't repeat. But it does rhyme.

By April 1868 there had been four Prime Ministers in three years: Palmerston, Russell, Derby and Benjamin Disraeli; Adams’s longevity at the legation during a period of such rapid political transition changed his public persona from that of a Yankee crank to a pillar of the diplomatic community.

I also found it grimly amusing that, despite fighting against slavery, the notion of equal rights was far from the mind of the Americans.

The second-class status of the coloured regiments was reflected in their pay for the first two years – which stayed at $7 a month, only just over half the $13 paid to whites – until Congress rectified the inequality.

And

In Manhattan, a delegation of black New Yorkers was denied the right to walk behind Lincoln’s funeral cortège. When the White House intervened, a police escort had to protect the black marchers from the violence of the mob.

As I said, it is a long book - about 1,500 printed pages. I found myself occasionally lost trying to work out whether a person was British, Confederate, Union, or something else. That's probably my failing at knowing how to retain knowledge while reading history. But you can't fault the detail and breadth of sources used.

I found it to be an exemplary history. There is so much that I didn't know about the Civil War. And I was completely ignorant of Britain's role in the affair.

Here are the Top 5 Weird Things about the USA:

Credit Cards

During our holiday, we mostly paid with credit card.

In the UK, we use the Chip & Pin system. It's far from fool proof, and has some security weaknesses, but compared to the signature system used in the US, it's a breeze.

In a UK restaurant, the waiter comes up to me with the credit card terminal. I slot my card in, see the amount on the bill, add a tip, enter my PIN and hand the terminal back to the waiter. The machine spits out a receipt. My card never leaves my sight the whole time.

In the USA... well! The waiter hands me the bill. I hand over my credit card. The waiter disappears. The waiter reappears (hopefully!) with a completed transaction slip. I physically write in the tip I want to leave, calculate the total amount, sign the receipt, then walk out of the building. The waiter doesn't check that I've signed correctly - or at all! I can't see if the waiter has decided to add an extra couple of dollars to my tip, or has cloned my card. It's utterly bizarre.

What's even stranger is the attitude to checking whether the card belongs to me. In every restaurant I went to, I handed over my card, scrawled a signature and left. In almost every store I went to, I had to hand over my driver's licence to prove that I was the owner of the card. Why the discrepancy?

So, in summary - weird and inconsistent!

Adverts

The USA makes some of the best TV in the world - yet it makes the worst adverts. From my intensive scientific study of watching TV a few times, I have concluded that there are exactly two sorts of adverts shown in the USA.

First, "Do you suffer from any of the following conditions? Then you may need our brand new wonder drug Resplatulin! Guaranteed to improve the quality of your marriage. Side effects may include nausea, limbs falling off, uncontrollable bowels, and permanent death. Tell your doctor to prescribe Resplatulin today!"

The second type of advet goes something like, "Have you ever taken Resplatulin? New research shows it may cause hair loss, broken bones, heart failure, and nasal cancer. If you would like to sue someone for prescribing you Resplatulin, call our lawyers today!"

And so it goes - on and on and on!

Actually, the first advert we heard on the radio as we got into Las Vegas was this doozey:

"Girls may look older, act older, and even say yes – but having sex with them is still illegal if they're under 16! Visit ShesNotOldEnough.com."

Don't get me wrong, I think PSAs encouraging young men not to be sex offenders is a good thing. But it speaks volumes that this knowledge isn't already drummed into people's heads. For extra WTFerry - listen to the disclaimer at the end.

This public awareness campaign was supported by the Nevada State Health Division through Grant # 3B01DP0009040 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent official views of the Nevada State Health Division nor the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

When every advert needs a hefty disclaimer - often read at a breakneck pace, and then sped up - you know something is wrong.

Driving

I found driving on the wrong side of the road to be a fairly simple experience. Only once, after pulling out of a parking lot onto a deserted road did I find myself on the English side. It probably helped that I was driving a Prius - a car I'm familiar with - so I didn't have to worry about the controls.

There were five things which really weirded me out. They may well be confined only to San Diego - so my apologies to any other US city!

Firstly, there's no concept of an overtaking lane. In the UK, the idea is that you drive on the lane furthest away from the central reservation, when you need to pass another vehicle, you move to the next lane. Well, in theory! In the UK, I am rarely under-taken. In the USA, it seemed a free-for-all - drivers used whichever lane they damned well felt like for passing other vehicles. Which was made doubly confusing because...

Speed Limits are more like speed minimums. In the UK I'm used to driving at 70 and no faster - I stick to the speed limits and am genuinely angered by those who don't. In San Diego, I think there was a race to see who could break the sound barrier first! I was sticking to the posted 55MPH while being over- and under-taken at speeds I'd guess were double that. Amusingly, all the speed limit signs said they were enforced with RADAR! I wouldn't mind speeding drivers, but it seems...

Holding your cell-phone while typing on a laptop are suitable activities to perform while driving. I can kind of see that holding a phone isn't so much of a problem when you're driving an automatic transmission vehicle as compared to the manuals more common on Britain's roads. But texting? Glancing over at a laptop on your passenger seat? Yes, the UK has people who put on make-up, or eat while driving - but we've made using your phone an offence. Considering most phones come with a hands-free kit and Bluetooth kits are only a few quid, I can't see why anyone would hold their phone and drive at the same time. Mind you, it gives you something to do at...

STOP signs. I'm not sure how they're supposed to work, so when I saw one I stopped. Occasionally I'd reach a crossroads where all four directions had stop signs. So we'd all sit there and wait until someone was brave enough to make the first move. Dear America - get some roundabouts! Suddenly stopping and starting is useful practice for...

Traffic Lights. Here's how they work in the UK. Green - Go. Amber - this light is about to turn red, so hurry through, or slow down. Red - STOP!

So far, just the same as the USA. However, in the UK we have... Red and Amber - this light is about to turn green, so release the handbrake and get ready to go.

Yeah, the USA don't have that. So people spend their time at a red light waiting for it to go green, revving their engines or otherwise tensing up to move off instantly. Because, if you don't start moving the millisecond that light turns, everyone behind you will let you know exactly what they think of you!

Food

I'm a vegetarian and, thanks to HappyCow I was able to find loads of veggie friendly restaurants. What I was not able to do was find anywhere which served reasonably sized portions! Almost everywhere we ate served up jumbo platters of food, with a huge serving of fries - or a salad dripping in dressing. Every soft drink was endlessly filled up - which makes it really hard to judge just how many gallons of high-fructose corn syrup you've ingested.

The sheer quantity of food, all at a reasonable price, was bewildering. Every restaurant was quite happy to give us a doggy bag of our leftovers, which was a small mercy.

Portion control when eating out is really tricky.

Military

The USA has a strange relationship with its military. Perhaps it's due to these vast amount the country spends on defence, but I've never been to any other country which treats members of the armed services with such reverence in public.

Nearly every tour, museum, or leisure facility we went to in the USA had a separately discounted price for veterans or currently serving members of the military and their family. I don't think I've ever seen that in the UK or Europe. I'm not saying it's a bad thing - but it's very odd to see. I'm sure the armed forces are underpaid and that this is a gesture of gratitude - but I wonder if, in some subtle way, it acts as an incentive to enlist? The decision is obviously a lot more complex than "I can get 10% off at Sea World!" but the discount is pervasive and part of a culture which glorifies military service unlike anywhere else I've been.

Speaking of Sea World, a very weird thing happened there. At the start of the Shamu Killer Whale Show, the presenter asked for all members of the US military (and her allies) to stand so the audience could applaud them for "protecting freedom"! Here's someone's video of the "salute to the troops":

This may, in part, be due to the large military presence in the San Diego area.

Again, I'm not saying that it's wrong - but, from my perspective, it's weird.

Weird Is As Weird Does

One of the great things about travelling is seeing what people take for granted. Every country has aspects which the locals take for granted. Sometimes they're great, sometimes their terrible, but in all cases they're part of the fabric of society.

I've been to countries where:

• Each toilet has a built in bidet and you can't flush away paper.
• Crossing the road takes nerves of steel.
• Restaurants don't open until 8pm.
• On street urinals are commonly used during the day.
• Cows walk in the street.
• Tax is included in the price tag!

America is a fun place to visit, but all y'all are weird!

I don't know much about Mitt Romney's position on gun control. It doesn't seem to have come up much in the run up to the election. I can, I think, infer his thoughts on the matter after watching this exchange he had with Bob Garon, a Vietnam veteran who was having breakfast with his husband.

You can jump to 1:50 to hear the exchange I think is so illuminating.

The quote from Romney is:

I think at the time the constitution was written it was pretty clear; that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Now, as far as I am aware, the United State Constitution has nothing to say on the subject of marriage. The Bill of Rights - written around the same time as the constitution - is also silent on the issue. It does, however, have this to say about guns:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Using Mitt Romney's logic, it seems pretty clear that "Arms" refers to muskets, bayonets, maybe small cannon. Doesn't it?

Or, do we perhaps accept that things change. That our laws need to be updated to societal and technological norms.

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Those seem like fine goals.

There's no life when cruelly ended by war machines. There's no happiness when love is banned. There is no liberty when people are held hostage to the tyranny of their forefathers' limitations.