Address to 2024 Drake Energy Security Forum

The following is a summary of Nick’s October 15, 2024 address at the Drake Energy Security Forum.

It’s awesome to be here, at the birthplace of the modern oil industry. It’s fascinating to think that shortly after Edwin Drake struck oil here, the company I work for, CNX Resources, was just getting started.

For 160 years we have been at the forefront of Appalachia’s energy and economic evolution, and today, we continue to be a regional innovator.

That term – regional innovator – plays to the conference theme this year, “At the Crossroads: Navigating America’s Energy & Climate Dilemmas”. I don’t see a dilemma as much as a crucial need for all stakeholders to accept the realities of the situation.

I’ve got a lot to say and cover, so let’s get into it. You may not agree with everything I have to say today. But, as pointed out earlier, the purpose of this forum is to engage in civil discourse. Let’s have some fun.

Climate, Renewable Fuel Sources, and Geopolitics

Let’s talk climate. Weather is in the news with the recent tragic storms.

Climate change is happening. It’s been happening for millions of years. It will be happening as long as there is a planet Earth. And we know that well before the start of the Industrial Revolution, when human beings figured out how to harness the magical power of that carbon atom, the extent of climate change had been much more severe than what we’ve seen the past couple hundred years.

Three quick examples. Around 5000 years ago the Florida Keys were completely underwater for substantial periods of time because of higher sea levels. In the time of Christ in the Mediterranean region, both sea levels and temperatures were significantly higher than today. And then around 1000 AD, there were Vikings in Greenland doing what? Farming.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide has indeed increased since the start of the Industrial Revolution. It’s gone from about 200 parts per million up to about 400 parts per million today. Think of those proportions as follows. For a college football stadium holding 100,000 fans, a 200 parts per million concentration of visiting fans is only 20 spectators in the stands. 99,980 are home fans. If you double the concentration of visiting fans to 400 parts per million, the number of visiting fans has doubled. It’s gone up from 20 to now 40 fans. Has the atmosphere of that crowd changed to any observable extent?

And despite CO2 levels going up over the past couple hundred years, climate-related deaths globally have plummeted. They’re down 95 percent over the past century. And we know that more people die globally from extreme cold, many more than from extreme heat.

Innovation with the shale revolution allowed natural gas to displace enormous amounts of coal in the power grid, reducing CO2 emissions tremendously the past 30 years.

That wasn’t from government, mandates, regulation, and it certainly wasn’t from wind and solar. It was the private sector innovating with disruptive technology in places like Pennsylvania. Yes, Pennsylvania. Since 2005, using natural gas on our grid dropped state CO2 emissions over 40 percent.

Yet while US and PA carbon emissions are down since 2000, India’s are up 150+% and China’s are up 200+%. The developing world uses more coal than ever. Can’t blame them. They’re after reliable and affordable energy access and who doesn’t want that?

And so-called renewables, that’s false advertising. There’s nothing renewable about wind or solar. Wind and solar are not zero carbon or zero emitting. The supply chain life cycle assessment of what it takes to produce a kilowatt hour from solar or wind betrays huge carbon footprints.

Wind and solar also suffer from very low energy density, making it impossible to scale without ecological damage. The amount of wind turbines or the acreage of solar panels needed to pursue supposed net zero plans would require blanketing entire states with either solar farms or wind farms,

And it brings collateral damage with it. Offshore wind and whale kills along the East Coast of the United States. And onshore wind, the worst thing that happened to birds since the cat.

These realities are why it’s concerning to see what elites and experts are forcing upon society and economies when it comes to policy cures or medicines to ‘tackle’ climate change.

The consequences of those medicines or cures may be significantly worse for economies and quality of life across the globe than the actual symptoms or ailments of climate change.

Consider the carbon dioxide emissions tied to wind and solar and electric vehicles and their supply chains I mentioned.

First you need massive mining and movement of surface area to get to the requisite materials , requiring substantial carbon-fueled energy, transportation, and equipment.

And most of that must happen in faraway lands. Secondly, once you’ve mined the stuff, you need to concentrate it into purified feedstocks. That is going to require even more carbon energy. Again, most occurring in foreign locations.

Once concentrated, all those feedstocks come together in a manufacturing facility to start building the components for wind turbines and solar panels and electric vehicle batteries. Those factories are likely powered by a carbon-based grid, often coal-fired.

Then all those components are transported to the United States and Europe. Whether via ships, rail, trucks, or planes, what’s going to fuel that transportation? Yes, carbon-based energy.

Oh, and constructing the wind turbine towers and the solar arrays requires concrete, clearing trees for pads, clearing right of way, and metal transmission lines for the kilowatt hours. All carrying significant carbon footprints.

And once everything’s installed, if the wind doesn’t blow or the sun isn’t shining, often the case in places like Pennsylvania, you need a reliable back up, which will be some form of carbon-based power.

Add all that up. A very substantial carbon dioxide footprint for wind and solar. And a legitimate accounting of the life-cycle CO2 footprint for EVs will show they are materially higher than the internal combustion engine.

That’s why the consequences will not be positive ones with pursuing the policy medicines that have been prescribed. The promised cure ends up being worse than the vilified disease.

But there are other negative consequences. Wind and solar are not cheap as a foundation of an electric grid. We see proof everywhere. Wind projects are failing because of poor economics and higher costs.

Another negative consequence is general inflation. General inflation is raging as economies and societies embarked on these net zero follies because the latter causes the former. Increase the cost of energy and you create energy scarcity, you reduce reliability of energy, and that will adversely affect the cost of everything in society because everything utilizes energy.

None of this is good news for consumers or the middle class or businesses.

Our balance of trade also suffers, because China has built a stranglehold on the supply chains to manufacture an electric vehicle or a wind turbine or a solar array. The US and EU simply cannot mine, process, or manufacture enough of the stuff needed for a net zero plan relying on wind, solar, and EVs. Ridiculous to assume so.

There are dire geopolitical aspects to climate policies. They enable bad actors across the map.

Russia now enjoys energy leverage over Europe because of EU climate polices. Europe purposely shut down domestic energy sources of natural gas and nuclear. Coupled with a mad dash to wind and solar, which failed to deliver. That created an energy imbalance, and it was filled by Russian natural gas through pipelines like Nord Stream. Putin saw leverage and was emboldened to invade Ukraine not once, but twice.

China has been gifted enormous leverage from western climate polices. Again. it controls the supply chains of wind, solar and EVs. And now China can confidently eye up Taiwan.

How about OPEC. The US shale revolution slayed OPEC. But the climate alarmists with their policies dutifully resurrected OPEC because we need Mideast oil to flow to keep the price of oil down. Crazy.

Crazier with Iran. Iran knows its oil is now necessary due to climate policies. We appease, loosen sanctions, and fly pallets of cash to them on a carbon fueled plane. The debacle reaps hundreds of billions of dollars for Iran, which it uses to fund Hamas, Hezbollah, and nuclear weapon capability.

Totalitarian Venezuela is yet another example suffering from the same root cause: western climate policies. It went from a pariah and under heavy sanction, to where we ease sanctions, respect sham elections, tolerate kidnapping of our citizens by the government, and ask Chevron to flow billions of dollars of Venezuelan crude.

But the biggest tragedy: individuals in the developing world without access to reliable, affordable energy. Climate alarmist policies ensure they continue to be denied reliable and affordable energy. What gives anyone the moral authority to do so?

What’s really behind these policies? They make no sense from a chemistry, physics, math, and economics perspectives. I think I know; it’s an adversary lurking externally and internally.

The natural enemy of western republican democracy is the Left. Communist, socialist, totalitarian, or some combination. The Left benefits from climate policies on an unprecedented scale.

External vanguards of the Left are coauthors of our climate policies. It’s been well established that Russian interests are huge funders behind the Ban Fracking movement. Climate polices force a transition from energy independence of the West to an energy dependency on totalitarian nations of the Left.

But the adversary is found internally here as well. The Left despises the individual and his or her freedom to choose for themselves. The Left wants to tear away that freedom.

And then place that decision making power in the hands of a higher authority. A religion or ideology. The state. The expert class. Or a toxic cocktail of all three.

What better way to achieve the aims of the Left than by controlling energy? If you wanted to control society and the individual, but you could only choose one industry or sector to achieve it by, what would you choose? Health care or maybe finance or maybe tech? Not bad. But I would choose energy. Because the kilowatt hour, HP, and BTU touch everything in a modern economy.

If you control the kilowatt hour, the HP, and the BTU, you control decision making. Folks, climate policies are not about atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. They are not about weather. They are about control.

If my premise is correct, one would see climate policies bleeding into things beyond the generation grid. We are seeing just that.

Consider food. What you can and should eat is being attacked by everyone from radical environmentalists to the United Nations. Now experts demand we consider the carbon footprints of foods. There is a hit list. Red meat, ice cream, beer. So if you like those foods, I’ve got some bad news that might be coming your way when these climate policies continue on their inevitable march toward control.

Driving is another front in the fight. What better expression of personal freedom than the personal automobile? But with EV mandates, the individual now is reliant on the availability of the grid and when and where you may charge. Climate policies aim to transition the personal car from a quality-of-life booster for the masses to a luxury of the 1%. Another form of control.

Did you hear of 15-minute cities? It’s a movement found in climate policies to ultimately force individuals to live in urban areas within so many minutes of walking distance to public transportation. Because that would be the only mode of transportation available. And to force living in small apartments versus larger individual homes.

Climate policy is manifesting in emergency powers. Climate emergency days that you now see in California. When it’s hot, don’t charge your EV or run your air conditioner or open your business. Grid emergency. Created by climate policies.

The end goal is for the individual to lose control over their own decision making. Instead, trust in the higher authority, the government or the expert. In line with the ideology of the Left.

They’ll take care of you and tell you what to do. But history informs what happens once the Left controls.

What is an energy industry, Keystone State, and American to do? There is a quite exciting path if you assess. I admit I have a somewhat contrarian view versus the common consensus. Let me share my thoughts and see what you think.

The Evolving Energy Landscape

First, I agree with certain aspects of the common consensus.

  • Policy and key sectors of the global economy continue to pursue lower CO2 emissions; maybe not zero but much, much lower than current.
  • Policy is mandating an electrification of everything, resulting in unprecedented demand growth for the power grid. The most recent example is data centers and AI.
  • The ability of wind and solar to deliver uninterruptible, reliable, and low-cost energy at scale to feed the growing grid demand is extremely suspect (to be kind).

Natural gas should be the clear winner across energy sources to meet higher energy demand at lower CO2 intensity.

Better yet, the Appalachian basin and Pennsylvania, with the Marcellus and Utica shales, is the premier natural gas deposit on the planet.

If all this comprised the complete analysis and game board, one would rightly conclude that the Appalachian basin is poised to flourish, and one would have expected these results to have already manifested in current market metrics.

Yet that has not occurred. And I believe it will not occur without a shift in the situational assessment by the industry, capital markets, and policy makers. We are misreading things.

This is where I diverge from the common consensus.

I believe:

  • Policy across governments and bureaucracies prohibits the smooth allocation of capital into infrastructure to link Appalachian nat gas to growing grid demand. Attempts to navigate the policy roadblocks are met with a coordinated lawfare campaign that strangles with litigation. The idea of a new pipeline to provide Appalachian energy to Boston is ridiculously obvious. But such a pipe will not be allowed to be built; it is counter to that ideology that permeates a system from which approval must be secured to proceed.
  • Supply from the Appalachian basin is experiencing a step-change evolution with the deep Utica. CNX has pioneered this horizon, and we see it delivering a new level of supply magnitude (higher) and response time (quicker) for the basin.
  • When a basin establishes higher potential supply levels, delivers quicker supply response times, and is artificially bottled-up due to the inability to invest in logical infrastructure, there will be in-basin price consequences. Unless something creates new demand or take-away, a sustained upside for in-basin pricing will remain elusive.
  • The industry looks to LNG export as being the answer. However, to unlock the next wave of Appalachian supply, LNG requires more pipes to move our product to coastal LNG terminals. Even setting aside the infrastructure constraints, a true step-change in LNG export capacity is a nonstarter over the next decade due to policy and legal constraints, the most recent example being the LNG permit ‘pause.’
  • Now many point to growing grid demand to power AI data centers as the answer. After all, such demand in-basin doesn’t require new long-haul pipes or large-scale LNG facilities. But the tech industry who buys the power to feed the data center economy will demand the power come from something that offers a low/net zero CO2 footprint. They don’t want just low-cost and reliable power. They demand low-cost, reliable, and low/net zero CO2 power.

Those realities may depress at first blush, but there is an exciting path available from the herd mentality. What would that look like? Well, it’s been what CNX has been up to.

There are key industrial sectors of today’s economy that are growing and have an appetite for energy. Hydrogen and the IRA, Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF), power grid and AI Data Centers, and transportation fleets.

Energy to the above sectors must meet certain criteria. The following ‘boxes’ must be ‘checked’: reliable, uninterruptible, low-cost, short supply chain, ready now, net zero or low CO2, and the ability to demonstrate no harm to local/regional ecosystems.

None of the touted energy solutions check all the boxes. Wind and solar – we covered those fatal shortcomings already. Nuclear has lots of excitement but recent experience is not promising. Ultra-high cost to build, as evidenced by Georgia Power; not ready now and will take years to build.

Natural gas? Many advantages and boxes checked, but one key shortcoming of not net-zero CO2.

So, what energy solutions would check all the boxes? CNX and Appalachia offer a few.

The first is captured coal mine methane, or CMM. As determined by the US Department of Energy, CMM is a carbon-negative product that reduces the methane emissions entering the atmosphere.

When CMM is custom blended with the Marcellus and Utica, companies like CNX can deliver to customers an energy supply with the exact carbon intensity desired. A CMM blend product has a fraction of the cost of new nuclear and offers scalability, reliability, and supply chain benefits that are far superior to wind and solar.

But our solutions are not limited to CMM. Technologies now ready for deployment allow us to harness the unique characteristics of the deep Utica to manufacture low-cost, low-carbon intensity CNG and LNG on-pad, serving markets beyond those linked by existing pipelines.

These products can meet those growing sectors of energy demand.

  • Hydrogen production at scale requires enormous amounts of reliable energy. CNX’s CMM blended with shale gas is ready-now to provide net-zero hydrogen at scale. This, when coupled with the IRA, will kickstart hydrogen production across Appalachia.
  • The creation of SAF to decarbonize aviation has remained elusive as emerging alternatives to existing jet fuels have failed to meet scalability and cost challenges. CMM blended with shale gas provides a net zero CO2 solution. Our project at the Pittsburgh International Airport will be the first SAF plant at scale utilizing CMM.
  • The re-shoring of American industry is another opportunity. CNX is partnering with NewLight Technologies to provide CMM as a critical feedstock into their manufacturing process that creates revolutionary, net-zero, biodegradable, plastics-substitute products. Manufacturers looking to decarbonize and de-risk supply chains will look to Appalachia and CNX.
  • AI will increase energy demand and Appalachia is uniquely positioned to benefit from this growth due to its proximity to CMM, short supply chains to shale gas, and legacy infrastructure. But the AI economy needs energy solutions at scale, today. Data center developers are logical customers for CMM blends and CNG/LNG.
  • Pad-level CNG and LNG are poised to disrupt transportation fleets served by diesel and gasoline. Our solutions are reliable, local, and ready-now to improve emissions and economics by converting away from heavier hydrocarbons.
    The opportunity for this basin is exciting. End markets are just starting to realize it. We are about to experience a transformation of Appalachia.

Real solutions to real problems require policy rooted in objective fact.

There is the need for good macro policy, what we discussed, but also good regional policy.

Radical Transparency

On that note I want to wrap up with an approach CNX is working on to change the paradigm on the local and regional level – we call it Radical Transparency.

An air quality monitor at the CNX RHL37 well pad in Greene County, PA. Visit www.cnxradicaltransparency.com to learn more.

What is it? Data-driven monitoring, analysis and transparency to guide policy that protects the public and recognizes the important role of energy in Pennsylvania and Appalachia.

We built and rolled this out with help from Governor Shapiro and PA Department of Environmental Protection.

We are monitoring air and water quality, waste, and methane in and around our operations.

We are open sourcing data for all to see in real time. This is critical. We can’t continue to hold our data in a black box and release it on our terms to a limited audience. You can find it on the web right now.

The data is collected independently by an accredited third party.

And the PADEP is provided this data unabridged at the same time as it is provided to us – further transparency and confidence.

Simple but powerful. Without real time transparency, industry data will always be questioned and dismissed. So, let’s provide it.

We’re just getting started with this effort so expect to hear much more about it.

For daily insights and commentary from Nick Deiuliis, follow Nick on X at @NickDeiuliis and on LinkedIn.

History Hiding in Hotels: The Hague’s Hotel Des Indes

By Nick Deiuliis

Humans are odd creatures. We spend billions of dollars and invest precious free time to travel and explore the history and culture of places, both near and far. Our bucket lists abound with unvisited destinations as our runway of time remaining in our mortal coils steadily diminishes.

Despite our innate drive to explore, we often pass by and miss a trove of history waiting to be discovered during our travels.  Stories that are latently present in something you find everywhere, from hometowns to exotic locales.

Where is all this history and culture awaiting?  In, of all things…hotels.

Think about it.  Travelers tend to limit exploration options to the traditional list of museums, monuments, streets, neighborhoods, restaurants, and events.  Meanwhile, hotels are demoted to nothing more than places to sleep and park luggage.

That’s a mistake for lovers of travel, history, and sense of place.

Of course, the older the hotel, the deeper the history and story.  Certainly, every large American city boasts an impressive list of legacy-rich hotels.  In Europe, it’s ridiculous how deep the roster runs.

Realizing how hotels can add to the travel experience opens a new dimension to historical and cultural prospecting.

By way of example, consider the awe-inspiring history of a hotel I stumbled upon during a recent trip.  It’s in the Netherlands; in the city of The Hague, the official seat of government of the Netherlands.1  Its name is Hotel Des Indes. What a story it has.

The Palace Before the Hotel

The Hotel Des Indes prominently sits in the center of The Hague, occupying the corner of the city’s famous tree-lined avenue, Lange Voorhout.  This impressive green space was originally envisioned and created in 1536 when the Holy Roman Emperor and House of Habsburg leader, Carl V, visited The Hague and wanted to alleviate the city’s overcrowding.  The front yards of several prominent residences were appropriated, and the consolidated space was converted into a prestigious walking avenue lined by trees.

For five centuries that vision has provided one of Europe’s most enjoyable urban venues.

The Lange Voorhout in the city center of The Hague, the Netherlands, on a sunny autumn day.

By the late 1500s, as the Middle Ages ended, the region we now know as the Netherlands became a republic.  Its political center became The Hague, and the golden age of the Dutch Empire, one of the most powerful empires in history, began.

The Dutch Empire rose, roamed the world, and receded.  Meanwhile, not much happened on the corner of The Hague’s Lange Voorhout for about 300 years.

Things got interesting in 1858 when Baron van Brienen, a counsellor to Dutch King William III, decided to build a town palace on the corner of the posh Lange Voorhout.  He chose the location despite already enjoying an impressive estate, Clingendael, on the outskirts of The Hague, so that he could host parties in the city center.2

The baron built his urban palace, featuring a magnificent ballroom and other luxurious amenities that would later benefit the future hotel. The palace was a bold statement, and in many ways a physical manifestation of the baron’s ego.

The baron’s eye for detail in the mid-1800s can be found in today’s hotel.  The baron had his initial ‘B’ inscribed on the gilded doorknobs of each chamber, which can still be admired on the doors of the entryway to the hotel salon.  There is a small hole in the top of these doorknobs, designed to accommodate a feather.  A white feather in the doorknob signified to palace staff and visitors that entry was permitted, while a red feather in the doorknob indicated the baron did not want to be disturbed.3

Despite his stature, title, and fortune, in 1863 the baron ultimately did what we all do: he died.

Birth of the Hotel Des Indes

In real estate it’s all about location, location, location.  The baron’s palace occupied a prime spot on the corner of the gathering center of The Hague. A perfect location for a hotel.

After the baron’s death, the palace building was sold, underwent an extensive multi-year renovation, and was dedicated as a hotel.  An 1880 announcement boasted, “This first-grade hotel is the largest in the residency and has been newly furnished according to the standards of this current time.”  Indeed, the Hotel Des Indes was quite the item when it opened.

The hotel’s name, Des Indes, was inspired by the then-famous hotel of the same name in Batavia, or what we know today as Indonesia, which was a Dutch colony.  The coat of arms of Batavia is still displayed in the triangular decoration on the facade of the hotel and on the canopy over the hotel entrance.   The name of the Batavian hotel was copied as a marketing ploy to attract travelers from the Dutch East Indies as guests when visiting The Hague.

The first guest, at least for dinner, was the famous reformed banker-turned-Dutch artist, Hendrik Willem Mesdag.4  The painter reserved a large table at the end of April in 1881 to celebrate a wedding anniversary with his wife and his close friends.

Above is a section of Mesdag’s most famous work, the Panorama Mesdag. The painting is a massive panoramic work completed in 1881 that showcases a 360-degree painted view of the beach and dunes at Scheveningen.

On May 1st, 1881, the hotel officially opened with a toast by Prince Frederick of Orange.  Two days later the hotel hosted a ball, with attendees wearing costumes dressed as Greeks, Turks, or in Renaissance style.

Hotel Des Indes soon made its mark as a progressive and innovative hotel for its time. Each floor had a bathroom and a few years later each room was outfitted with a bathroom, offering hot and cold running water. There was an intercom system that guests could use to call reception from their rooms.  The hotel offered an unprecedented level of luxury and technology.

Home-Away-From-Home for Political Elites

Russian Tsar Nicolas II, the last emperor of Russia, father of Anastasia, and eventual victim of a Bolshevik firing squad, played a pivotal role in the hotel’s legacy when he proposed to host a peace conference in The Hague in 1899.   A slew of new guests, consisting of heads of state, governors, and diplomats, found their way to the residential hotel and stayed there for months during what came to be known as the First International Peace Conference.5

The Tsar’s idea and subsequent conference created the opportunity for Hotel Des Indes to cement its reputation among the elites of the diplomatic service.  That’s a key constituency that regularly visits The Hague, the seat of Dutch government.

American political leadership was drawn to the Hotel Des Indes through the years; Presidents Benjamin Harrison, Teddy Roosevelt, and Jimmy Carter stayed at the hotel on separate occasions.

The hotel also has an impressive Pittsburgh connection.

After that first peace conference in 1899, it was agreed that the world needed an International Court of Arbitration so that humans could avoid war.6  A donation was made by Andrew Carnegie, at the time the richest man in the world, to construct what became the Peace Palace in The Hague (today it houses the International Court of Arbitration).  Before Andrew Carnegie’s visit to The Hague in 1913 to commemorate the opening of the Peace Palace, the hotel hosted an army of security staff tasked with protecting Carnegie from kidnapping.

Surviving Conflict: Hotel Des Indes Through the World Wars

Austria’s Archduke Franz Ferdinand stayed at the Hotel Des Indes three years before his assassination that triggered the start of the First World War.   Although the Netherlands remained neutral during the Great War, the global strife led to economic calamity, affecting the hotel as well.  It took an intervention by the Dutch government in 1918 to insure the survival of the Hotel Des Indes.  The government bailout of the hotel allowed the Netherlands to offer war negotiators first-class lodging while they immersed in peace talks at the nearby Peace Palace.

Between world wars, in 1929, the hotel hosted diplomats who met at The Hague for the Conference on Reparations, just before the collapse in global financial markets.

Then came World War II. The Netherlands tried to remain neutral at the start, hoping to copy its successful strategy for avoiding World War I’s destruction. Unfortunately, Germany didn’t consider Netherlands neutrality as acceptable, and Hitler demanded its immediate surrender.

He was rebutted initially, so Germany proceeded to have Rotterdam destroyed by German bombers.  Germany promised to unleash the same devastation on The Hague, Amsterdam, and other Dutch cities in the coming days if the Netherlands did not unconditionally surrender. General Winkleman was left in charge of the Dutch government after the queen fled to London.  Facing certain destruction across his country, the general surrendered on May 14th, 1940, a few doors down from the Hotel Des Indes.

The Germans occupied The Hague and the Wehrmacht moved into the Hotel Des Indes.  A machine gun was placed in the hotel hallway.  A bust of Hitler was brought to the hotel to be placed at the reception area, but the hotel director brazenly objected, and surprisingly the rejection was accepted by the Germans.  The hotel during World War II German occupation became known as the ‘Wehrmacht Hotel’.

LEFT: The Hague Arrival of General Eisenhower Lange Voorhout Palace on Oct. 6, 1945. RIGHT: General Eisenhower and Dutch General Hendrik Johan Kruls at Hotel Des Indes on Jan. 10, 1951 (Credit: Duinen, […] van / Anefo – Nationaal Archief)

After liberation by the Allies, American troops stayed at the hotel.  Britain’s Winston Churchill and General Montgomery were some of the first guests after liberation. There’s a famous photo of General Eisenhower touring The Hague after the war with the Hotel Des Indes in the background, and Ike returned to the hotel in the early 1950s when he became the first NATO commander.

Spectrum of Celebrity Through the Years

Andrew Carnegie wasn’t the only American business titan to be connected to the Hotel Des Indes.  Henry Ford and his family stayed at the hotel in 1930 as he worked on building a Dutch manufacturing facility.  Media tycoon William Hearst stayed at the hotel regularly in the 1930s as he attended art shows looking for Dutch masters works for his extensive art collection.

Charles Lindberg was at the hotel in the 1930s, who after his famous transatlantic flight was the biggest celebrity on the planet.  The Dali Lama was at Des Indes.

Movie stars stayed at the hotel through the years, including France’s Yvette Guilbert in 1902, one of the world’s first movie stars.  Josephine Baker, the first black woman to star in a movie and civil rights activist, stayed at the hotel in 1955.  Iconic Audrey Hepburn signed the hotel guestbook during the mid-1980s. Omar Shariff played in a bridge tournament at the hotel.

Rachmaninoff, of the great composers of classical music, slept at the hotel in 1928.

The most famous ballerina in the world in the 1920s, Anna Pavlova, of The Dying Swan fame, met her premature and unfortunate demise at the hotel in 1931, in the hotel’s Japanese Salon.  Pavlova was traveling, and while staying at the hotel became severely ill.  Doctors told her she had pneumonia, she required an operation, and that she would never be able to dance again if she went ahead with the operation. She refused to have the surgery, saying, “If I can’t dance, then I’d rather be dead”.  She died shortly after in the hotel.

Prince (or the artist formerly known as Prince) set up at Des Indes when he played Rotterdam.  So did Michael Jackson and Bono. The arrival of Mick Jagger brought a mob of hysterical fans in front of the entryway of the hotel.

Incredible Story Within an Epic History

There is one story tied to Hotel Des Indes than impresses above all others, one that does not pertain to a celebrity or notable event.  Instead, it is an amazing story of an individual.

The story belongs to a long-time hotel employee, Kurt Irrgang.  He worked at the hotel for nearly 40 years, but it was his journey over his career that is amazing.

Kurt was born in Germany in 1914 and moved to Belgium when he was a teenager to train for a career in hospitality.  After he graduated from hotel school, he moved to The Hague and started a job as a lobby boy at the Hotel Des Indes.  Kurt married a Dutch woman, she gave birth to twins, and then Germany promptly invaded the Netherlands.  A challenging time to be raising a young family.

But it got worse for Kurt.  When the Germans occupied The Hague and the Wehrmacht settled into the Hotel Des Indes, they came to realize Kurt is German-born.  Protocol dictated that Irrgang be immediately assigned to join the German military.  He was separated from his family and dispatched to the worst front imaginable, the Russian Front.  The last place you would want to be as a German foot solider during World War II.

Toward the end of the war as Germany is collapsing, Kurt is captured by the Russians in Czechoslovakia.  He is sent to a prison camp in Siberia, likely undergoing forced labor, torture, and other trauma that he refused to speak of through his life.  He was released by the Russians a few years after the war’s end, and he made his way back to his family in The Hague.

Kurt returned to the hotel to work and climbed his way up the career ladder to become Matre’d of the Hotel Des Indes.  He officially became a Dutch citizen in 1956.

Kurt became an iconic part of the hotel in the eyes of guests and staff.

Some say history is made by the individual.  Kurt Irrgang’s journey proves they are correct.

Des Indes: Blueprint for Spotting History Hiding in Plain Sight

The story of Hotel Des Indes is one example in one city.  There are hundreds of Hotel Des Indes across America and Europe waiting to be appreciated and decoded.

The Hague is located on the west coast of the Netherlands, approximately 45 miles southwest of Amsterdam. The North Sea is visible on the horizon, above.

Don’t miss hiding-in-plain-sight history and culture during your next visit or trip to wherever life takes you.  It may be where you live and sleep for a few days, or right around the corner.   Travelers from all walks of life will inevitably find something of specific interest to them within the walls of these lodging gems.

Running down the rabbit holes of hotels does not require staying in them.  Simply walk in and look around.   Or grab a drink or a bite to eat.  Many hotels have staff happy to discuss their proud legacies.

Change your travel routine, whether for first-time visits or repeat visits and whether for business or pleasure.  Do a little research prior to find the oldest and most historic hotels.  Invest the time for a quick stop and look around.  You’ll be surprised at what you find.

Hotels offer the opportunity to stumble upon history by accident…but sort of by design.  The best of both worlds.

•

[1] Although Amsterdam is the official capital of the Netherlands.  I know, more complicated than it needs to be.  That’s European bureaucracy for you.
[2] This is European royalty we are talking about, after all.
[3] Try that at home and see if it works.  Good luck, if your house is anything like mine.
[4] Mesdag played a key role in the rise of the Haggse School, or The Hague School, of painting.  Their use of somber colors is why they are sometimes referenced as the Gray School.
[5] One hotel guest and conference attendee was Paul Kruger, president of the Republic of South Africa, leader of the peasant rebellion known as the Boer War, and who the famous gold coin Krugerrand is named after.
[6] Does any of that sound familiar?  More than one hundred years later, still working on that thought.

Making Alexander Great: Five Secret Ingredients

By Nick Deiuliis

The moniker, Alexander the Great, is befitting of the man’s historical resume. Macedonian ruler of the known world, from Greece to India. By age 30, creator of one of the largest empires in history. Undefeated in battle and a brilliant military mind. Visionary leader.

Countless pages over centuries have covered seemingly every aspect of Alexander’s life and campaigns. Historians obsess over Alexander’s military tactics and famous battle sequences. Psychologists opine on his ego, temper, and sexual preferences while physicians diagnose his combat injuries, illnesses, and medical treatments. Logisticians marvel at his army’s supply chain prowess.

Yet there are five critical and intriguing components to Alexander the Great’s epic story that are not properly appreciated. Factors that don’t have much to do with military battles or tactics. Five vital, yet secret, ingredients that were necessary to build the legend.

Most Elite of Upbringings

Aristotle (born 384 BC) is one of history’s greatest minds. The polymath covered subjects spanning the natural sciences, philosophy, linguistics, economics, politics, psychology, and the arts. He attended Plato’s Academy until his late 30s and laid the groundwork for the development of modern science.

The historian Robin Lane Fox noted that Aristotle “wrote books on the constitutions of 158 different states, edited a list of the victors in the games at Delphi, discussed music and medicine, astronomy, magnets and optics, made notes on Homer, analyzed rhetoric, outline the forms of poetry, considered the irrational side of men’s nature, set zoology on a proper experimental course, was intrigued by bees and began the study of Embryology.”

Though Aristotle wrote many elegant treatises and dialogues for publication, only around a third of his original output has survived, and none of it was intended for publication.1

Shortly after Plato died, Aristotle left Athens and ended up pursuing a crucial career opportunity that impacted world history. Philip II ruled Macedonia, to the north of Greece. The King wanted Aristotle, the best instructor in the land, to tutor Philip’s son, Alexander (not yet known as ‘The Great’).

Phillip built a school in Mieza for Aristotle to instruct young Alexander and a group of young noblemen. The future conqueror received three years of instruction from Aristotle at the academy.2

The archeological site of Mieza located in Macedonia is where Aristotle is believed to have tutored Alexander.

Aristotle prepared for Alexander a special text of the Iliad, which was Alexander’s favorite work. Legend has it that Alexander kept Aristotle’s text on the Iliad under his pillow. Aristotle also wrote pamphlets for Alexander on kingship, colonies, and instructed him on geometry, rhetoric, and the ability to debate a case from one side as well as the other. All of which were tools that would serve Alexander well during his life.

Indeed, Alexander enjoyed the most exclusive of upbringings. His father, Philip II, was King of Macedonia. His teacher was Aristotle. And he attended an elite academy built especially for him.

Not exactly the rearing environment of a common peasant. Yet Alexander as a leader earned the respect of the common soldier through his actions.

Alexander would often lead the attack charge, receive treatment for his wounds after his injured soldiers were cared for, and sleep in the same conditions as his soldiers. That style of leadership is rare, particularly for someone with the privileged background of Alexander.

Family Dysfunction

Alexander the Great experienced a volatile set of family dynamics early in life. An ancient version of a soap opera, reality show, and investigative crime documentary rolled into one.

Alexander’s mother, Olympias, was the wife of Philip II. She was Greek, and since the Greek states were historic rivals of Macedonia, it made the royal arrangement somewhat controversial.

When Alexander was a young man, his father repudiated Alexander’s mother and took as a new wife a Macedonian who had a daughter with Philip and was expecting what was rumored to be a son. If that were true, it would put Alexander’s succession as the next potential ruler of Macedonia, after his father, in jeopardy.

Succession concerns and the risk of not being next in line in the ancient world often resulted in royal homicide. Sure enough, within a year Philip II was assassinated by a bodyguard. The murder catalyzed instant speculation as to who may have been involved in the murder and what the motive was. It placed Alexander into a dangerous dynamic at a critical age.

Depiction of Philip’s assassination by Pausanias in The Story of the Greatest Nations (c. 1900)

The role that Alexander potentially played in his father’s death has been of historical debate for centuries.

Many historians conclude Alexander was an active participant planning his father’s murder. Father and son often fought, at times violently and publicly. Much of the conflict centered on the drama of Philip II repudiating Alexander’s mother and marrying another woman.

But Alexander devising his father’s murder is just one possible scenario.

Aristotle believed the bodyguard who murdered Philip II acted alone and was achieving revenge after Phillip II terminated their homosexual affair.3

Alexander offered his own theory as to who was behind the assassination of his father. He speculated the murder was politically motivated and organized by the Persians, rivals of Phillip II and Macedonia.

And one cannot rule out Alexander’s mother, Olympias, as a prime suspect in planning Philip’s demise. His new marriage humiliated her and hamstrung the political prospects of her son. Interestingly, Olympias ordered that the body of the murderer be taken down from its stake and cremated with honor.

Alexander experienced, dealt with, and successfully navigated through traumatic family drama—positioning him to become king and begin his conquests. Proving once again that what doesn’t kill you often makes you stronger. Or alternatively, if Alexander played a role in his father’s death, proving that sometimes crime pays.

Machiavellian…Centuries Before Machiavelli

Alexander’s upbringing and personal crises at a young age prepared him to become a master at Machiavellian tactics long before the birth of Machiavelli. He had a talent to manipulate politics and shape perception to his liking.

After Alexander would win a major battle, he would often send trophies taken from the enemy (armor, shields, etc.) back to Greece and Athens to be displayed in temples. He would inscribe on the trophies: “Alexander son of Philip and the Greeks”. In parentheses he would write: “Except the Spartans”, and then would continue with “[sends] these spoils from the Persians in Asia”.
Two details of the practice and inscriptions highlight Alexander’s political savvy and group psychology mastery.

The sending of trophies back to Athens adorned with his inscription of being ‘the son of the Greeks’ was public relations genius. Athens and much of Greece were the least reliable allies of Macedonia and Alexander. Alexander’s practice transformed himself into a Greek, whereby it would be more difficult for Greeks or Athenians to not stick with the alliance.

His parenthetical portion of the trophy inscriptions, ‘except the Spartans’, accomplished an even larger public relations feat. Specifically excluding the Spartans conveniently allowed Alexander to rewrite history into a version that was more suited to his goals. Before Alexander, the Spartans were the undisputed regional leaders and champions of Greek liberty against the Persians.4 Excluding Sparta in the trophies’ dedications was Alexander’s way to modify history, whereby he displaced the Spartan legacy of being the exemplar of Greek resistance against the recognized enemy, Persia. And inserted himself as the new exemplar.

Welcoming Input, Only to Decide the Opposite

Alexander encouraged debate and input from his senior advisors throughout campaigns. Yet he also had a penchant for deciding a course counter to what those closest to him advised. As far as Alexander was concerned, the consensus be damned.

Four examples show the dynamic at play.

The earliest decision point involved what to do about Persia’s formidable naval fleet in the Mediterranean. Alexander’s advisers urged seeking a direct naval battle with the Persians and then pivoting to the next step based upon the outcome of the naval encounter.

Alexander disagreed. His strategic vision was beyond what his advisers could see. While the advisers were thinking short-term and tactical victory or setback, Alexander was thinking long-term and aiming for total global domination. He chose to forgo a direct naval battle and instead to take out Persian naval bases along the coast to, as he put it, ‘defeat the Persian fleet from the land.’ It was unconventional thinking and it worked.

A second decision point that illustrated Alexander’s penchant for bucking the consensus and choosing a separate path came after Alexander won his first battle against Darius of Persia. Darius offered Alexander an enticing bribe to cease his campaign: all of Asia Minor. Alexander pushed on and after he won another battle against Darius, the Persian leader upped his offer to include all territory up to the Euphrates River, treasure, and Darius’ daughter’s hand in marriage.

Alexander’s advisors strongly urged him to accept the deal. Darius’ offer was far beyond what the advisors hoped to achieve tactically in the campaign. But Alexander flatly refused, using the justification that he already informed Darius that he, Alexander, was Lord of Asia. Therefore, all Darius’ wealth and lands were already Alexander’s, including Darius’ daughter’s hand in marriage (but only if Alexander wanted to take it).

Alexander’s decision to not accept the offer and continue with the campaign proved a good one. Alexander’s advisors played tactical checkers while Alexander was playing strategic chess.

Two other examples of Alexander astutely dissenting from his advisors’ opinions at crucial decision points pertain to battle tactics.

At the Granicus, advisors thought attempting to cross the river with the Persian army already sitting at the other bank would be disastrous. Alexander was convinced attacking directly across the river would create a psychological advantage for his army and result in victory and proclaimed, “I should feel ashamed after crossing the sea from Europe to Asia if this little stream should hinder us.” He led the charge into the river, which led to victory.

At Guagamela, Alexander’s inner circle debated whether the army should attack at night or daylight. Advisors thought a night attack better, but Alexander felt it could confuse the troops and would not be befitting of the reputation of the army. He said darkness belonged to “robbers and way layers” and “…my glory shall not be diminished by stealing a victory. I am determined on an open attack.” Once again, his decision led to victory.

Oratory to Manipulate, Inspire, and Persuade

Alexander was an extremely talented orator. He was able to connect with and inspire his troops at crucial junctures.

Looking to conquer the known world over the course of years will create times when the army grows weary and frustrated. Alexander’s army, thousands of miles from home and away for years, was not immune to that phenomenon. One of Alexander’s most effective tools for countering poor morale and recharging it was his gift for public speaking.

Alexander and Porus by Charles Le Brun, painted 1673, depicting the Battle of the Hydaspes.5

A crucial test of energizing poor morale via oratory for Alexander was presented by his army in India. To manipulate his troops’ feelings and to motivate them to stay, he gave a passionate speech. He focused on his leading from the front, subjecting himself to the hardships of the common soldier, and of the loyalty owed to him.

Alexander said:

“I have no part of my body, in front at least, that is left without scars; there is no weapon, used at close quarters, or hurled from afar, of which I do not carry the mark. I have been wounded by the sword, shot with arrows, struck from a catapult, smitten many times with stones and clubs for you, for your glory, for your wealth.”

He continued with:

“Depart all of you and when you reach home, tell them there that your king, Alexander, victor over the Persians… Tell them, I say that you deserted him, that you took yourselves off, leaving him to the care of the wild tribes you conquered. This, when you declare it, will be no doubt glorious among men and pious in the sight of heaven. Be gone!”

Alexander certainly had a sense for the dramatic and could adeptly use words to sway.

He coupled the speech with elaborate sulking theatrics over the following few days, and by the end of the performance, his army was ready to follow him anywhere and for as long as he liked.

Five Secret Ingredients Helped Transform Alexander into ‘The Great’

Five crucial and underappreciated attributes helped transform Alexander into the legend. The development of his story required much more than military prowess, bravery, and good timing.

It also required:

  • An elite upbringing at the foot of his king-father and Aristotle;
  • Volatile family dynamics, which tested and introduced him at an early age to the harsh realities of leadership;
  • Ability to define vision and manipulate perception through astute public relations and optics;
  • Confidence to gather views of trusted advisors but to decide on a different course; and,
  • Gifted oratory to sway and inspire during challenging times.

To learn more about the man beyond the military campaigns, check out John Keegan’s The Mask of Command.

A great unconventional work on Alexander is Lance Kurke’s The Wisdom of Alexander the Great: Enduring Leadership Lessons from the Man Who Created an Empire.

The trove of thoughts and views on Alexander the Great seems endless. Indeed, there is still much to learn from the legend, twenty-three centuries later.

•

[1] Here’s a pair of questions to ponder: How different would life today or modern history be if we had the benefit of the full writings and learnings of prior great minds like Aristotle?  If you tally up the cumulative knowledge that mankind amassed over the eons and across the great societies, what percentage survived for today?  Most, half, or only a small fraction?  Your answers may lead to fascinating alternative history scenarios, but for a sacking or pandemic here and there.
[2] Ivy League grads’ bragging rights pale next to those other young noblemen at the Mieza Academy, who were instructed by Aristotle and were classmates with Alexander the Great.
[3] It was quite common for male elites to be openly bisexual during Philip II’s time.
[4] Movie buffs may be familiar with Sparta’s resistance to Persia from the film 300, which was a fictionalized retelling of the Battle of Thermopylae in the Greco-Persian Wars.  Sparta’s King Leonidas led 300 fearless Spartans into battle against the Persian King Xerxes’ massive army.
[5] From Britannica: “The Battle of the Hydaspes effectively marked Alexander’s farthest advance on the Indian subcontinent. Faced with larger kingdoms to the east and tired from years of war, his army subsequently mutinied and forced him to turn back toward Macedonia. During the return march, Alexander died in Babylon in 323 BCE, and his empire was subsequently divided among his generals.”

William Jennings Bryan: America’s Forgotten Political Titan

By Nick Deiuliis

The most prominent figures in American political history occupied the White House as president.  But there are a few exceptions, quite notable ones.

Two obvious ones are Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton. Neither served as president but both left outsized impacts on the United States that endure to this day.  And there are a couple of other names with extensive legacies that are lesser known: Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun. Neither were president but both exuded tremendous influence and power during their political primes.

Yet there is another, one who had just as much influence and impact on American politics and policies, perhaps arguably even more, than Hamilton, Clay, or Calhoun.  Most Americans outside of political history buffs don’t even know his name, let alone his story.

His name is William Jennings Bryan.  His story is fascinating.

The Beginning

William Jennings Bryan was born in southern Illinois in 1860, just before the Civil War exploded.  He attended law school at then Union Law College, which is now Northwestern University.  Early in his legal career, Bryan moved west to Lincoln, the capital of fast-growing Nebraska.

Left: a young William Jennings Bryan. Right: Bryan’s boyhood home in Salem, Illinois. Built in 1852, it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

Bryan built a successful practice and started to advise and campaign for local politicians.  Bryan was an exceptional public speaker, inspiring with vision and passionate delivery. 1

After a few speeches his raw potential as a politician was too great to ignore.  Bryan ran for Congress in 1890 as a Democrat.  His platform consisted of reducing tariff rates, supporting the coinage of silver at a ratio equal to that of gold, and breaking the power of business trusts.

Bryan was a prototypical populist from rural and small-town America. He had an inherent mistrust of big business and championed himself as a fighter for the common man.  His views early on were somewhat radical, but as time passed his views became more mainstream within both the Democratic and Republican parties.  Many of those views remain embedded in modern American policy.

He won his House seat, and his Democratic party was ascending and secured a majority in the House after the 1890 election.

Once in the House, Bryan began to evolve his views and platform.  This was the height of the Gilded Age, and the Democratic Party splintered into two groups. The conservative northern “Bourbon Democrats” sought to limit the size and power of the federal government. Another group of Democrats, largely farmers of the South and West, favored greater federal intervention to help farmers, regulate railroads, and limit the power of large corporations.2

Bryan became affiliated with the latter group of farmers and populists, and he advocated for the free coinage of silver, what was labeled as the Free Silver Movement, and the establishment of a progressive federal income tax. That endeared him to many reformers.

Winning By Losing

After the economy tanked during the Panic of 1893, Bryan became more appealing to many voters. Rather than running for re-election in the House in 1894, Bryan sought election to the United States Senate.  He lost.

But he gained wider notoriety and his national profile surged.  Everyone, it seemed, wanted to hear or see him.  Speaking fees allowed Bryan to give up his legal practice and devote himself full-time to public speaking and politics.

His defining moment that elevated his brand nationally tied back to the Free Silver Movement and populism.  Bryan called the gold standard “not only un-American but anti-American” and used the issue to emerge as the nation’s leading Democrat.  In his famous ‘Cross of Gold’ speech at the Democratic National Convention in 1896, Bryan argued that the debate over monetary policy was part of a broader struggle for democracy, political independence, and the welfare of the “common man”.

The Cross of Gold speech was a raging success.  Bryan was met with applause on the floor of the convention that lasted for over half an hour at the end of the speech.  Three excerpts display the power of his words:

A line from early in the speech: “The individual is but an atom; he is born, he acts, he dies; but principles are eternal, and this has been a contest over a principle.”

From the middle of the speech: “This was a struggle between the idle holders of idle capital and the struggling masses, who produce the wealth and pay the taxes of the country.”

Bryan campaigning for president in October 1896. Listen (here on YouTube) to Bryan reciting his “Cross of Gold” speech 25 years later in 1921.

Here’s the famous ending of the Cross of Gold speech, from which it got its name: “If they dare to come out in the open field and defend the gold standard as a good thing, we shall fight them to the uttermost, having behind us the producing masses of the nation and the world. Having behind us the commercial interests and the laboring interests and all the toiling masses, we shall answer their demands for a gold standard by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”

Three-Time Presidential Candidate

The Cross of Gold speech secured Bryan the Democratic nomination for president.  And at the age of 36, Bryan became, and remains, the youngest presidential nominee of a major party in American history.

Bryan faced off against Republican candidate William McKinley in 1896.  McKinley campaigned from his porch and enjoyed a sizeable funding advantage.  But Bryan had his words; he went on the road and gave hundreds of speeches.  Twenty to thirty a day, many taking on an almost religious revival feel.

But McKinley won the election, taking the northeast and upper Midwest.  Bryan took the South and West, excluding California.

Despite the loss, Bryan’s support within his coalition grew stronger, and he easily won the Democratic nomination and ran again for president in 1900.  Once more he faced McKinley, this time as the incumbent president and with the charismatic Teddy Roosevelt as vice president.

Bryan focused his campaign on anti-imperialism and was opposed to the US assuming control of the Philippines. Bryan argued that the United States should refrain from imperialism and should seek to become the “supreme moral factor in the world’s progress and the accepted arbiter of the world’s disputes”.3  The American Anti-Imperialist League, which included Andrew Carnegie and Mark Twain, didn’t exactly love Bryan, but his strong stance against imperialism garnered their support.

The 1900 Democratic campaign once again relied on Bryan’s marathon of oratory.  In a typical day, Bryan gave four hour-long speeches and shorter talks that added up to six hours of speaking. At an average rate of 175 words a minute, he turned out 63,000 words a day, enough to fill 52 columns of a newspaper.  That put tremendous wear on his voice.

Yet he continued to move people with his words. One observer described it as “the poor, the weak, the humble, the aged, the infirm would rush forward by the hundreds holding up hard and wrinkled hands with crooked fingers and cracked knuckles to the young great orator, as if he were in very truth their promised redeemer from bondage.”

Yet McKinley won again, and by a wider margin than in 1896. Bryan even lost his home state of Nebraska.

After the 1900 election loss, Bryan turned to journalism and more public speaking.  He began publishing his weekly newspaper, The Commoner, which echoed his views.4 The newspaper became one of the most widely read of its era and boasted 145,000 subscribers.

President McKinley was assassinated, and Teddy Roosevelt became president.  Roosevelt moved to the left, favoring federal regulation of railroad rates and meatpacking plants.  And of course, he was an ardent trustbuster.  President Roosevelt adopted key policies as a Republican that looked much like what Bryan advocated for when he ran for president as a Democrat.

However, Bryan didn’t stand still on the ideological spectrum either.  He kept moving to more progressive policies.  He favored federal regulation of banks and securities, protections for union organizers, and federal spending on highway construction and education.  He demanded transparency in campaign contributions and advocated for government control of the currency.  All of which we have today on a massive scale.5

Bryan speaking at the 1908 Democratic National Convention.

For a third time, Bryan ran as the Democratic nominee for president, this time in 1908 against Taft. Bryan added to his policy platform requiring national banks to provide deposit insurance. And he unified the labor movement and secured the first presidential endorsement ever issued by the American Federation of Labor.

However, the third time did not end up being the charm for Bryan. Because the Republicans also moved left, there wasn’t much substantive difference between Bryan and Taft in 1908.  Taft won easily, taking almost everything outside the South.

Bryan was a three-time presidential election loser.  But the 493 cumulative electoral votes cast for Bryan across three separate elections are the most received by a presidential candidate who was never elected.

Wilson Era

After three losses, Bryan surrendered his presidential ambitions.  But he did not leave presidential politics, playing s crucial role in helping Woodrow Wilson secure the Democratic nomination in 1912.  Wilson won the presidency when he beat the split Republican candidates of Teddy Roosevelt and Taft.

President Wilson nominated Bryan as Secretary of State, an obvious and logical choice considering Bryan’s popularity and support.  Wilson explained that “this is only natural for the man who had led in the transformation of the national attitudes.”6

Bryan also helped Wilson reduce tariff rates, impose a progressive income tax, introduce new antitrust measures, and establish the Federal Reserve System.  The residual good and bad of these moves are present today.

But the honeymoon with President Wilson would not last.  Wilson was a globalist and viewed America as a leader in the world while Bryan at heart was a staunch isolationist. The fatal falling out between the two came with the First World War and navigating the European powers. Wilson was sympathetic to the Allies (the UK, France, Russia and Italy) while Bryan favored strict neutrality.  When the Lusitania was sunk by a German U-boat and American citizens perished, Bryan did not want to take Germany to task while Wilson viewed the event as a wanton act of war.  Before you knew it, Bryan resigned as secretary of state.

Challenging Times

After leaving public service, Bryan focused on advocating for the eight-hour workday, a minimum wage, the right of unions to strike, and women’s suffrage.  In the 1920s, Bryan became one of the most prominent religious figures in the country.  And that’s when his fortunes started to darken.

Bryan dedicated himself to two crusades: rabid support for prohibition and opposition to the teaching of evolution in schools. He saw alcohol as inherently evil and something that the state should prohibit.  He called for state and local laws banning public schools from teaching evolution because he saw Darwin’s scientific hypotheses conflict with the literal text of the Bible.

The religious, teetotalling, and anti-evolution rhetoric led to a famous (or for Bryan, infamous) event.  In July 1925, Bryan participated in the highly publicized Scopes Trial. The defendant, John T. Scopes, had violated a Tennessee law barring the teaching of evolution in public schools, while serving as a substitute biology teacher.

Scopes’ defense was funded by the American Civil Liberties Union and led in court by the famed lawyer Clarence Darrow.  Darrow argued that the Tennessee statute violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution.  Bryan defended the right of parents to choose what schools teach and argued that Darwinism was trying to invalidate “every moral standard that the Bible gives us”.  He wrote that “science is a magnificent material force, but it is not a teacher of morals.”7

Scopes was found in violation of the law and fined $100.  The national media intensely covered the trial, and many ridiculed Bryan as a symbol of ignorance and anti-intellectualism. Will Rodgers at the time said, “I like Bill Bryan, but he is making a fool out of himself and out of religion.”

Bryan passed away in the summer of 1925, days after the conclusion of the Scopes trial.  He is buried in Arlington National Cemetery.  The back of his headstone reads: “He kept the faith.”

Greatness Comes With a Mixed Legacy

William Jennings Bryan was far from perfect, at least from the perspective of protecting individual rights, keeping government minimal, letting the free market function, and holding science supreme.

He was for big government, perhaps mainly because of his distrust of big business.  He trusted the government agency or bureaucrat more than the private sector capitalist.

He could, depending on the issue, be anti-individual rights, whether it was with African Americans’ rights or with denying individual choice through his support of prohibition. Ironically, despite being a great orator, he held positions that stifled free speech, primarily his opposition to the teaching of evolution theory.

Which meant he could too easily place ideology and religion above science, as evidenced by his role in the Scopes trial.

But the man exuded undeniable and substantial positives. Particularly as an advocate for the small town, the farmer, the industrial worker, and the middle class.  He earned the moniker of The Great Commoner.

He was a force to be reckoned with, and his fingerprints remain across American policy and society to this day.  Bryan was, if nothing else, a courageous voice for the commoner at a time when the little guy needed such a champion.

And few other American greats can lay claim to substantially changing both their political party as well as the opposing party; Bryan certainly can lay claim to doing so.  His playbook is borrowed by more than one prominent current American leader or candidate and is copied in more than one current major policy or political movement.

Ponder what Bryan’s views would be of America today.

  • The Federal Reserve: would he view it as a protector of the little guy or an out-of-control beast laying waste to the commoner to enrich the 1%?
  • Would big government still be desirable to him? Or would it now represent to Bryan a bigger threat than big business?
  • And the religion of climate alarmism muscling its way to becoming The Science, subsuming real science.  Would he see such as part of a moral crusade or instead as the suppression of the individual, middle class, and science itself?
  • Would Bryan’s support of private sector unions then translate to support of public sector unions and their political monopoly on power today?  Or would he instead view public sector unions as a very different and dangerous thing, much like FDR did after him?

Speaking of FDR, one could postulate that if there was no William Jennings Bryan, there would not have been FDR’s New Deal.  A byproduct of impressive legacies like Bryan’s is fascinating speculation over alternative history scenarios.

Bryan had great feel for the pulse of America, enjoyed innate great timing, and was able to masterfully package a message into compelling oratory.  As such, it is not surprising that his policies took root in American politics and society.  Yet those legacies grew out of control after Bryan’s time.  Indeed, the Frankenstein monster he jolted to life is now running wild and unchecked.

It is not just history repeating itself; it is testament to William Jennings Bryan’s impact on the United States of America. What he drove and what he represented, both the good and the bad, endures.

His legacy is…everywhere.  And more Americans need to know his story.

•

[1] You can hear Bryan’s speeches on platforms like YouTube.  Give him a listen; impressive in front of a mic.
[2] Read more about the history of American farmer political movements at: https://nickdeiuliis.com/news/harvesting-history/.
[3] As you read on, it will become difficult to assess whether Bryan was a staunch isolationist or a naïve globalist.  Perhaps the truth is he could be either, depending on timing and circumstance.
[4] Bryan’s nickname was The Great Commoner.
[5] With mediocre success, to be kind.
[6] Imagine this: the State Department at that time boasted 150 employees in Washington and an additional 400 in embassies abroad.  A staff of 550.
[7] America has a sad history of allowing ‘The Science’ to suppress the scientific method and of letting religion or ideology subsume rational thought.  It didn’t start with elites dictating pandemic policy or preaching climate alarmism.

Summer Contemplations: Four Graduations in Seven Days in May

By Nick Deiuliis

As I’m sitting in the sun, surveying a browning lawn while writing this reflection, most friends, neighbors, and coworkers have their thoughts on the upcoming 4th of July holiday. Depending on when you’re reading this, perhaps you’re similarly in flux preparing for, in the middle of, or returning from that highly anticipated vacation.

But my mind keeps thinking about four graduations from early May. Although each event was different, all shared a common purpose: celebrating achievements of young adults about to enter the next chapter in life and career.

This country has a lot riding on those next chapters being successes. And as Independence Day approaches, there’s an interesting connection to graduation season that has me still pondering May in the height of summer.

As recent graduates step into the next phase of their lives, they do so freely in a country where all individuals have the opportunity to succeed, free from tyranny and oppression, with the promise of contributing to the ongoing story of America.

A Dream Grows Up

The first graduation celebrated the students who successfully completed the 2023-2024 CNX Foundation Mentorship Academy program.

This was the third class in three years to do so, with the Mentorship Academy again delivering on its mission of presenting regional career paths that don’t require a four-year college degree to high school juniors and seniors from underserved rural and urban communities across western Pennsylvania.

The event was hosted at the ‘HQ at CNX’. Graduating students, families, Mentorship Academy mentors, and Mentorship Academy partners were all in attendance for a celebration of not just making it through the program but more importantly, of what is to come for promising career paths.

Mentorship Academy students left the program with a certificate, a resume, interview skills, business attire, a focused view of what career they are targeting, and most importantly, a support network of contacts willing to open doors across the region.

Two thoughts stick with me through this summer.

The obvious: the CNX Foundation Mentorship Academy has blossomed into a striking success. The first year was a voyage into the unknown; working with roughly thirty high school students, a handful of daring mentors, and a small group of willing partners. The past year’s enrollment exceeded eighty students, and the program enjoyed the focus and refinement that come with continuous improvement and dedication of a competent team. Next year’s class may exceed two hundred students. Hard to believe and inspiring to see.

Yet I also wonder what those recent graduates of the Academy are doing with their time this summer. Did they heed the advice to jump on the career plan immediately after graduation? Are they dedicating themselves to self-improvement and working toward goals? Do they understand this is their best shot at making a remarkable life for themselves? And that it is now entirely up to them?

I’m invested in the answers to those questions.

The Long and Winding Road

The next day I found myself sitting in a downtown Pittsburgh arena, attending a Catholic university undergraduate commencement for health sciences majors. Déjà vu was at hand since decades prior I participated in a similar commencement as a law school grad in the same facility and at the same institution. Now I was the spectator.

Earning a four-year degree is a huge accomplishment for any career path, but this is only another step in the long journey for these graduates. After undergraduate studies, these professions require two more years of academic and hospital residency work before earning doctorates and practicing their craft to provide patient therapy and care. So, after walking on stage, receiving their diploma, and shaking the hand of the dean, it is a short weekend of enjoyment followed by jumping headfirst back into classes Monday during summer semester. Not an endeavor for the meek.

Do those graduates have the stamina to keep going and not get distracted or exhausted from the journey? Do they understand how proud everyone around them must be?

Sitting here in summer, I hope the answers to both are in the affirmative. The graduates have much to gain by staying the course, and society needs their budding professional skills more than ever.

A Regional Crown Jewel

A few days later, it’s a sunny May evening. I am walking out to Pomp and Circumstance in a procession and onto a stage at the 50-yard line of the Steelers’ home field. Awaiting are hundreds of graduates from the Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) along with thousands of their friends and families seated in the stadium.

The vibe is beyond celebratory; it is raucous. Everyone is excited, and not only because of the earning of associate degrees. But also because the degree came at a reasonable cost of tuition and thus will deliver a great rate-of-return on investment for the graduate; a rarity in today’s higher education system and the biggest reason why CCAC is one of the most critical assets in western Pennsylvania.

I had two jobs that evening.

First, as commencement guest speaker I must inspire the graduates. Which first requires not losing their attention. The pressure was on. So, I decided to be brief, direct, and to the point (after all, The Gettysburg Address was only three minutes long). I emphasized how staying true is crucial in life, that it’s how the graduates earned degrees. They were true to themselves, their values, their families, to CCAC, and to the region.

I urged them to think for themselves, show up every day and work hard, and always be learning and doing. All those attributes fit snugly with the legacy of CCAC and western Pennsylvania.

I closed with the famous Churchill quote, “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” Because I couldn’t help but think that evening wasn’t just the end of the graduates’ beginning, but more importantly the start of something great for them.

My second duty was to shake hands and congratulate each graduate when they ascended the stage and received their diploma. Much less stressful than the first duty. But it took much longer. Time well spent.

Weeks later I am thinking of the future greatness coming up on the stage that night to receive a degree. Who and how many? Can’t wait to see what unfolds in the coming years.

This Place Is Different

Last up was a drive down to the Virginia peninsula where a famous colonial town and college are nestled between the York and James Rivers.

The College of William & Mary was chartered in 1693 and is known as the Alma Mater of the Nation. A 17-year-old George Washington received his surveyor’s license there and Thomas Jefferson attended as an undergraduate. The first honorary degree was conferred upon Ben Franklin in 1765.

Not surprisingly, the College is a stickler for tradition, including commencement ceremonies. It was on full display in the packed campus stadium on a warm Friday evening. Everyone, especially the graduates, was bubbling with the excitement of ending a journey that will now make them part of a long, proud legacy.

Judge John Charles Thomas, the first African American and youngest appointee to the Supreme Court of Virginia, served as the ceremony’s keynote speaker. He is also a poet. Judge Thomas proceeded to give an incredibly impactful and heartfelt speech. He urged graduates to become builders and to keep focused during chaotic times. He left everyone energized and motivated.

Watch Judge Thomas’ speech here on YouTube. Twelve minutes well spent.

At the event’s conclusion, the crowd made their way down to the field to meet graduates and snap photos. I looked around and couldn’t help but wonder to what extent the individuals in the caps and gowns felt a responsibility to live up to the legacy of what they experienced and are now part of.

The more I think about it, that pressure of responsibility should be a big motivator for the graduate. As well as a vital ingredient for a well-functioning America. A few more Judge Thomases make a big difference.

Four Bright Lights of Optimism

Much of our education system is sadly in crisis these days. From plunging competencies in high school, to a void of effective career planning for students, to higher-ed being hijacked by an ideology that turned campus from the marketplace of ideas into a four-year indoctrination center.

Collectively, the problems risk assigning an entire generation to unrealized potential. Perhaps we reached the point of no return.

But experiencing four quite different graduations across seven days provided an injection of bold, fresh successes with preparing and equipping the next generation for both the needs and opportunities of America in the coming years.

The trick is to make today’s exceptional exceptions in our education system tomorrow’s norm. That will require more than one person’s summer contemplation; it will require the commitment and buy-in across the full spectrum of the willing.