This is essentially just a collection of links, with
some vague notes with links to where the information comes from, when and if
it is, as such, available. I carry no pretense
that it is authoritative: the web is a harsh mistress for anybody looking to read a
little non-fiction. I'm trying my best though: the only thing new in the world is
the history you don't know.
Unless otherwise noted linkless entries for the most part should be considered, so far as I know, debatable as such.
The resources for background and sourcing is information
available on the web or in the bibliography, and so it should be assumed that entries without links
are by and large things I probably know little about beyond having heard brief mention of elsewhere
(which is why it exists: because
one doesn't already).
That means it may or may not belong there, or may or may not have in fact happened, and that further reading, googling,
library visits, and
documentation is required, which is generally true anyway.
Entries are usually based on a solid suspicion,
but for instance the entry on Guyana at one point said flat
out that the CIA had been responsible
for the assassination of Walter Rodney because where I heard about it said as much, and it turns out after digging around
for information on it that CIA involvement remains an allegation that is disputable
and pending further FOIA inquiries. Everything true is classified.
As any telling of history will be painted by the biases of the teller I will briefly outline my own,
more than obvious, biases. These are as follows: on the part of greater recognition of
basic human rights, liberty, respect for sovereignty and just and lawful interaction between sovereign entities,
and the improving of general human welfare -
after that I don't really give a crap which ideological pins the subject is brandishing on the lapel: it doesn't
appear to matter very often.
Such biases should be in general keeping with those of most sane persons, as even staunch capitalists
and staunch socialists are usually able to recognize that what
is generally passed off as either has almost nothing to do with what the words actually
refer to, that's why India has markets, the United States has a welfare state, and China has gulags.
The world does not, despite the efforts of statesmen to make it otherwise,
revolve around black and white clashes between ideologies. Human suffering itself
isn't black and white, except in that it exists, and liberty in that it often doesn't.
Objective interpretation is left as an exercise for the reader, as I'm obviously still getting a handle
on that myself.
I won't be adding entries related to Israel anytime soon, as I'm somewhat interested
in keeping the noise-to-signal ratio down (Israel-Palestinian conflict and US involvement there-in
qualifies as the former), and my beefs on that inane, persistent, troll of a topic are made quite clear
If a link is broken please notify me, or try the