who are the patriarchs?

Angela Saini has a few books out. One of them is called The Patriarchs. I agree with nearly everything she writes but she is completely wrong about Communism. On page 190 she writes:-

"One of the first political changes that the leadership introduced when it took power in Russia was to put women on an equal legal footing with men, notes historian and political scientist Archie Brown."

Who does she mean by 'the leadership'? From the context you would think Lenin and his Bolshevik government. That is not true at all. Women gained the vote before the Bolshevik coup and used it in the 2017 election. Lenin, however, ignored the votes of millions of men and women and kept power for himself. Thus you could say that he took the vote away from women (and men).

Soon after the Revolution in early 1917 40,000 women marched through the capital city. At the State Duma they demanded to meet with the deputies. Negotiations continued into the night, and ending with Lvov giving in and awarding women the right to vote.

So you could say that it was Prince Georgy Lvov, the head of the provisional government, who gave women the vote. However, he had previously refused to consider a petition sent by the Russian League of Women's Equality. So you could say the women took the vote for themselves with their march and demand for negotiation.

Lenin and his Bolshevik party took power later in the year. He could have cancelled the planned elections but that would have lost him support and he was hoping his party would do well. Men and women voted for the Socialist Revolutionary Party more than any other party. A man called Chernov should have become the new leader of Russia but Lenin kept control for himself.

The Bolsheviks didn't really believe in parliaments anyway. They thought that parliaments were part of the capitalist phase of human development. They much preferred soviets. These were workers' councils. The Bolsheviks had more support in the two big cities than in the countryside. Lenin could manipulate the soviets but also ignore them.

When other parties got their act together and started to participate in the soviets the Bolsheviks could see their support ebbing away. So they dissolved any soviet where men and women had voted for other parties, the Socialist Revolutionaries and the Mensheviks.

The Mensheviks were the other Marxist party. They gained control of Georgia where they implemented the sort of reforms that people would expect from true socialists, including the sort of land reform that the majority of people wanted. The Mensheviks came to power in Georgia through an election where both men and women had the vote. Five women were elected deputies. They were only in power for a few years because Lenin sent his army in to take over: to murder and torture large numbers of people who hadn't managed to flee. So he took the vote away from Georgian women as well as Russian women. Although it is said that this was Stalin's project, Lenin merely 'approved' it (pity he didn't consider the wishes of Georgian women as much as the wishes of Georgian men Stalin and Ordzhonikidze). That's How Men Came to Rule in Georgia.

On page 200 of The Patriarchs by Angela Saini she writes about the encounter between Khrushchev and Nixon later known as the Kitchen Debate. This supposedly outlined the differences between the Russia and America in terms of gender equality. The point though is that American men and women could vote Nixon out of power, but Russian men and women couldn't vote Krushchev out of power. Russian women had the vote, then it was taken away from them. They might have had pretend votes which would not have affected 'the leadership'.

On page 219 of The Patriarchs by Angela Saini she writes:-

"In China between the 1950s and the 1970s, the Communist Party openly celebrated its commitment to gender equality. The country had the world's largest workforce of women."

Women and men were slaves in Mao's China. Lack of food caused oedema/edema, a swelling of the body. Lack of food and overwork caused prolapsed wombs in millions of Chinese women. This is what Frank Dikötter has written in his book Mao's Great Famine: The History of China's Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-62. You can also read Mao: The Unknown Story by Jung Chang,  The Penguin History of Modern China by Jonathan Fenby and Tombstone: The Untold Story of Mao's Great Famine by Yang Yisheng.

Between 1958 and 1962, 45 million Chinese people were worked, starved or beaten to death. Rape 'spread like a contagion', according to Dikötter. Yet Angela Saini seems to think it was a time of 'gender equality'. If men and women are treated equally badly that is bad enough. We have no reason to believe that women suffered more from oedema than men, so that's not a problem then, that's equality. Women however suffered the extra problem of prolapsed wombs and mass rape. Look on the bright side though - a woman with a prolapsed womb might not have seemed so attractive to the rapists. Gender equality? I don't think so!

I have started reading Tombstone: The Untold Story of Mao's Great Famine by Yang Yisheng. I quote below from this book about the situation of women in Communist China.

page 196 ""The communal canteen is a dining hall (a place for getting food), a tribunal (a place where kitchen staff and managers beat and scold people), and a bordello (where team leaders and managers hire the prettiest girls as kitchen staff and mess around with them." For example, the leader and manager of Team 6 ... took more than their share out of commune members' grain rations and used these rations to seduce and rape thirteen women. In 1960, thirty-nine people who ate at this communal kitchen died."

page 217 "On February 1, 1961, the Central Committee endorsed a Health Ministry report that classified conditions associated with starvation, such as edema, emaciation, amenorrhea, and uterine prolapse, as routine illnesses."

page 220 "Gynecological disorders were rampant, especially amenorrhea and the excruciatingly painful uterine prolapse."

Angela Saini doesn't seem to be able to recognise patriarchs. Neither did Clara Zetkin. Angela Saini was a big fan of Clara Zetkin who was a big fan of Lenin. As happens with many people of her political persuasion, she can recognize that Stalin was a patriarch. She doesn't understand that Lenin and Mao also were.

the Barncroft pond

I used to live in the Wirral in a block of flats called Barncroft. It used to have a big garden but they built a new block of flats there. What annoyed me is that they filled in an old pond and they cut down more trees than they needed to. The pond was nowhere near to where the new building is. There was absolutely no need to fill it in.

Although there is an enormous area of south-facing roof space on the new building, there are no solar panels.

Someone did an ecological survey and decided the pond no longer existed. If they had come back in the winter or spring, or if they had asked one of the tenants, they would have known that it is a seasonal pond. I consulted an expert, she said try to get them to dig a new pond. I tried that, they (Magenta Living) refused.

Below are some of my favourite photographs of the Barncroft pond. They are all from 2018. The plants poking through the surface are Yellow Flag Iris (Iris pseudacorus). In the garden there were frogs, hedgehogs, Poplar Hawk Moths and bats too. When I first moved there ducks nested on the pond.

Does this look like a 'Dried up pond' to you? Barncroft is in Larchwood Close in Heswall. There used to be two ponds there, near Pensby Hall. The Eastern one had gone by 1969. One or both of the ponds was known locally as 'Dead Man's Dip' after a young man committed suicide there (Phil Andrews).

Not all landlords have the same attitude as Magenta Living. Consider this description of Oaklands (retirement housing) in the Wirral by its manager "Oaklands is set in beautiful mature gardens with a pond and woodland area for residents to enjoy".

When I told someone from Magenta (Louise Edwards) that they shouldn't be filling in the pond, she told me that the plans had been submitted and approved. There was no way they could go against the plans, the council planning department would never accept a change. She also said that they were going to put in a water feature. A water feature isn't a replacement for an ancient natural pond. In my experience they don't get maintained so they stop working. Just like the one in the central garden area at Barncroft.

You know what? They didn't put a water feature there, or anywhere else. Even though it was in the plan. So it seems they can do what they like, whether it's part of the plan or not. They don't want to say that though.

They cut down a big poplar tree that they didn't need to. They wouldn't tell us why they cut down this tree, far away from the new building. The reason was that they had a secret agreement with the developer that they were going to get lorries out into Pensall Drive (the main entrance/exit was in Larchwood Close). They told everyone who asked that they weren't going to do that, that they were only going to get the portakabins out that way when they had finished the building.

However, they took lorries in and out, and a cement mixer. I've got photographs of these vehicles going past my window. I've also kept an email from a council officer who said that they had told him they weren't going to take lorries out via Pensall Drive. They took the lorries so close to a big sycamore that the next year it didn't come into leaf. Now they have cut this dead tree down. It had a Tree Preservation Order on it.

I haven't seen any bats this year. I used to see them out my window. There had always been bats. I said to myself that when they go I will too. Just before I left they pollarded three big poplar trees. Usually this is done in the winter. They did it in the summer. Not a light pollarding either. Whether they will survive I don't know. I don't think they care.

other social experiments in Russia

The Bolshevik party took control of Russia in 1917. They didn't control the whole of Russia to begin with although they controlled the two big cities, Petrograd and Moscow. It took them a while to take control of the whole of Russia, this was the civil war, and in the meantime there were other governments.

The Bolsheviks would have accepted the democratically elected parliament - the Constituent Assembly - if they had had a majority. They didn't though and so Lenin had it closed. Some of the elected members of the Constituent Assembly fled for their lives, such as the family of the American author Nabokov.

Others went to a city called Samara where for a time they had their own state, dominated by the Socialist Revolutionary Party. This was a non-Marxist socialist party popular among the peasants because they believed in redistribution of land from landlords to peasants. Having said that though, the Samara government (Komuch) didn't enact land redistribution, at least not from land owners to peasants.

Other SRs decided to back Lenin because he said he believed in land reform. The Samara government despite their democratic legitimacy didn't last long. Military defeats and political intrigues brought about their end. Apparently Chernov (leader of the SRs) and Martov (leader of the Mensheviks) weren't helpful to Komuch.

The Bolsheviks could always claim that soviet democracy was better than parliamentary democracy anyway. Soviets were to begin with councils elected by workers, soldiers and peasants. That fitted Marxist ideology. It seems that soviets were genuinely democratic to begin with but then Lenin and Trotsky managed to dominate them, giving the Bolsheviks a spurious semi-legitimacy.

Another Marxist party was the Menshevik Party. The original Marxist party split into two, the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. Mensheviks managed to get control of Georgia and their government lasted a couple of years before the Red Army defeated them. Unlike the Komuch, the Mensheviks in Georgia really did redistribute land to the peasants.

Alexander Antonov was a Socialist Revolutionary who controlled large areas of Russia centred on the town of Tambov. His army was called the Blue Army, unlike other anti-Bolsheviks who were called Greens.

The other interesting social experiment was the Anarchist region in the Ukraine. Nestor Makhno was the leading figure in this region. Towards the end of the civil war his army backed the Bolsheviks and became absorbed into the Red Army. Makhno managed to flee Russia otherwise he would probably been murdered by Lenin's secret police, the dreaded Cheka.

Maria Nikiforova, was another Anarchist. Her group was called the Black Guards. Anarchists were Black, Bolsheviks were Red, anti-Bolsheviks Green and reactionary armies were Whites.

In George Orwell's book Animal Farm we get a totally wrong impression of the course of the Russian Revolution. The character of 'Old Major' represents either Marx or Lenin. Marx was long dead by the time of the February 1917 revolution. Lenin had nothing to do with it. Lenin launched his coup d'état later that year.

Most Russians supported the Socialist Revolutionaries, or at least most of the peasants did, who were the biggest group. The SRs were not Marxist. Some of them were foolish enough to support Lenin. Russian industrial workers and soldiers/sailors were as likely to support the Mensheviks (who were Marxists) or the Anarchists. The SRs supported the elected Constituent Assembly and formed their own government, quite legitimately.

The idea that the Bolsheviks were the one and only alternative to the Tsar, that they were the revolution, is wrong. It can only help the Communist cause. Animal Farm seems to be teaching us that Marx, Lenin and Trotsky were the good guys and it all got betrayed by Stalin. The reality is that the revolution was betrayed by Lenin and Trotsky in 1917.

Should you water your grape vine?

Opinion is divided on the subject. I say you shouldn't. Everyone else says you should.

The subject of watering is not as simple as most people think. One mistake that people make is thinking that they have thoroughly watered an area of ground but they have only wetted the top few inches. Plants will root into this surface layer. They become dependent on watering and will suffer if it is not consistent or otherwise inadequate.

Instead of watering little and often, water less frequently but more thoroughly. Don't water a big area every day, water a smaller area using just as much water. You can see if the water has sunk down to lower levels by using a trowel or your hands to dig down. Instead of watering four raised beds each day, water one each day in turn using the same amount of water.

If you must water a vine, do it this way. Infrequently but thoroughly. Use a trickle of water over a long period of time. The water will sink down deep and the roots can follow the water down. Instead of watering the surface, use a vertical pipe to to water into.

If you planted a vine you could at the same time install three vertical pipes. One a foot long near to the vine. One two feet long a bit further away. One three feet long or however deep your subsoil is. In the first year you could water into the short pipe, just to help the vine get established. The next year remove the pipe and water into the second one. The third year water into the longest. Hopefully the roots will grow deep and then it will find its own source of water.

If it is in a greenhouse or against a wall it may never find its own source of water deep down. So watering may still be beneficial. The same rules apply though, infrequent but thorough. I would do it only once; in June, July and August.

I wouldn't plant a vine in a greenhouse. Unless in was something special such as Muscat of Alexandria. Even then you can plant it outside the greenhouse but let it grow inside. They do not need to be protected from winter cold. They don't need high temperatures so in the summer open doors and vents. You can use the greenhouse to get them started earlier in spring and help the grapes to ripen in the autumn.

Some varieties - such as Muscat of Alexandria -  can suffer from fungal diseases like powdery mildew. Keep humidity down: this is achieved by opening doors and vents and also by pruning so you don't get a mass of foliage. Lack of water at the roots can also weaken a vine, so that could be one valid reason in favour of watering.

There are chemicals that can control fungal diseases. Copper compounds don't control powdery mildew, which is the worst of them. Fungi don't seem to like extremes of acidity or alkalinity. You can try sulphur to lower pH or use various sodium compounds to raise it. Just enough to affect the fungus but not so much as to damage the leaf (or your skin). Some people use dilute yogurt: it has to be something with lots of lactobacillus bacteria to increase acidity.

There are modern varieties that are resistant to fungal problems, early ripening so don't need a greenhouse or wall (even for dessert grapes), and have a looser bunch of grapes that don't require thinning. The muscat flavour and the 'strawberry' flavour are delicious.

Muscat of Alexandria and Siegerrebe have a good muscat flavour. Muscat bleu does too and is better in other ways. Fragola is one of the varieties with the 'strawberry' flavour (it doesn't really taste of strawberries - American grape soda tastes of it).

Some people are growing vines in containers. Obviously they will need watering. Feeding too. Otherwise I wouldn't. If I did I would water infrequently but thoroughly and use a low-nitrogen fertilizer once it has become established.

Another factor to take into account is whether you have sandy or clay soil. Mediterranean soils tend to be sandy or rocky, very free draining. What I suspect is that in Britain the deeper roots may die in winter. Then it would only have more surface roots. If so that could be another reason for watering.

People say that vines love watering. If a vine has surface roots only then sure it will respond to watering, and manuring too. You may well get a bigger crop if you irrigate. In California they are depleting the aquifer to irrigate almonds. I'm sure they get a bigger crop.

However almonds and vines can grow in dry conditions and will produce an adequate crop without lots of water and nitrogen. If an almond farmer in California can't make a profit and would go bust without irrigation then something needs to change. Maybe the farms need to be bigger or almonds need to cost a bit more. They are going to have to stop one day, when the aquifer runs out, so they may as well sort out the problem now.

new railway between China and Europe

For a long time Chinese manufactures have moved by sea to markets in Europe and America. Now a new rail route has been opened between an inland Chinese city (Chongqing) and Europe (Duisburg in Germany and soon Antwerp). The route goes through Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus and Poland.

Very large numbers of Chinese people have moved from inland China to coastal regions to take work in factories making goods destined for Europe and America. The new railway might do something to counter this trend. The route is quicker and cheaper than sending goods by sea.

Hans the unfortunate hippo

In 1945 the German city of Königsberg was conquered by the Russian Army. It had a zoo, but only four animals survived. One of them was a hippopotamus called Hans, found in a ditch. Hans had been injured and had not eaten for many days but was nurtured back to health.

The Russians expelled the German population and repopulated it with Russians, annexing it to Russia. The zoo was repopulated too, but Hans remained there and became a feature for many decades.

The Sulimov Dog - a dog/jackal hybrid

The Sulimov Dog (Russian: Собакa Сулимова) is a Russian Jackal-Dog Hybrid originating from an initial hybrid between a Lapponian Herder and a Turkmen golden jackal. The breed was introduced by Klim Sulimov, the chief breeder for Aeroflot airline security. The primary use of this breed has been to aid airport security as sniffer dogs.

During the breeding process male jackal pups had to be fostered on a Lapponian Herder bitch in order to imprint the Jackals on dogs. Female Jackals accepted male Huskies more easily. The half-bred Jackal-Dogs were hard to train and were bred back to Huskies to produce quarter-bred hybrids (quadroons). These hybrids were small, agile, trainable and had excellent noses. They were then called Sulimov Dogs after their creator and may one day be registered as a working breed of dog. Twenty-five Sulimov dogs are used by Aeroflot at Sheremetyevo Airport in Moscow, for functions which include bomb-sniffing. Their breeding program dates back to 1975, but was not applied to bomb detection until 2002.