My Review of Barry Strauss' "Jews vs. Romans"

The Jewish Wars

I take my title from Josephus’ “The Jewish War” which recounts the great Jewish revolt against Rome from 66-74 C.E. Hoover Institution fellow, Barry Strauss while using Josephus’ history, he casts a critical eye on this work written in about 75 C.E. From the time of the Roman invasion of Judea in 63 B.C.E to 136C.E the Jews of Israel fought three wars against the Romans and in many of those wars Jews fought Jews in what can be characterized as civil wars. Indeed, like Josephus some Jews fought on the side of Rome and there was so much infighting that the Talmud tells the reason for the destruction of the Second Temple was “groundless hatred.”

Although Judea was ostensibly a backwater state in the Roman Empire it played a major strategic roll in the thinking of Rome and its arch enemy Parthia (modern day Iran). Simply put, Judea in the hands of Parthia would have created a strategic nightmare for Rome. That is the reason Rome deployed one seventh of its legions in Judea between 66 C.E. – 74 C.E. to put down the great Jewish Revolt. That revolt led to the destruction of the Second Temple and the siege of Masada. Thus, it was no accident that such Roman Emperors as Augustus, Tiberius, Vespasian, and Hadrian took a great interest in the goings on in this small province in their empire.  Further, it was out of this clash of civilizations came Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism.

 

Although Judea was down it was not out. There was a revolt of the diaspora in 116 C.E. and then the Bar Kokhba revolt of 132-136 C.E. Although Bar Kokhba’s guerilla army fought bravely, in the end, they were no match for the trained legions. Just as in the first revolt, there were many Jews who sided with Rome, either out of self-interest or fear of how it would end. The Romans then wiped Judea off the map by calling it “Palaestinia.” I wonder how many Palestinians today know that their name came from ancient Rome.

 

Barry Strauss has given us a very readable history Jewish-Roman wars of two millennia ago. That history resonates today. Indeed, it may seem like current events. My one criticism of the book is that it does not give the reader a sense of the economy of the region. He doesn’t go into the role of Herod as the master builder of Judea. Did that bring about prosperity or result in high taxation to pay for all of his projects? He does mention the gap between the rich and poor Jews but, doesn’t really go into detail.  When I was in Israel last year, I witnessed an archaeological site in Jerusalem that portrayed the immense wealth of the city’s upper crust. That aside Strauss has written an excellent history of the period. 

My Review of Peter Cozzens' "Deadwood: Gold, Guns and Greed in the American West"

 Gold in Them There Hills

As an enthusiastic fan of the Deadwood HBO series, I was looking forward to Peter Cozzens’ book on the same subject. Except for the book being too long, I was not disappointed. Cozzens’ “Deadwood” has everything. His cast of characters include Wild Bill Hickock, Calamity Jane, Sitting Bull, President Grant, and George Hearst. We witness Indian wars, cattle rustling, horse thieves, stagecoach robberies, gun fights and water wars. As in the HBO series, the two leading protagonists are Seth Bullock and Sol Star who own a hardware store. Bullock would become sheriff and U.S. Marshall and Star would remain a pillar of the community.

 In four short years 1876-1879 Deadwood sparked the imagination of the entire country with the discovery of gold in the Black Hills of South Dakota. The town was founded by would be miners illegally squatting on Indian land that was later legalized. The miners largely came from the vast army of the unemployed caused by the long depression of 1873-1879. Following them was a smaller army of “soiled doves,” prostitutes in the vernacular of the day, who populated the Deadwood’s notorious brothels.

 Two facets of Deadwood’s short history bring out the economist in me. First Deadwood represents a case study in spontaneous order where the town was created out of nothing. Of course, quite a bit of disorder went along with the order, but Deadwood worked more or less. Indeed, Deadwood was one of the few places in the U.S. where African Americans, Jews and Chinese got along with the majority white Christian population and were respected to varying degrees.

 Second, with the passage of Grant’s Specie Resumption Act of 1875 the United States was put on a path to the gold standard. One of the problems with the gold standard is that the growth in the money supply is contingent the success of miners in finding gold. Hence, the importance of Deadwood. In part, Deadwood helped put the U.S. back on the gold standard in 1879.

 Cozzens highlights the role George Hearst the mining magnate who struck it rich in nearby Lead City. His Homestake Mine would form the foundation of his wealth and it enabled his son William Randolf to become a press lord and leading politician in the early 20^th Century. He was far from the most scrupulous person, but his mine produced gold through 2002. It truly was the mother lode.

Deadwood’s day in the sun ended with a fire in late 1879 which wiped out the town. However, absent the fire the decline in placer mining made decline inevitable. Capital intensive hard rock mining took the place of the very labor-intensive panning for gold. Cozzens tells a great story of this small mining town that captured the attention of the nation.

 

 

Donald Trump (National Socialist*)

President Donald Trump is nominally a Republican, but in reality, he is putting us on the road to an American version of the national socialism of the 1930’s. Domestically he is attempting to seize the commanding heights of the economy by taking ownership positions in Intel and U.S. Steel and by taking a 15% cut from NVIDIA’s sales to China. ( https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2025/07/on-road-to-serfdom.html ) Remember that under national socialism businesses remain under private ownership but are under the control of the government. This is a far cry from capitalism. 

 

Further Trump is challenging the independence of the Federal Reserve by demanding the removal of Lisa Cook from the board for allegedly committing mortgage fraud. How did this come about? His minion Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, pulled the mortgage of files of Lisa Cook as well as the files from such Trump adversaries as New York Attorney General Letitia James and Senator Adam Schiff. Let us be clear, this was no accident and soon the IRS and other federal agencies will get into the act.

 

To enhance his powers domestically Trump has appointed his cronies in the Justice Department, the F.B.I., the regulatory agencies and on the courts. Indeed, one of his private attorneys, Todd Blanche is now a deputy attorney general, and another, Eric Bove, was just confirmed to the Court of Appeals. Perhaps more serious is that he has purged a host of officers in the military and the CIA who might be more loyal to the constitution than to him. A defining feature of national socialism is loyalty to the leader, not to the law.

 

In keeping with his national socialist tendencies Trump is in the process of establishing a 150,000-member national police force in the form of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. These officers could at the stoke of a pen be empowered to engage in broader law enforcement activity and unlike the military they would not be subject to the strictures of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. Indeed, Trump seems to be using the military in violation of that act anyway. Meantime many U.S. citizens have been caught up in the roundup of illegal immigrants.

 

Internationally Trump through his tariff policies is attempting to turn the open economy of the United States into more of an autarky where domestic production would be sheltered from international competition. In imposing his tariff regime Trump ignored Congress which has near exclusive power over tariffs and taxation. Trump has now lost twice the courts on his tariffs; and it will soon be up to the Supreme Court to rule on them. Further Trump has imposed punitive tariffs on our allies all while cozying up to dictators Putin and Xi. This all part of the national socialist playbook. It might be stretch, but could there be a Trump, Putin, Xi axis?

 

All the while the moral eunuchs of the Republican Party have either cheered Trump on or silently acquiesced. ( See from 2019:  https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2019/02/the-republican-moral-eunuchs-and.html ) Similarly, fearful of retaliation, the business community has remained silent and bowed to his wishes. Thus, in eight short months Trump has seized control of a good part of the economy and the security apparatus of the state.

 

To be sure this not the first time the U.S. experimented with national socialism in peacetime. In 1933 President Roosevelt used the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) and the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) to take control of a good part of the economy. Fortunately, the NIRA was declared unconstitutional in 1935 and the RFC withered away. Let us hope the Supreme Court does the same thing to Trump’s tariffs.

 

Later in 1971 President Nixon imposed a system of price, wage, rent and dividend controls on the entire economy. Nixon also used the IRS against his enemies and spied on his political opponents. The Nixon controls expired in early 1973 and he was impeached in 1974. Say what you will about Nixon; he respected the process. I doubt that can be said of Trump. In 2009 President Obama temporarily took control of the banking and automobile industries.

 

To conclude Trump is in the process of creating an American version of national socialism. I am not going to use the polite words of state capitalism or American Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics. Forewarned is forearmed!

 

*- The reference to national socialism is derived from Germany’s Nazi Party. The official name of the Nazi Party was Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei  or NSDAP which in English is the National Socialist German Workers Party. The Italian version of national socialism was called Partito Nazionale Fascista, PNF which in English is the National Fascist Party.

Trump, Putin, and Ukraine: Part 2

Last week we wrote up what we thought was a successful conclusion to the Trump-European-Ukraine meeting in Washington D.C. ( See: https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2025/08/trump-putin-and-ukraine-now-comes-hard.html ) Unfortunately, little did we realize that Trump and his hapless special ambassador Steve Witkoff, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, were played for suckers by Putin. Put bluntly, Putin did not agree to security guarantees from the Europeans to be coordinated by the United States. Putin wants all of the Donbass and no European troops in Ukraine.  

So what is to be done now? The U.S. and Europe should step up arms shipments to Ukraine and greenlight Ukrainian attacks deep into Russia. In addition both the U.S. and Europe should sanction Russia to the max. The attacks have already begun with Russia's energy infrastructure now under long range attack. Gas lines are now forming in Russia. In addition, as we have argued in the past, Ukraine should set ablaze the Russian oilfields in Western Siberia. The path to a negotiated settlement requires Russia to feel real pain putting the ball in Trump's court. Hopefully that will happen.   

The Wall Street Journal follows Shulmaven on Serfdom

 

Sunday, July 27, 2025

On the Road to Serfdom*  (See: https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2025/07/on-road-to-serfdom.html )

Trump, Intel and the Road to Serfdom

Hayek warned of the danger of government ownership stakes in major companies.  (See: Trump, Intel and the Road to Serfdom - WSJ paywall)

---

By 

Daniel J. Smith

Aug. 20, 2025 1:47 pm ET

Trump, Putin, and Ukraine: Now Comes the Hard Part

I have been writing about Ukraine since 2014 (See: https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-ukraine-what-is-to-be-done.html ) and as recently as last March. (See: https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2025/03/shame.html ) Yesterday’s White House summit meeting with European leaders and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky reversed the very negative vibes set off by Friday’s Trump-Putin Alaska summit where it was feared that Trump was about to sell out Ukraine. The conversations were both serious and friendly and it seems that there was a real reproachment between Trump and Zelensky.

 

However, the hard part is now ahead of us. It remains to be seen whether or not Putin will actually meet with Zelensky. Today Switzerland offered up its good offices as a meeting site. Should that happen, it would open the way for a trilateral summit with Trump, Putin, and Zelensky.

 

What has to be ironed out is the precise border between Ukraine and the Russian held provinces. That border would have to be defensible, which means that the current Ukrainian position in the Donetsk region would have to be maintained, something that Russia is opposed to. Another question is what the European security guarantee would cover.  For example, would it include troops on ground, air support and rebuilding assistance? Perhaps more important what would be the modalities of the United States’ role as security coordinator. Would it include intelligence sharing, military hardware, and air support? Although Trump has ruled out combat troops, would it allow for support troops involved in training. And don’t forget Putin has a vote in all of this.

 

Nevertheless, for the first time since the war started over three years ago there is a pathway to a settlement. It certainly won’t be perfect because Putin’s aggression would be rewarded, but it will enable Ukraine to be a viable and prosperous state. Remember, diplomacy is the art of the possible.

My Review of Andrew Lambert's "No More Napoleons"

The Balance of Power

King’s College naval historian Andrew Lambert has written an over-detailed evaluation of British geopolitical strategy from 1793-1914. After fighting France for 22 years Britain settled on a strategy of offshore balancing and maintaining order in Europe enforced by the Royal Navy and a small expeditionary force. The initial goal was to prevent a revanchist France from regaining control of Europe. The architects were Prime Minister Lord Liverpool, Foreign Secretary Castlereagh, and the Duke of Wellington. The latter initially as the hero of Waterloo and later as prime minister. Their policies were enhanced by Lord Palmerston as both foreign secretary and prime minister.

Britain’s greatest fear was that a continental power could launch an invasion from the low countries. Hence it was crucial to keep France out of the Scheldt Estuary and the Port of Antwerp. When Belgium split off from Holland the 1839 Neutrality Treaty orchestrated by Palmerston kept France out. The result of that treaty and Britain’s troop presence in Belgium in 1870, kept both France and Germany out of Belgium during their war. This would not be so in 1914.

The linchpin of the strategy was the power of the Royal Navy whose goal was to be at least twice as strong as any two powers. Aside from a quantitative advantage the Royal Navy had the most technologically advanced fleet by taking advantage of steam power, screw propellers, gunnery, and hydrology. The Royal Navy truly ruled the waves and it enabled Britain to become a global power through its colonies, but for that power to be maintained there had to be an offshore balance in Europe.

For most of the 19^th century the policy succeeded largely because France was in a long-term relative decline while Britain was moving to its heights. However, after 1870 Britain entered into a relative decline in relationship to a newly reunified Germany. As a result, it required an alliance with France which severely limited Britain’s freedom of action. Britain learned the hard way in the trenches of France. Given all of Britain’s interest in Belgium, it is a wonder why Germany was unsure about Britain’s entry in World War I after it invaded Belgium.

Although Lambert discusses the 1815 Vienna settlement, he makes little note of Count Metternich of Austria whose interest in a stable Europe was greater than Britain’s. He also does not cite Henry Kissinger’s “A World Restored” on the Congress of Vienna. He also left out a discussion on the 1878 Congress of Berlin where British Prime Minister Disraeli played a leading role in settling, at least for a time, the Balkan question. There is way too much information in this book, and I would only recommend it to history nerds.