Living History

Yesterday, I read, with a strange sense of loss, that perhaps the most historical man I'd ever met passed away. I am, of course, talking about Otto von Habsburg, who passed away on July 4th at the age of 98.

To give you an idea of what a piece of living history this man was, let me give you some background. He was born November 20th, 1912, the eldest son of Blessed Charles I of Austria (who you may remember, Blessed John Paul the Great beatified in 2004). Charles I was the last emperor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and a great Catholic statesman. Austria was the only power that did not engage in chemical warfare during the Great War, mainly because of Charles' abhorrence of it, and warfare in general. So dedicated was Charles to peace that he sought a separate peace with the Allies, apart from Germany (but the French managed to ruin that).

Otto von Habsburg was the last Crown Prince of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He was a pretender to the thrones of about half of central Europe, and—through his family—a link to the once-great Holy Roman Empire. He was a stalwart opponent of both Nazism and Communism, for which the former group sentenced him to death for opposing the Anschluss in 1938. He was instrumental in aiding the Allies during World War II, and played a role in the downfall of Communism in the 80's.

During my Adventures in Austria, circa 2001, I had the great privilege of meeting this man, this living historical figure. The director of the Austrian program had invited him to the Karthause to speak to us students, and graciously, the Archduke agreed. I was interested in his visit, because as a recent graduate of Miss Smyth's Grand History of Western Civilization, I was well versed on House Hapsburg. He spoke to use students at length, one evening, giving a rambling talk about Austria, her history, her people, and his place in it. While the details of the talk have become hazy in the ten years since, I still remember a couple details quite clearly.

His Imperial and Royal Highness Archduke and Prince Imperial Otto of Austria, Prince Royal of Hungary, Croatia and Bohemia, seen here in this 2001 file photo. Photographer, Your Truly.

What struck me most about his talk was the personal, eyewitness accounts he gave of momentous historical events. He told stories about how he personally delivered Hungarian spy reports to FDR, or how, as a representative of Austria during World War II, he was given advanced notice of the Allied bombing raids. Invariably, each week an Austrian church or monastery would be targeted. He would speak with Roosevelt's assistant who, as a good Irish Catholic, would manage to postpone the raids that targeted churches.

One story I remember most clearly was the one he told about when he discovered the Allies' plans to divvy up Austria and give the lion's share (including Vienna) to the Soviet Union, as part of the peace treaty. He immediately rushed to see FDR and said, while he had always admired him and his methods of resisting the Communists, this was a bad idea. FDR agreed and told Otto that if he could get Churchill to agree, he would renegotiate. Otto immediately rushed to Churchill's room to speak with him. The secretary said that Churchill was sleeping, and he wasn't to be awoken, unless it was a matter of life or death. Otto said it was, and met with the sleepy Churchill, and convinced him to side with him and FDR. In the end, the Soviet Union took only a very small part of Austria.

Travelling Europe and seeing the history is interesting for an American such as myself, particularly one from Los Angeles, where anything older than 50 years is considered ancient. Seeing all these great monuments from ancient Rome, or cathedrals of the middle ages, or castles of the Renaissance. It's just something we don't have here. But there was another interesting side to Europe as well, and that was the history of the last hundred years. In that time, Europe had been the battlefield for the two greatest wars mankind has ever waged, and the site of the two most evil regimes the world has ever known. Here was a man who was linked to all of it, and spoke of it off the cuff, off the top of this head, as if this recent history was an old colleague of his.

Truly, the history of the 20th century is now just a little more remote.

Too Clever By Half

So, in Boston, Sarah Palin makes a reference to Paul Revere warning the British...



...for which she is roundly ridiculed by the Left. Everyone knows that Paul Revere's ride was to warn the towns of Lexington and Concord of the coming British invasion. We all read the poem in middle school.

Of course, it turns out she was right. In Revere's own words from a 1798 letter, he had warned the British that “there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.”

Perhaps before mocking someone's ignorance, we ought make sure we are knowledgeable on the subject ourselves?

The Left's response was, of course, telling. Upon having their ignorance pointed out, they merely insisted that, "OK, maybe Sarah was right, but she couldn't have known she was right. She just got lucky." This is a wonderful argument: it is absolutely unprovable. It is simply assertion about what someone else was thinking. Since no one knows what anyone else is thinking, the assertion cannot be proven false.

But of course, for the Leftists, it can be proven, by their weird logic. Remember, these are the Cultural Elite. The Brights. The Educated and Informed. They don't get their news from stupid channels like Fox News. They get it from reliable sources, like MSNBC and NPR, which never spin and are never wrong. They have degrees from Columbia and Berkley. They're smarter than you.

So, really, it's quite simple in their logic:
M. Leftists are smarter than right-wing rabble.
m. Leftists did not know that Paul Revere warned the British.
C. Therefore, Sarah Palin could not have known that Paul Revere warned the British.

You see? Quite clever. Too clever, one might say, by half.