March 23, 2026

THE FUTURE HAPPENS WHILE YOU’RE DISMISSING IT:

The case of the disappearing secretary (Rowland Manthorpe, Mar 01, 2026, Rowland’s Newsletter)


Not so long ago, the work of secretaries – typing, filing, organising, administrating – was a cornerstone of the economy. By 1984, six years after the map above, there were around 18 million clerical and secretarial workers in the United States, roughly 18 percent of the entire workforce. This was totally normal. In the UK at the same time, between 17 and 18 percent of the workforce was some kind of secretary. In France it was 16 percent. Different economies with different economic policies; all ended up with one in five or six workers employed in clerical work.

Why so many? Because every stage of information processing required a human hand. In a mid-century organisation, a manager did not “write” a memo. He dictated it. A secretary took it down in shorthand, then retyped it. Then made copies. Then collated the copies by hand. Then distributed them. Then filed them. And so on and so on. Nothing moved unless someone physically moved it. There was no other way.

Human computers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab in the 1950s. Credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech
For this reason, the most sophisticated, information-dense organisations were often the ones with the most administrative staff. As NASA prepared to launch the Apollo missions in the mid-1960s, 15% to 18% of its civil service workforce was classified as “clerical and administrative support”. There were the human “computers” made famous by Hidden Figures, but also technical typists, who typed up mathematical equations. As one of those typists, Estella Gillette, later put it: “The engineers depended on us for everything that wasn’t their job. We were their support system.”

This line is often taken as an inspiring motivational quote, but it was a literal description of the situation at the time, because of what today we might call an interface problem. The invention of shorthand and the typewriter in the early twentieth century had made it possible to create accurate records, but senior staff – even engineers at NASA – didn’t interact directly with the administrative machinery of the office. Secretaries and clerks were the unavoidable interface between the manager and the ability to get things done. You spoke to a secretary; they “interfaced” with the shorthand pad and the typewriter. You handed over a paper; they “interfaced” with the filing cabinet. Every kind of activity was organised this way. The secretary was the interface for the diary, a physical object kept only on their desk. (This could be a source of real influence.) They were the human “firewall” or routing system for phone calls. If the manager wanted a coffee, well that was the secretary too. It all went through her.

Then came the personal computer.

THE LOSING OF WWII:

Missing liberal hypocrisy (Jerusalem Demsas, Mar 22, 2026, The The Closing Argument)


After the end of WWII, the Allied powers were figuring out what to do with Italy’s African colonies. Libya and Somalia got independence, but Eritrea was handled very differently.

There’s a quote that can be cited by basically any Eritrean in the world attributed to John Foster Dulles, a U.S. representative to the UN General Assembly who would go on to become Eisenhower’s secretary of state:

“From the point of view of justice, the opinions of the Eritrean people must receive consideration. Nevertheless, the strategic interests of the United States in the Red Sea basin and considerations of security and world peace make it necessary that the country has to be linked with our ally, Ethiopia.”1

Essentially, the U.S. was preparing for the Cold War — lining up allies, securing military bases, containing Soviet influence — and wanted Eritrea’s Red Sea ports and communications facilities to go to its existing ally, Ethiopia. Ethiopia is a landlocked country without Eritrea, which was (and is) a large part of its motivation for continued hostilities with its smaller neighbor.

During Ethiopia’s occupation of what is now an independent country, it imposed its own language, banned political parties and unions, and dissolved the Eritrean parliament at gunpoint. Eritreans did not go quietly; what followed was a long and bloody war of resistance.

In a country of about 3 million, between 60,000 and 80,000 were killed, and 50,000 children were orphaned. Those casualties include many of my parents’ direct relatives. Proportionally, if this happened in the U.S., that would mean about 6.8 million deaths, on the low end. Hilariously,2 Ethiopia switched sides in the Cold War anyways and imposed communism on both its own people and Eritrea as well. This was all depressingly predictable at the time.

The U.S. decision to oppose Eritrean independence ended up being net negative for world peace and national security as well as for its stated aims of the right to self-determination and independence.

In failing to remove the USSR we compromised our Founding ideals across the globe and let communism kill 100 million people.

MALTHUS BIRTHED ALL OUR EVIL IDEOLOGIES:

Paul Ehrlich, Estimated Prophet: The modern Malthusian had conviction, if nothing else. (Theodore Dalrymple, Mar 22, 2026, American Conservatism)

Karl Marx detested Malthus, seeing in him an apologist of inescapable mass poverty, but he was much influenced by him nevertheless (as was Darwin), and made precisely the same mistake that Malthus made. Malthus thought that only one variable, the size of population, would change, and did not realize that the productive capacity of the land and industry could more than compensate for the growth in population. Marx did not see this either: He thought the majority of the population was destined for immiseration, leading eventually to a cataclysm, after which everything would be all right.


Ehrlich was a Malthusian; and the problem with Malthusianism is that, however many times you expel it from your thoughts, it returns.

Darwinism, Marxism, Nazism, etc. all flow from the initial nonsense of Malthus.