Anna Mary Moses

Anna Mary Moses

Anna Mary Robertson woke up every morning at four o’clock. She did it for seventy-eight straight years, long before anyone ever imagined her name would hang on gallery walls.

The alarm was never a clock. It was habit. Darkness still pressed against the windows when she swung her legs out of bed and pulled on her boots. Cows waited to be milked. Chickens needed feeding. The stove had to be lit. Breakfast had to be cooked for whoever happened to be hungry that morning. After that came the garden, the laundry, the mending, the endless small repairs that kept a farm from falling apart.

This was life in rural New York in the late nineteenth century, and Anna Mary knew no other way to exist.

She was born in 1860, the third of ten children, into a world where survival depended on hands that never rested. Schooling was brief. Childhood was shorter. By the age of twelve, she was sent away to work as a hired girl for wealthier families. Twenty-seven cents a week bought the right to scrub floors, wash clothes, cook meals, and raise children who belonged to someone else.

There was no room for wanting. No space for imagining a different life. Whatever dreams she carried were pushed down until they were nearly forgotten.

Still, something in her noticed beauty. As a child, she crushed berries and mixed the juice with chalk, painting rough colors onto scraps of wood when no one was watching. It was a quiet pleasure, fleeting and impractical. It did not help with rent or bread or winter coats. So she let it go.

At twenty-seven, she married Thomas Moses. Together they farmed land in Virginia, then returned north to New York. Life followed the same rhythm it always had. Work. Weather. Birth. Loss.

Ten children were born. Five survived.

Each death hollowed her a little, but she did not stop. She cooked. She cleaned. She sewed quilts by lamplight after everyone else had gone to bed. She patched clothes until fabric turned thin as paper. She learned endurance the way other people learned art.

Years collapsed into seasons. Seasons into decades. The children grew up and left. Thomas’s back gave out, but he worked anyway. Anna Mary worked alongside him, her hands cracked and strong, her body shaped by repetition.

She rose before dawn. She slept late only when illness forced her to. She never once thought of herself as an artist.

In 1927, Thomas died.

Anna Mary was sixty-seven years old.

The farmhouse fell quiet in a way it never had before. No footsteps. No shared meals. No voices carrying across the fields. For the first time in her life, she belonged only to herself, and she did not know what to do with the silence.

She turned to embroidery, the familiar motion of needle and thread. But age had arrived uninvited. Arthritis stiffened her fingers. Each stitch burned. What had once been comforting became unbearable.

Her sister suggested painting.

“Your hands might manage a brush better than a needle,” she said.

Anna Mary had never held a paintbrush in her life. She had never seen a museum. She did not know what “art” was supposed to look like. But she walked into the general store and bought a few cheap tubes of house paint, the kind meant for barns and fences. She found old boards in the shed. She mixed colors on cardboard.

She was seventy-eight years old when she painted her first picture.

It was simple. A farmhouse. Rolling hills. Figures working the land.

But something opened.

Memories flooded out. Winter sleigh rides. Maple sugaring parties. Barn raisings. Harvest dances. Children skating on frozen ponds. A world she had lived inside and watched slowly disappear.

She painted from memory, not observation. She did not sketch. She did not revise. She worked quickly, confidently, joyfully. Sometimes she painted until two in the morning, humming hymns at her kitchen table.

For three years, she painted without expectation. She gave pictures to neighbors. Sold a few for three or four dollars at the local pharmacy. It was enough to buy groceries. Enough to keep going.

Then, in 1938, a man named Louis Caldor walked past the pharmacy window.

He was an art collector from New York City. The paintings stopped him cold.

He bought every single one.

“Who painted these?” he asked.

“That’s just Grandma Moses,” the pharmacist said. “She’s about eighty.”

Caldor drove straight to her farmhouse. He found her in a calico dress and apron, painting at her kitchen table.
“You’re going to be famous,” he told her.

She laughed. She thought he was teasing.

He wasn’t.

Within two years, her paintings were hanging in New York galleries. Critics called her work primitive. Naive. Untrained. They searched for categories because they didn’t know where to put an elderly farm woman who painted joy without irony.

The public understood immediately.

They saw warmth. Community. A world where people knew each other and seasons mattered. They saw happiness without apology.

At eighty, Anna Mary Moses appeared on the cover of *Life* magazine. At ninety, she painted every day. She worked until she was 101 years old, producing more than 1,600 paintings.
She had spent nearly eight decades doing what survival demanded.

Then she spent the rest of her life doing what her hands had always wanted to do.

She did not talk about inspiration. She did not speak about destiny. She simply painted what she knew and loved.

Anna Mary Moses proved that a beginning does not expire with age. That the life you were meant to live can wait patiently for you. And that sometimes, the longest road leads exactly where it was always supposed to end.

Of Friction, Tension, Dovetail Joints And Cooperation

Two Arguing In Trade Class

I watched two boys threatening to kill each other over a news headline that wouldn’t matter by Tuesday, standing in a room full of saws they didn’t know how to use.
That was my final Tuesday. The administration called it “The Transition.” I called it what it was: the death of the last place in this school where truth was something you could touch. They were gutting my woodshop to put in a “Digital Innovation Lab.” Apparently, the world needed more podcasts and fewer chairs.
I’m seventy-two. My hands look like tree bark, and I’ve got a lower back that predicts rain better than the Weather Channel. I was just supposed to pack my tools and leave.
But then Hunter and Leo walked in.
They weren’t supposed to be there. They were cutting gym class, hiding out in the dust-choked silence of the shop. Hunter was a kid who wore work boots that had never seen a job site, angry at a world he felt was leaving him behind.
Leo was the opposite—slight, anxious, wearing a hoodie that cost more than my first car, angry at a world he felt was burning down.
I didn’t hear what started it. Probably something they saw on a screen. But when I walked out of the supply closet, they were chest-to-chest.
“You people are the problem,” Hunter spat, his face red. “You’re a dinosaur,” Leo shot back, his voice shaking but sharp. “You’re ruining everything.”
They were parroting scripts written by millionaires in television studios, acting out a war neither of them started.
I could have sent them to the principal. I could have walked away. But I looked at the lathe in the corner, covered in forty years of dust, and I felt a sudden, desperate need to leave something behind that wasn’t silence.
I picked up a piece of scrap pine and slammed it onto a workbench. The sound cracked like a gunshot.
They jumped apart, eyes wide.
“Phones,” I barked. I held out a grease-stained hand. “On the bench. Now.”
“We weren’t doing anything,” Hunter stammered, posturing.
“I didn’t ask what you were doing. I said phones.”
Reluctantly, they handed over their lifelines. Two black rectangles of glass that told them who to hate every morning.
I pointed to the center of the room. There sat the Beast. A twelve-foot solid oak conference table. It belonged to the Town Council. It was built in 1955.
Someone had spilled industrial solvent on it, ruining the finish, and the legs were wobbling. The town wanted to scrap it for a plastic one. I had rescued it.
“This leaves tomorrow,” I told them. “It needs to be stripped, sanded, and stabilized. And I can’t lift it alone.”
“I have a physics test,” Leo said, looking at the door.
“Physics,” I grunted. “Good. Today you’re going to learn about friction and leverage. Grab a sander.”
For the first twenty minutes, the air was thick with resentment. The belt sanders roared, drowning out their ability to argue. That’s the beauty of loud machinery; it forces you to shut up and pay attention to your hands.
Hunter attacked the wood aggressively, trying to force the varnish off. Leo was timid, barely touching the surface.
“Stop,” I yelled over the noise. I walked over to Hunter. “You’re digging in.
You’re scarring the wood because you’re angry. The wood doesn’t care about your feelings, son. Treat it with respect, or it’ll give you splinters.”
I turned to Leo. “And you. You’re afraid of it. You’re dancing around the problem. Put your weight into it. Lean in.”
They glared at me, but they adjusted.
An hour passed. The smell of decades-old varnish gave way to the clean, sharp scent of red oak. It’s a smell that gets into your lungs and cleans out the rot. The sweat started coming. Real sweat. Not the kind you get from stress, but the honest kind that comes from work.
“We need to fix the legs,” I said, flipping the massive table over. “Hunter, grab that end. Leo, get the other. On three.”
It was heavy. Stupidly heavy. Hunter slipped. The weight shifted entirely to Leo.
“I got it!” Leo grunted, his face going pale, knees buckling. “Don’t drop it!”
Hunter yelled, but he didn’t just yell. He scrambled, sliding under the frame, jamming his shoulder up to take the weight off Leo.
For ten seconds, they stood there, panting, locked together by three hundred pounds of timber. If one moved, the other would get crushed.
“Together,” I said softly. “Set it down. Slow.”
They lowered it. When they stood up, they didn’t look at their phones. They looked at each other. Just for a second. It wasn’t a look of friendship, but it was a look of recognition. You have mass. You are real. You are not a pixel.
I brought them over to the broken joint on the leg.
“Look at this,” I said, tracing the jagged wood. “This is a dovetail joint. It’s the strongest joint in carpentry.”
They leaned in.
“You see how the tails are cut?” I asked. “They flare out. They’re trapezoids. Once you fit them together, you can’t pull them apart just by pulling. The only way this joint fails is if the wood itself breaks.”
I looked them in the eye.
“The carpenter who built this didn’t use nails. He didn’t use screws. He used friction. He used tension. The two pieces of wood are cut differently, forced to fit together. The pressure is what holds them up. If they were exactly the same, they’d slide right apart. It’s the difference that locks them in.”
The room went quiet. The ventilation fan hummed in the background.
“You two,” I said, gesturing between them. “You think you’re enemies because you’re cut different. But a house built with only one kind of board falls down in the first wind. America wasn’t built by people who agreed on everything. It was built by people who hated each other’s guts but knew they needed the other guy to raise the barn.”
Hunter looked at his boots. Leo ran his thumb over the raw oak grain.
“Glue,” I ordered.
For the next two hours, the politics disappeared. The headlines about the election, the economy, the social wars—they dissolved in the smell of sawdust and wood glue. There was only the task.
Hold this. Pass the clamp. Too much glue, wipe it. My arm is cramping. Switch sides.
When we finished, the table looked magnificent. The grain popped with a coat of fresh oil, swirling like a topographic map of a country that no longer existed. It was solid. You could have parked a truck on it.
The bell rang. The spell broke.
They wiped their hands on rags. They were covered in the same gray dust. You couldn’t tell who voted for who. You couldn’t tell whose dad was a lawyer and whose dad was a mechanic. They were just two young men who had made something useful.
I handed them back their phones. The screens lit up immediately with notifications—doom, outrage, noise.
Hunter looked at his screen, then looked at the table. He didn’t check his messages. He just slid the phone into his pocket.
“It’s… good,” Hunter said. “It’s solid.” “Yeah,” Leo said, flexing his sore hand. “It’s not going anywhere.”
They walked to the door. Before they left, Leo turned around.
“Mr. Frank? What happens to the table?”
“It stays,” I said. “The Town Council voted to keep it. Said they couldn’t find anything new that felt real.”
They nodded and walked out into the hallway, into the noise of hundreds of kids staring at screens. But I saw them walk out differently. Shoulders back. Heads up. They didn’t walk together, but they walked parallel.
I swept the shop one last time. I left the sawdust on the floor.
We live in a time where everyone wants to be the hammer, smashing down anything that doesn’t look like them. We’ve forgotten that the goal isn’t to break things—it’s to build things that can stand the weight of the world.
We don’t need to agree on everything. We just need to remember that we are the wood, not the fire. And if we don’t learn to lock together, holding tight to the very people we struggle against, we’re going to collapse.
I turned off the lights. The smell of oak lingered in the dark. It smelled like hope.

Pearl S. Buck

Pearl S. Buck

Her manuscript was destroyed by war. Her disabled daughter needed care she couldn’t afford. Her husband controlled every penny. At 35, broke and desperate, she had one last chance—so she wrote a book that changed the world.

Her name was Pearl S. Buck, and she would become the first American woman to win the Nobel Prize in Literature. But first, she had to survive what would break most people.

Born in West Virginia in 1892, Pearl spent just three months in America before her missionary parents carried her to China. She grew up in Zhenjiang on the Yangtze River, speaking Chinese before English, playing with local children with her blonde hair hidden under a hat.

“I did not consider myself a white person in those days,” she later remembered.

She belonged everywhere and nowhere—a feeling that would haunt and define her entire life.

In 1917, she married John Lossing Buck and settled in rural China. Three years later, she gave birth to Carol.

Something was terribly wrong.

Carol couldn’t speak. She had violent tantrums lasting hours. She couldn’t learn basic tasks. Pearl’s husband withdrew completely, leaving her alone with a child whose condition no doctor could explain. Today we know Carol had phenylketonuria—a metabolic disorder causing severe developmental disabilities. In 1920, it was a mystery that felt like a curse.

Her husband controlled every penny of their money, forcing Pearl to beg for an allowance from her own teaching salary. He refused to return to America where Carol might get better care. Pearl realized with crushing clarity: she alone would be responsible for her daughter’s future, and she had no way to provide it.

Then came 1927.

During China’s civil war, the Nanking Incident erupted—a violent uprising that forced Pearl’s family to flee with only the clothes they wore. Soldiers ransacked their home.
In her attic workspace sat the only copy of her first completed novel—years of work destroyed in minutes.

The Red Cross evacuated them to Japan, then to a cramped rental in Shanghai shared with two other families. Her husband returned to work, leaving Pearl alone with the children in poverty.

She was 35. Her marriage was dying. Her daughter needed expensive lifelong care. Her manuscript was ash. She had nothing.

Most people would have surrendered.

Pearl started writing again—not from inspiration, but from desperation. Writing was her only path to financial independence, her only hope for Carol’s future.

She found a trade magazine listing three literary agents and wrote to all three.

Two rejected her immediately: “No American market for stories about China.”

The third, David Lloyd, said yes. He would represent her for 30 years.

In 1929, Pearl took Carol to America to find care. Touring institutions broke her heart—warehouses where disabled children were hidden and forgotten. She finally found the Vineland Training School in New Jersey, a place that seemed humane.

Leaving Carol there was, she said, the hardest thing she ever did.

To afford it, she borrowed money she had no idea how to repay.

Meanwhile, her first novel, East Wind, West Wind, was finally accepted—after 25 rejections. It was the last publisher on her agent’s list. One more rejection and it would have been withdrawn forever.

Pearl returned to China and began writing in a frenzy, driven by financial terror and creative urgency.

Three months later, The Good Earth was finished.

It told the story of Wang Lung, a Chinese farmer, and his wife O-Lan—ordinary people Pearl portrayed as fully human, complex, dignified, worthy of love. In 1930s America, where racism toward Chinese people was rampant, this was revolutionary.

When the Book-of-the-Month Club chose The Good Earth, Pearl received $4,000—enough for years of Carol’s care. She wept. For the first time in her life, she had security.

The book exploded. Nearly 2 million copies sold in the first year. It remained the bestselling novel of both 1931 and 1932. Pearl earned over $100,000 in eighteen months—an astronomical fortune during the Great Depression. She immediately secured $40,000 for Carol’s long-term care.

In 1938, Pearl S. Buck became the first American woman to win the Nobel Prize in Literature.

But her achievement went deeper than a prize. She had humanized Chinese people to Americans who’d been taught to see them as foreign and lesser. She built bridges across cultures through the simple power of storytelling.

She spent the rest of her life fighting for civil rights, women’s rights, and disability rights. She adopted seven mixed-race children. She wrote over 70 books. She founded Welcome House—the first international interracial adoption agency in America.

Pearl died in 1973 at 80. Carol outlived her mother, dying in 1992 at 72, having spent most of her life safely cared for at Vineland—exactly what Pearl had fought so desperately to ensure.

Pearl’s story teaches us something profound: sometimes our greatest work doesn’t come from comfort or privilege. It comes from necessity. From the determination to survive. From the fierce love that makes us refuse to give up.

She didn’t write The Good Earth because she felt inspired. She wrote it because her daughter needed her, and she had no other way forward.

And that desperation—that pure, undiluted love—produced one of the most important American novels of the 20th century.
Pearl S. Buck proved that when we’re fighting for the people we love, we’re capable of changing the world.

Ross Perot

Ross Perot

His employees got thrown in an Iranian prison. He hired Special Forces to break them out.
A $1,000 investment created a man who almost became president.
Ross Perot was 32 years old.
He quit IBM in 1962. Started Electronic Data Systems with nothing but an idea and a thousand bucks.
Everyone said he was crazy.
“Why would you leave the best sales job in America?”
“Data processing? Nobody’s buying that.”
“You’re throwing away your career.”
He didn’t listen.
But here’s what nobody tells you. They were almost right.
Perot was rejected 77 times before landing his first contract.
Seventy-seven nos. Most people quit after five. Maybe ten.
He kept going.
By 1968, EDS went public. The stock opened at $16. Within days it hit $160.
Forbes called him “the fastest, richest Texan.”
By December 1969, his shares were worth $1 billion.
Then April 1970 happened.
In a single day, Perot lost $445 million on the stock exchange.
The biggest individual loss in NYSE history at that time.
Wall Street laughed. “The Texan got what was coming to him.”
Most people would have crumbled. Sold everything. Gone back to a safe job.
Perot? He just kept building.
Fourteen years later, he sold EDS to General Motors for $2.4 billion.
But that’s not what makes this story interesting.
In 1979, a young Bill Gates approached Perot about buying Microsoft. A tiny software company worth maybe $2 million.
Perot thought the asking price was too high.
He passed.
Microsoft is now worth over $3 trillion.
Perot called it “one of the biggest business mistakes I’ve ever made.”
But here’s what separates good entrepreneurs from great ones.
When Steve Jobs got fired from Apple in 1985, he started a new company called NeXT. Everyone said Jobs was finished. Washed up. A has-been at 30.
Perot watched a PBS documentary about Jobs. Called him the next morning.
“If you ever need an investor, call me.”
Perot invested $20 million into NeXT. Took a board seat.
He didn’t want to miss another Microsoft.
NeXT struggled. The computers didn’t sell. Most people would have written it off as a loss.
But in 1996, Apple bought NeXT for $400 million. Jobs came back.
NeXT’s software became the foundation for macOS. And later, the iPhone.
Perot’s “failed” investment helped create the most valuable company on Earth.
But he wasn’t done.
In 1979, two of his EDS employees were arrested in Iran during the revolution. The government wanted $12.7 million in ransom. The U.S. couldn’t help.
Most CEOs would have hired lawyers. Waited it out. Let bureaucracy run its course.
Perot hired a retired Special Forces colonel. Assembled a team of Vietnam veterans who worked for EDS. Flew to Tehran himself.
When negotiations failed, his team helped start a prison riot. 11,000 inmates escaped. Including his two employees.
They drove 500 miles overland to Turkey.
All of them made it home.
Hollywood made a miniseries about it. Ken Follett wrote a bestseller.
Then came politics.
In 1992, Perot announced he was running for president. As an independent. No party. No political machine.
Everyone said it was impossible.
“Third-party candidates never win.”
“He’s wasting his money.”
“Americans don’t vote independent.”
At one point, Perot led the polls. Ahead of both George Bush and Bill Clinton.
He dropped out in July. Came back in October.
Still got nearly 20 million votes. 19% of the popular vote.
The most successful third-party candidate since Theodore Roosevelt in 1912.
He changed how campaigns worked. Used TV infomercials instead of rallies. Spoke directly to voters on talk shows. No handlers. No scripts.
He ran again in 1996. Got 8% of the vote.
Never won an election. Never held office.
But here’s what people miss.
Perot didn’t run to win. He ran to prove a point. That ordinary Americans were tired of being ignored. That you didn’t need permission from the political establishment to have a voice.
When he died in 2019, he was worth $4.1 billion.
Started with $1,000.
Rejected 77 times.
Lost $445 million in a single day.
Missed Microsoft.
Got called crazy for running for president.
Still built companies that sold for billions. Still rescued his people from a foreign prison. Still changed American politics. Still helped fund the technology that powers every iPhone on the planet.
What rejection are you letting stop you?
What “failure” are you treating like the end?
Perot got rejected 77 times before his first yes.
He lost almost half a billion dollars in one day and kept going.
He missed the biggest investment opportunity in tech history and still funded the next one.
He ran for president twice without winning and still made history.
Stop counting your losses.
Start counting your attempts.
The guy who got told no 77 times built a multi-billion dollar empire, bankrolled the iPhone, and ran for president.
Your “impossible” goal doesn’t look so impossible anymore, does it?
Think Big.

Astrid Lindgren

Astrid Lindgren

Sweden, 1941. A mother sits beside her daughter’s bed. The girl is burning with fever, slipping in and out of delirium. “Tell me a story,” she whispers.
“About what?” the mother asks.
“Tell me about Pippi Longstocking.”
Astrid Lindgren had absolutely no idea what that meant. Her daughter Karin had just invented a name out of thin air. But Astrid started talking anyway—making it up as she went.
She described a girl with bright red pigtails and mismatched stockings. A girl so strong she could lift a horse. A girl who lived alone in a house called Villa Villekulla with a monkey and a horse, with no parents to tell her what to do. A girl who ate candy for breakfast, slept with her feet on the pillow, and told adults “no” whenever she felt like it.
Karin loved her. Astrid kept inventing more Pippi stories every time her daughter asked.
A few years later, Astrid slipped on ice and injured her ankle. Bedridden and bored, she decided to write down all the Pippi stories as a birthday present for Karin. Then she thought: maybe I should try to publish this.
Publishers rejected it immediately.
The character was too wild. Too disrespectful. Too inappropriate. This was 1944 Sweden, where children’s books were about obedient boys and girls learning moral lessons. Pippi Longstocking was pure chaos—a child living without adult supervision, lying when it suited her, defying teachers, physically throwing policemen out of windows, refusing to go to school or follow any rules.
Critics would later call the book dangerous, warning it would teach children to misbehave.
But in 1945, one publisher—Rabén & Sjögren—took a chance. They published Pippi Longstocking.
Children went absolutely wild for it.
Finally, here was a character who represented everything they weren’t allowed to be. Loud. Messy. Free. Independent. Pippi had adventures on her own terms, made her own decisions, and treated adults as equals rather than authorities to be feared.
Some adults were horrified. But other adults—and millions of children—saw something revolutionary: a story that treated children as intelligent, capable people deserving of respect and autonomy.
Astrid kept writing. She created Karlsson-on-the-Roof, Emil of Lönneberga, Ronya the Robber’s Daughter. All of her characters questioned authority, trusted their own judgment, and had rich emotional lives. Astrid never wrote down to children. She didn’t simplify their feelings or pretend life was always happy. Her books dealt with loneliness, fear, injustice, even death—but always with respect for children’s ability to understand complex emotions.
Her books began reshaping how Swedish culture understood childhood itself.
By the 1970s, Astrid Lindgren wasn’t just Sweden’s most beloved children’s author—she was a cultural icon with real political power.
In 1976, she wrote a satirical fairy tale called “Pomperipossa in Monismania” published in Sweden’s largest newspaper. It mocked the country’s absurd tax system using humor—describing a children’s author being taxed at over 100% of her income.
The piece exploded into national conversation. It sparked fierce debate about tax policy. The Social Democratic government, which had ruled Sweden for over 40 years, lost the election shortly after—partly because of the tax debate Astrid’s satire had triggered.
She’d proven her voice could move mountains.
And she decided to use that power for something that mattered even more than taxes.
In the late 1970s, Astrid turned her full attention to a brutal reality that everyone in Sweden simply accepted as normal: hitting children was legal.
Parents spanked. Teachers used rulers and canes on students. It was called “discipline,” not abuse. It was how things had always been done.
Astrid Lindgren believed it was violence against the most defenseless people in society. And she believed it had to stop.
She began speaking everywhere—newspapers, television, public speeches, interviews. She wrote articles. She appeared on national programs. She used every ounce of her fame to argue one simple point: hitting children teaches them that violence is acceptable. Physical punishment doesn’t create better behavior—it creates fear, shame, and the lesson that might makes right.
Sweden listened to her.
In 1979, Sweden became the first country in the entire world to legally ban corporal punishment of children.
Parents could no longer legally hit their children. Teachers couldn’t use physical punishment in schools. The law didn’t criminalize parents, but it established an absolute principle: children have the right to protection from violence, even from their own parents.
It was revolutionary. No country had ever done this before.
And Astrid Lindgren’s advocacy was absolutely crucial to making it happen.
She didn’t stop there. She campaigned for animal rights, environmental protection, and humane treatment of farm animals. She used her platform to push Sweden toward becoming a more compassionate society—for children, for animals, for anyone vulnerable.
Astrid continued writing into her eighties. She published over 100 books translated into more than 100 languages. Pippi Longstocking became a global icon—a symbol of childhood independence and joy recognized on every continent.
When Astrid Lindgren died in 2002 at age 94, Sweden mourned her like a beloved national grandmother. The Swedish royal family attended her funeral. Thousands lined the streets. The ceremony was broadcast live across the nation.
But her real legacy was what she changed.
Sweden’s 1979 ban on corporal punishment influenced the entire world. Today, more than 60 countries have followed Sweden’s lead and outlawed hitting children. That number grows every year.
And countless millions of children grew up reading about Pippi, Emil, Ronya, and Karlsson—characters who showed them that being a child didn’t mean being powerless, voiceless, or less important than adults.
Think about what Astrid Lindgren actually accomplished.
She created Pippi Longstocking in 1941 to entertain her sick daughter. That girl with red pigtails and superhuman strength became one of the most recognized characters in children’s literature worldwide.
But Astrid’s real achievement was understanding that if you’re going to write stories where children have dignity, you have to fight to build a world where they actually do.
She wrote books that respected children. Then she helped create laws that protected them.
Sweden became the first country to write that respect into law.
Because one author believed children deserved better—and refused to stay quiet until the world agreed.
Astrid Lindgren proved that respecting children wasn’t just good storytelling. It was good policy. It was justice. It was necessary.
And it started with a feverish little girl asking her mother to tell her about a character with a funny name.
That’s how revolutions begin.

Neil Diamond

Neil Diamond

He walked away from medical school with $50 in his pocket to chase an impossible dream—and wrote the song that would make stadiums sing for 60 years.

Brooklyn, 1960.

Neil Diamond sat in his NYU dorm room, supposedly studying for his pre-med finals. His parents—humble Jewish immigrants who’d sacrificed everything—were counting on him to become a doctor. Security. Stability. The American Dream.

But Neil couldn’t focus on anatomy textbooks. His mind kept drifting to the melody he’d been humming all week. His fingers kept reaching for his guitar instead of his stethoscope.

That night, he made a choice that terrified him.

He dropped out of medical school. Walked away from the scholarship. Left behind his parents’ dreams and his own guaranteed future.

For what? A job writing songs at Sunbeam Music Publishing for $50 a week.

His parents were devastated. His friends thought he was crazy. He had no backup plan, no connections, no certainty that he’d ever make it.

For six years, he lived on hope and stubbornness. Writing songs nobody wanted. Playing gigs nobody attended. Wondering if he’d made the biggest mistake of his life.

Then 1966 happened.

A song he’d written—”I’m a Believer”—became one of the biggest hits of the decade. Not for him, but for The Monkees. Suddenly, the kid from Brooklyn who’d gambled everything was being played on every radio in America.

But Neil wasn’t done.

He wanted people to hear HIS voice telling HIS stories. So he kept writing. “Solitary Man.” “Cherry, Cherry.” “Cracklin’ Rosie.”

And then, in 1969, he wrote eight simple words that would become bigger than he ever imagined:

“Sweet Caroline… good times never seemed so good.”

Nobody knows for certain who Caroline really was. Some say Caroline Kennedy. Others say it was about his wife. Neil himself has changed the story over the years, almost like he knew the song needed to belong to everyone, not just to him.

Because that’s exactly what happened.

“Sweet Caroline” became the song couples slow-danced to at weddings. The song crowds screamed at baseball games. The song that brought together complete strangers in bars, concert halls, and living rooms across the world.

For over five decades, Neil Diamond gave us the soundtrack to our lives. More than 130 million records sold. A legacy that touched four generations.

In 2018, his voice began to fail him. Parkinson’s disease forced him off the touring stage—the place where he’d felt most alive for 50 years.

He could have disappeared quietly. Retired in peace.

Instead, he keeps writing. Keeps creating. Keeps proving that the fire that made a 20-year-old drop out of medical school never really goes out.

The kid who risked everything on a dream didn’t just make it.

He made us all believe that impossible dreams are worth chasing.

Because sometimes, the biggest risk isn’t following your heart.

It’s spending your whole life wondering what would’ve happened if you had.

Brigadier General Theodore Roosevelt Jr.

Brigadier General Theodore Roosevelt Jr

June 6, 1944.

As the landing craft approached Utah Beach, Brigadier General Theodore Roosevelt Jr. gripped his cane and checked his pistol.

He was fifty-six years old. His heart was failing. Arthritis had crippled his joints from old World War I wounds. Every step hurt.

He wasn’t supposed to be there.

But he had insisted—three times—on going ashore with the first wave of troops. His commanding officer, Major General Raymond “Tubby” Barton, had rejected the request twice. Too dangerous. Too risky. No place for a general.

Roosevelt wrote a letter. Seven bullet points. The last one: “I personally know both officers and men of these advance units and believe that it will steady them to know that I am with them.”

Barton relented.

And so Theodore Roosevelt Jr.—eldest son of President Theodore Roosevelt, veteran of World War I, twice wounded, gassed nearly to blindness—became the only general officer to storm the beaches of Normandy in the first wave.
This wasn’t ancient history. This was June 6, 1944.

The ramp dropped. German guns opened fire. Bullets slapped the water. Artillery shells screamed overhead. Men scrambled onto the sand, some falling before they took three steps.

Roosevelt stepped off the boat, leaning on his cane, carrying only a .45 caliber pistol.

One of his men later recalled: “General Theodore Roosevelt was standing there waving his cane and giving out instructions as only he could do. If we were afraid of the enemy, we were more afraid of him and could not have stopped on the beach had we wanted to.”

Within minutes, Roosevelt realized something was wrong.
The strong tidal currents had pushed the landing craft off course. They’d landed nearly a mile south of their target. The wrong beach. The wrong exits. The whole invasion plan suddenly useless.

Men looked around in confusion. Officers checked maps. The Germans kept firing.

This was the moment that could turn the invasion into a massacre.

Roosevelt calmly surveyed the shoreline. Studied the terrain. Made a decision.

Then he gave one of the most famous orders in D-Day history:

“We’ll start the war from right here!”

For the next four hours, Theodore Roosevelt Jr. stood on that beach under relentless enemy fire, reorganizing units as they came ashore, directing tanks, pointing regiments toward their new objectives. His cane tapping in the sand. His voice steady. His presence unshakable.

A mortar shell landed near him. He looked annoyed. Brushed the sand off his uniform. Kept moving.

Another soldier described seeing him “with a cane in one hand, a map in the other, walking around as if he was looking over some real estate.”

He limped back and forth to the landing craft—back and forth, back and forth—personally greeting each arriving unit, making sure the men kept moving off the beach and inland. The Germans couldn’t figure out what this limping officer with the cane was doing. Neither could they hit him.

By nightfall, Utah Beach was secure. Of the five D-Day landing beaches, Utah had the fewest casualties—fewer than 200 dead compared to over 2,000 at Omaha Beach just miles away.

Commanders credited Roosevelt’s leadership under fire for the success.

Theodore Roosevelt Jr. had been preparing for that day his entire life.

Born September 13, 1887, at the family estate in Oyster Bay, New York, he was the eldest son of Theodore Roosevelt—the larger-than-life president, war hero, and force of nature. Growing up in that shadow was impossible. Meeting that standard seemed even harder.

But Ted tried.

In World War I, he’d been among the first American soldiers to reach France. He fought at the Battle of Cantigny. Got gassed. Got shot. Led his men with such dedication that he bought every soldier in his battalion new combat boots with his own money. He was promoted to lieutenant colonel and awarded the Distinguished Service Cross.

Then, in July 1918, his youngest brother Quentin—a pilot—was shot down and killed over France.

Ted never fully recovered from that loss.

When World War II began, Theodore Roosevelt Jr. was in his fifties. Broken down. Worn out. He could have stayed home. Taken a desk job. No one would have blamed him.

Instead, he fought his way back into combat command. He led troops in North Africa. Sicily. Italy. Four amphibious assaults before Normandy.

And on D-Day, when commanders tried to keep him off that beach, he refused.

“The first men to hit the beach should see the general right there with them.”

After Utah Beach, General Omar Bradley—who commanded all American ground forces in Normandy—called Roosevelt’s actions “the bravest thing I ever saw.”

General George Patton agreed. Days later, Patton wrote to his wife: “He was one of the bravest men I ever knew.”

On July 11, 1944—thirty-six days after D-Day—General Eisenhower approved Roosevelt’s promotion to major general and gave him command of the 90th Infantry Division.

Roosevelt never got the news.

That same day, he spent hours talking with his son, Captain Quentin Roosevelt II, who had also landed at Normandy on D-Day—the only father-son pair to come ashore together on June 6, 1944.

Around 10:00 p.m., Roosevelt was stricken with chest pains.
Medical help arrived. But his heart had taken all it could take.

At midnight on July 12, 1944—five weeks after leading men onto Utah Beach—Theodore Roosevelt Jr. died in his sleep.
He was fifty-six years old.

Generals Bradley, Patton, and Barton served as honorary pallbearers. Roosevelt was initially buried at Sainte-Mère-Église.

In September 1944, he was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor. When President Roosevelt handed the medal to Ted’s widow, Eleanor, he said, “His father would have been proudest.”

After the war, Roosevelt’s body was moved to the Normandy American Cemetery at Colleville-sur-Mer—the rows of white crosses overlooking Omaha Beach.

And there’s where the story takes its final, heartbreaking turn.

In 1955, the family made a request: Could Quentin Roosevelt—Ted’s younger brother, killed in World War I, buried in France since 1918—be moved to rest beside his brother?

Permission was granted.

Quentin’s remains were exhumed from Chamery, where he’d been buried near the spot his plane crashed thirty-seven years earlier, and reinterred beside Ted.

Two sons of a president. Two brothers. Two wars. Reunited in foreign soil.

Quentin remains the only World War I soldier buried in that World War II cemetery.

Today, at the Normandy American Cemetery, among the 9,388 white marble crosses and Stars of David, two headstones stand side by side:

THEODORE ROOSEVELT JR.
BRIGADIER GENERAL
MEDAL OF HONOR

QUENTIN ROOSEVELT
SECOND LIEUTENANT
WORLD WAR I

The tide still rolls over Utah Beach. The sand looks the same. Tourists walk where soldiers died.

And somewhere in that vast field of white crosses, two brothers rest together—sons of a president who believed in duty, service, and leading from the front.

Some men lead by orders.

Some lead by rank.

Theodore Roosevelt Jr. led by example—cane in hand, heart failing, utterly unflinching.

He didn’t have to be there.

But he refused to lead from anywhere else.

George Lucas

George Lucas

Hollywood executives laughed when he asked for the toy rights. Then he became richer than all of them combined.
A near-fatal car crash led to changing cinema forever.
George Lucas was 18 years old.
Three days before high school graduation, his Fiat got crushed by a Chevy Impala at an intersection.
The impact threw him from the car. His seatbelt snapped. That malfunction saved his life.
He should have died. Doctors didn’t know if he’d make it.
He spent weeks in the hospital. Had to watch graduation from a bed.
Everything changed after that.
Lucas stopped racing cars. Started thinking about what he actually wanted to do with the second chance he’d been given.
He decided to make films.
Everyone said it was a waste.
“You barely graduated high school.”
“You’re not connected to Hollywood.”
“Film school is for dreamers.”
He didn’t listen.
Went to USC film school. Made student films that caught attention. Got a scholarship from Warner Bros.
His first feature film, THX 1138, flopped. Studio hated it. Cut it against his wishes. Lost money.
Then American Graffiti became a hit. Made over $200 million on a tiny budget.
But Lucas had a bigger idea. A space opera. Something nobody had ever seen before.
He shopped Star Wars to every major studio.
Universal passed.
United Artists passed.
Disney passed.
Everybody passed.
They said it was too weird. Too expensive. Too risky.
“Space movies don’t sell.”
“The script is confusing.”
“Nobody wants to see robots and aliens.”
Finally, 20th Century Fox took a chance. But they didn’t believe in it either.
Here’s where Lucas did something nobody understood at the time.
Instead of negotiating for a bigger directing fee, he asked for something else.
The merchandising rights. And the rights to any sequels.
The studio laughed. Merchandising? From a weird space movie? Sure, take it.
They thought they were getting a deal. Paying Lucas less upfront for rights they considered worthless.
That decision made George Lucas a billionaire.
Star Wars opened in 1977. Forty theaters.
Lines wrapped around blocks. People saw it ten, twenty, fifty times.
It became the highest-grossing film in history at that point.
The toys alone generated billions. Action figures, lunchboxes, video games, books, theme parks.
All because Lucas believed in something nobody else could see.
But he wasn’t done.
He built Industrial Light and Magic because no special effects company could do what he needed. Now it’s created effects for most major blockbusters in history.
He built Skywalker Sound. Changed how movies sound.
He built Lucasfilm into an empire.
In 2012, he sold it to Disney for over $4 billion.
Then gave most of it away to education.
Today, the Star Wars franchise has generated tens of billions of dollars across films, merchandise, streaming, and theme parks.
All because a kid who almost died in a car crash decided to chase an idea everyone said was impossible.
What dream are you abandoning because the first few studios said no?
What rights are you giving away because you don’t see their future value?
Lucas nearly died at 18. His first film flopped. Every major studio rejected his biggest idea.
He took less money upfront because he believed in what he was building.
He created technology that didn’t exist because he needed it for his vision.
He proved that the people who reject you don’t get to define you.
Your near-miss might be your wake-up call.
Your rejection letters might be proof you’re onto something.
Your “worthless” idea might be worth billions.
Stop letting studios, investors, and doubters write your story.
Start thinking like George Lucas.
Take the rights everyone else thinks are worthless.
Build what doesn’t exist yet.
And never let “no” be the end of the conversation.
Sometimes the biggest wins come from the deals nobody else wanted.
Because when everyone underestimates you, you get to keep everything.
Think Big.

Question Everything

Fake News

by Jeff Thomas

The average person in the First World receives more information than he would if he lived in a Second or Third World country. In many countries of the world, the very idea of twenty-four hour television news coverage would be unthinkable, yet many Westerners feel that, without this constant input, they would be woefully uninformed.

Not surprising, then, that the average First Worlder feels that he understands current events better than those elsewhere in the world. But, as in other things, quality and quantity are not the same.

The average news programme features a commentator who provides “the news,” or at least that portion of events that the network deems worthy to be presented. In addition, it is presented from the political slant of the controllers of the network. But we are reassured that the reporting is “balanced,” in a portion of the programme that features a panel of “experts.”

Customarily, the panel consists of the moderator plus two pundits who share his political slant and a pundit who has an opposing slant. All are paid by the network for their contributions. The moderator will ask a question on a current issue, and an argument will ensue for a few minutes. Generally, no real conclusion is reached—neither side accedes to the other. The moderator then moves on to another question.

So, the network has aired the issues of the day, and we have received a balanced view that may inform our own opinions.

Or have we?

Shortcomings

In actual fact, there are significant shortcomings in this type of presentation:

The scope of coverage is extremely narrow. Only select facets of each issue are discussed.

Generally, the discussion reveals precious little actual insight and, in fact, only the standard opposing liberal and conservative positions are discussed, implying that the viewer must choose one or the other to adopt as his own opinion.

On a programme that is liberally-oriented, the one conservative pundit on the panel is made to look foolish by the three liberal pundits, ensuring that the liberal viewer’s beliefs are reaffirmed. (The reverse is true on a conservative news programme.)

Each issue facet that is addressed is repeated many times in the course of the day, then extended for as many days, weeks, or months as the issue remains current. The “message,” therefore, is repeated virtually as often as an advert for a brand of laundry powder.

So, what is the net effect of such news reportage? Has the viewer become well-informed?

In actual fact, not at all. What he has become is well-indoctrinated.

A liberal will be inclined to regularly watch a liberal news channel, which will result in the continual reaffirmation of his liberal views. A conservative will, in turn, regularly watch a conservative news channel, which will result in the continual reaffirmation of his conservative views.

Many viewers will agree that this is so, yet not recognise that, essentially, they are being programmed to simply absorb information. Along the way, their inclination to actually question and think for themselves is being eroded.

Alternate Possibilities

The proof of this is that those who have been programmed, tend to react with anger when they encounter a Nigel Farage or a Ron Paul, who might well challenge them to consider a third option—an interpretation beyond the narrow conservative and liberal views of events. In truth, on any issue, there exists a wide field of alternate possibilities.

By contrast, it is not uncommon for people outside the First World to have better instincts when encountering a news item. If they do not receive the BBC, Fox News, or CNN, they are likely, when learning of a political event, to think through, on their own, what the event means to them.

As they are not pre-programmed to follow one narrow line of reasoning or another, they are open to a broad range of possibilities. Each individual, based upon his personal experience, is likely to draw a different conclusion and, thorough discourse with others, is likely to continue to update his opinion each time he receives a new viewpoint.

As a result, it is not uncommon for those who are not “plugged-in” to be not only more open-minded, but more imaginative in their considerations, even when they are less educated and less “informed” than those in the First World.

Whilst those who do not receive the regular barrage that is the norm in the First World are no more intelligent than their European or American counterparts, their views are more often the result of personal objective reasoning and common sense and are often more insightful.

Those in First World countries often point with pride at the advanced technology that allows them a greater volume of news than the rest of the world customarily receives.

Further, they are likely to take pride in their belief that the two opposing views that are presented indicate that they live in a “free” country, where dissent is encouraged.

Unfortunately, what is encouraged is one of two views—either the liberal view or the conservative view. Other views are discouraged.

The liberal view espouses that a powerful liberal government is necessary to control the greed of capitalists, taxing and regulating them as much as possible to limit their ability to victimise the poorer classes.

The conservative view espouses that a powerful conservative government is needed to control the liberals, who threaten to create chaos and moral collapse through such efforts as gay rights, legalised abortion, etc.

What these two dogmatic concepts have in common is that a powerful government is needed.

Each group, therefore, seeks the increase in the power of its group of legislators to overpower the opposing group. This ensures that, regardless of whether the present government is dominated by liberals of conservatives, the one certainty will be that the government will be powerful.

When seen in this light, if the television viewer were to click the remote back and forth regularly from the liberal channel to the conservative channel, he would begin to see a strong similarity between the two.

It’s easy for any viewer to question the opposition group, to consider them disingenuous—the bearers of false information. It is far more difficult to question the pundits who are on our own “team,” to ask ourselves if they, also, are disingenuous.

This is especially difficult when it’s three to one—when three commentators share our political view and all say the same thing to the odd-man-out on the panel. In such a situation, the hardest task is to question our own team, who are clearly succeeding at beating down the odd-man-out.
Evolution of Indoctrination

In bygone eras, the kings of old would tell their minions what to believe and the minions would then either accept or reject the information received. They would rely on their own experience and reasoning powers to inform them.

Later, a better method evolved: the use of media to indoctrinate the populace with government-generated propaganda (think: Josef Goebbels or Uncle Joe Stalin).

Today, a far more effective method exists—one that retains the repetition of the latter method but helps to eliminate the open-ended field of alternate points of view. It does so by providing a choice between “View A” and “View B.”

In a democracy, there is always an “A” and a “B.” This illusion of choice is infinitely more effective in helping the populace to believe that they have been able to choose their leaders and their points of view.

In the modern method, when voting, regardless of what choice the individual makes, he is voting for an all-powerful government. (Whether it calls itself a conservative one or a liberal one is incidental.)

Likewise, through the modern media, when the viewer absorbs what is presented as discourse, regardless of whether he chooses View A or View B, he is endorsing an all-powerful government.

Two Solutions

One solution to avoid being brainwashed by the dogmatic messaging of the media is to simply avoid watching the news. But this is difficult to do, as our associates and neighbours are watching it every day and will want to discuss with us what they have been taught.

The other choice is to question everything.

To consider that the event that is being discussed may not only be being falsely reported, but that the message being provided by the pundits may be consciously planned for our consumption.

This is difficult to do at first but can eventually become habit. If so, the likelihood of being led down the garden path by the powers-that-be may be greatly diminished. In truth, on any issue, there exists a wide field of alternate possibilities.

Developing your own view may, in the coming years, be vital to your well-being.

Source: https://internationalman.com/articles/question-everything/