Why is Copernicus relevant to our understanding of Globalization?

We are constantly bombarded with media reports on globalization in terms of its increasing process and potential effects on our lives. What is meant by this concept and why should we be concerned with its impact? The developing countries of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and Asia should be interested in it because of the opportunities and threats offered by globalization (also known as globalisation).

The mother of this globalization is Science and the activator is her daughter Technology (both affectionately called science and technology). The most visible manifestations of “globalization” are in the economic and communications spheres. And one of the fathers of Science is our friend Copernicus.

In two sentences his contribution to Science and Globalization is:

Copernicus broke open the medieval idea of an enclosed, Earth-centered universe.
He set the stage for all of modern astronomy.

And why does this matter?

He lived at a time when people believed Earth lay enclosed within crystal spheres at the center of the universe. Can you picture the leap of imagination required for him to conceive of a sun-centered universe? The publication of Copernicus’ book – De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres) – just before his death in 1543, set the stage for all of modern astronomy. Today, people speak of his work as the Copernican Revolution.

Nicolaus Copernicus – Heliocentric Model [HQ]

Post-data: Copernicus wasn’t the first to conceive of a sun-centered universe. Early Greek philosophers also spoke of it. It was the Greek philosopher Aristotle, however, who proposed that the heavens were literally composed of 55 concentric, crystalline spheres to which the celestial objects were attached. In Aristole’s model, Earth lay at the center of these spheres. Thus Earth lay – fixed and enclosed – until Copernicus published his version of a heliocentric universe.

Remembering the wise Talleyrand

Political Cartoon of Napoleon I and TalleyrandNapoleon I, originally Napolean Bonaparte, was the emperor of France. He seized power in 1799 in a coup d'etat, crowned himself emperor in 1804, and attempted to conquer Europe. He abdicated in 1815 after several military defeats. — Political Cartoon of Napoleon I and Talleyrand
Napoleon I, originally Napolean Bonaparte, was the emperor of France. He seized power in 1799 in a coup d’etat, crowned himself emperor in 1804, and attempted to conquer Europe. He abdicated in 1815 after several military defeats.

Je connais quelqu’un qui a plus d’esprit que Napoléon, que Voltaire, que tous les ministres présents et futurs: c’est l’opinion.

I know where there is more wisdom than is found in Napoleon, Voltaire, or all the ministers present and to come — in public opinion.

Charles Maurice de Talleyrand was born a day like today on February 13, 1754. He is one of the smartest and more prolific politicians and diplomats of modern times (and one of my favourites). Born and well educated in the arts, letters and ideas into an aristocratic family in Paris he quickly became a wise men by a young age. He worked, survived and taught successfully for and against the regimes of Louis XVI, participated actively through the French Revolution and then under Napoleon I, Louis XVIII, Charles X, and Louis-Philippe.

The Dutch historian, Pieter Geyl, said once that, “in the purely political arena” the only figure to have held on to his rank in history during the Napoleonic era, apart from Napoleon himself of course, was Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord and he intended to include a chapter on the prince in his famous work Napoleon For and Against (Harmondsworth, 1949).(1)

Talleyrand was, without a doubt, one of the most remarkable figures in the history of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, and certainly one of the most controversial. He was one of a rare breed capable of occupying a wide range of positions in politics and society, both in his public and private life. To a certain extent, he was representative of his era, whether taking on the mantel of the Ancien Régime, as an aristocrat working for the Revolution, or as lord of the Château de Valençay during the Restoration. However, it is the most important of these roles, Minister of Foreign Affairs during the Directoire, the Consulate, the Empire and the Restoration, for which he is of course remembered.

To learn more about his life, works and ideas I invite you to read the following biography (one of my favourite books too) which I am sure you will all enjoy: Talleyrand by Duff Cooper

Remembering J’accuse

“It is a crime to poison the small and the humble,

to exasperate passions of reaction and intolerance,

while taking shelter behind the odious antisemitism…”

A day like today in February 07 1898 the Émile Zola was brought to trial for libel for publishing J’Accuse in the L’Aurore a literary, liberal, and socialist newspaper published in Paris, France J’accuse is in my opinion one of the most important historical essays ever written because it brought to public opinion an honest and objective critic against the ruling elite’s injustices.

In his letter, Zola addressed President of France Félix Faure, and accused the government of antisemitism and the unlawful jailing of Alfred Dreyfus, a French Army General Staff officer sentenced to penal servitude for life for espionage. Further, “Zola pointed out judicial errors and lack of serious evidence. The letter was printed on the front page of the newspaper, and caused a stir in France and abroad. Zola was prosecuted and found guilty of libel on 23 February 1898. To avoid imprisonment, he fled to England, returning home in June 1899.”

Zola’s intention was that he be prosecuted for libel so that the new evidence in support of Dreyfus would be made public^{(“Correspondence Between Emile Zola and Imprisoned Alfred Dreyfus”. Shapell Manuscript Foundation.)} The case divided France deeply between the reactionary army and church and the more liberal commercial society and its ramifications continued for many years. On the 100th anniversary of Zola’s article, France’s Roman Catholic daily paper, La Croix, apologized for its antisemitic editorials during the Dreyfus Affair. As Zola was a leading French thinker, his letter formed a major turning-point in the affair.

Zola’s powerful letter included a direct conversation to the President of France to whom he address as a honorable and rightful man,

And it is to you, Mr. President, that I will proclaim it, this truth, with all the force of the revulsion of an honest man. For your honor, I am convinced that you are unaware of it. And with whom will I thus denounce the criminal foundation of these guilty truths, if not with you, the first magistrate of the country?

And by doing this, he requested the President to be truthful to Justice.

Lets have this letter as a memory of which is our truthful right and obligation as citizens of our States. Let us remember that We MUST always Accuse the wrongdoers and Demand justice to prevail.

Audio (French) – J’Accuse – Lettre ouverte d’Emile Zola

Access to the French Original version available here via Archive.org

Here you can find the English translation of the letter: “I Accuse…!” By Émile Zola

Today January 27 is International Holocaust Memorial Day

Let us never forget,

Holocaust Memorial Day Documentary

Tribute to holocaust victims – We shall never forget!

Two historical references for a discussion on the right to keep and bear arms

**Battle of Courcelette**
Like the observer in the tree in the right foreground, painter Louis Weirter witnessed this Somme battle as a soldier. His painting depicts the chaos and complexity of fighting on the Western Front, and the use of combined arms tactics. The capture of the ruined town of Courcelette, France on 15 September 1916 was a significant Canadian victory. It was also the first time tanks (left foreground) were used in battle.
**Painted by Louis Alexander Weirter**
Beaverbrook Collection of War Art

One of the most controversial discussions in the last few weeks has been the one around guns, its regulation and controls, its production, on the rights to use guns, on private gun ownership and the arguments of those in favor/against the Right to keep and bear arms in the United States of America. The right to keep and bear arms in that country has a historical significance rooted in a long standing common law, prior even to the existence of their Constitution. In England, a similar legal wording can be found in the Bill of Rights 1689 which states “Subjects which are Protestants may have Arms for their Defense”.

The historical significance of this argument is long standing and varies from country to country (specially those with a common law system). The principle behind this topic is the relation of the private ownership (historically contextualized of course) of the “means of force” versus the monopoly of the use of force by government. Today I have two recommendations on this topic for those of you looking for essays and books to read: