The Hollywood blacklist, also known as the entertainment black list, was directed towards a multitude of Hollywood producers, directors, screenwriters, actors, musicians, and other entertainment professionals. These individuals were denied employment in the motion picture industry based on their real or suspected political associations or beliefs.

Those who were considered sympathetic towards the American Communist Party, or were in any way involved in any liberal humanitarian efforts that were considered associated with communism were to be blacklisted.

The HUAC (The House Committee on Un-American Activities) was created in 1938 to investigate and carry out the elimination of Communist sympathizers in America. The committee established its first Hollywood blacklist in November of 1947 immediately after ten writers and directors refused to give testimony to the HUAC and were cited for being in contempt of congress. History would refer to these writers and directors as the “Hollywood Ten.”

Senator Joseph McCarthy conducted a “witch hunt” on all those suspected of being associated with, or having sympathy for the Communist Party. The over zealous, and almost paranoid, actions of the Senator came to be known as “McCarthyism.” The term originated as a criticism of the Senator, but later took on a much broader meaning and is still used today to describe unsubstantiated and reckless accusations.

The HUAC hearings began their sessions with a number of individuals in the film industry being accused of being members of, or aligning themselves with The Communist Party, and allegedly implementing sympathetic material into their films. Particularly affected were screen writers, including legendary screen writer Arthur Miller, but many actors and directors were also cited.

The Senate committee felt strongly that the liberal ideas being portrayed in many Hollywood films constituted a great threat to traditional American society.

As a result of their industry being singled out for this persecution, actors Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall, and Danny Kaye, along with Director John Houston, created The Committee for the First Amendment in protest against the accusations that were being brought against the motion picture industry.

As a result of these hearings, and in spite of the protest movements, Hollywood was severely damaged. The consequences dictated the dismissing of many of its most talented stars, screen writers, directors and other creative forces that were cited as being communist sympathizers.

Many of these film professionals would never be able to resume their careers, and many found that friends and family would also turn their backs on them. They were now perceived as being guilty of having leftist viewpoints, and had not only found their careers destroyed, but were also labeled as “traitors” by the American public who, as a result of political propaganda, strongly believed Communism to be the biggest threat to American society..

Many who were blacklisted faced almost constant harassment from the FBI, experienced great defamation of character, and were now considered as “outcasts” by their own society. The black listing practices by the Senate would continue through the 1950’s and threaten the entertainment industry for over a decade.

The kids who were teenagers in the USA in the early to mid 1950's were a special brand of youngster. They'd grown up as little kids during the World War II years and had lived through rationing, the loss of fathers and uncles in the war, and the fear of the enemy potentially invading their towns and homes. They saw the war won by Uncle Sam's brave fighting men. And when it was all over, they began to live under a new fear of "the communist threat." These kids were taught to despise communism, Russia, and everything about it. They endured countless "duck-and-cover" drills to prepare them for a possible atomic attack.

It's easy to look back at that time now with idealized vision and imagine it as a carefree time of fun and frivolity. But the teenagers of the era were different than most any teenagers that came before them. They were hardened by war and the threat of more war. They were aware that there was menace in the world. Simply, they just weren't quite as innocent as teenagers before them had been. They had a harder edge.

And this harder edge made them less likely to simply accept what the grownups of the world told them. They began to search for their own identities in ways that teenagers never really had. As part of this, they grew increasingly bored with the pop music they were hearing.

In 1953 the top of the pop charts was full of names like Patty Page, Perry Como, Tony Bennett, Eddie Fisher, Les Baxter, and the Ames Brothers. These were all great artists without a doubt, but they belonged to the grown-ups and not the kids. They sang songs like, "How Much is that Doggie (in the Window)", "April in Portugal", and "Song From Moulin Rouge". These weren't necessarily bad songs, but they no longer spoke to this new breed of teenagers.

By 1954, the kids had become restless. They wanted music that was their music. They may not have been exactly aware of what they wanted, but they knew that what the pop charts up to this time had to offer was not satisfying. They needed music to match their anxious feelings in a newly atomicized world – a world that could blow up any day.

Rock and Roll songs were starting to break into the charts in the early 1950's here and there. But in 1954 a young kid named Elvis Presley smashed through the top of the charts and finally gave the kids exactly what they wanted. Elvis was ruggedly handsome, dangerously sensual, and perfectly despised by the older generation. His style of performing was something that most white kids had never seen before and when they saw it, they instantly loved it. They wanted more.

The rockabilly world knew a good market when it saw one and many musicians and bands followed in Elvis' footsteps to create and expand this new music called rockabilly. The teenagers absolutely ate the new music up. By 1956 Elvis was selling millions upon millions of records for the RCA Victor label and started racking up the number one hits. Carl Perkins, Gene Vincent, the Burnette Brothers Rock and Roll Trio, Eddie Cochran, Jerry Lee Lewis, Buddy Holly, and many, many other artists came up through the rockabilly ranks and became household rock and roll names.

In the process, boring music was all but banished from the top 40. Oh, the occasional song slipped through – Bat Boone had countless hits with watered-down versions of rocking R&B and rock and roll songs – but by and large the charts were dominated by the new rock and roll music. And there was no turning back. By the late 50's and certainly by the early 60's, rockabilly had given way to new forms of rock and roll. Rockabilly's reign at the top of the charts was short lived, but its significance cannot be over stated. At a time when the teenagers began to demand more than "How Much is that Doggie (In the Window)", rockabilly delivered. It pushed boring music from the charts and made way for rock and roll. And rock and roll has yet to relinquish that control of the pop charts.

1. “Cuba is a strict Communist Country with soldiers everywhere.”

Communist… yes, Strict… no. In fact, if you didn’t know that Cuba is a communist country and visited, you would probably come back none the wiser. As for soldiers, I have been to Cuba three times and yes I do remember soldiers, they were at the airport… the same way you see soldiers at many airports throughout the Caribbean and the rest of the world for that matter. The fact is, you could spend your vacation looking for signs of Communism and not find one, or you could just enjoy the Island.

2. “The food in Cuba is horrible!”

I’m not going to say that you are about to discover a culinary Utopia, but I wouldn’t go as far as saying the food is horrible. Simply stated, there are not a lot of available spices so the food tends to be quite bland. Remember, edible but boring is a long way from inedible. If it concerns you that much, pack some salt and a bottle of Frank’s red hot sauce.

3. “Besides the beaches, there’s nothing to do.”

Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, Cuba is a destination that truly has something for everyone. Eco-tourism including hiking, birding, caving, bike tours and many other activities are thriving and Cuba is an incredible location for diving and snorkeling as well. Granted the nightlife is far from the caliber of other islands but that isn’t to say it’s non-existent. With so many influences through the ages, almost every city has a different flair and makes for a new experience with every visit.

4. “A lot of the hotels in Cuba are cheap and run-down.”

There is no denying that when tourism first started taking off that getting a first class accommodation was next to impossible however, we are talking about 30 years ago and a lot has changed. Infrastructure has been constantly upgraded and large chains such as Melia, Riu and even Sandals have invested some of their best all-inclusive resorts in the best locations on the island. Getting an amazing hotel right on some of the best beaches in the world in Cuba isn’t any different from other top resort destinations.

5. “Cuba is poor with a lot of homeless and beggars.”

Have you walked down the streets of any major North American city lately? The fact is, unfortunately, there are panhandlers and homeless people everywhere. I wouldn’t say it’s worse in Cuba, the only difference is that what you call pocket change, they call a month’s salary. This also has nothing to do with Cuba being “poor” as it isn’t a coincidence that you only really find this at the major tourist areas. They know just like anywhere in the world that there is a sucker born every minute and in Cuba, the allure of buying cigars at a quarter of the price is their specialty. Would you really buy your new big screen T.V. from a guy in a van that you have never met and will never see again? If so, then go ahead and buy those “genuine” $350 Cuban cigars for $75, it’ll be the most you ever paid for banana leaves. Just ignore or a polite “no” is all it takes.

For 40 years, the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe appeared indestructible. The Iron Curtain began to fall apart in 1989 and in only one year, countries have left communism one after another, like domino pieces. The symbol of the Cold War, Berlin Wall has been called the “physical representation” of the Iron Curtain. For 28 years, the enormous construction divided in two a city – Berlin and a country – Germany. The fall of the Berlin Wall is the most important mark of the communist bloc failure.

The construction of the wall began on August 13, 1961 to stop the westward emigration of the German people. In the east it was named “the anti-fascist protection wall” while in the west people called it “Wall of Shame”. 155 km of disgrace of over 3 m high, of which 43 km through the heart of Berlin.

The frontier was also made of km of trenches, bunkers, hundreds of watch towers and barbed wire. Although the creation of the wall began in 1961, Germany was ruptured since the end of World War II. In 1945, Reich capital was divided between the Allied powers in the west and the Soviet Union in the east, and in 1949 two countries were born: Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic. In 1952, East Germany closed its border with West Germany, worried about the departure of population. There were exposed points though, where people were still able to pass. More than 2.5 million Germans made it to west between 1949 and 1961.

Although on June 15, 1961 East German leader Walter Ulbricht declared that there will not be a wall built, on August 13, the eastern part of Berlin is surrounded by barricades and barbed wire. The wall is built in certain stages. In 1962 a barricade was added, 90 feet on the inside, being created a strictly controlled “restrained zone”. Houses on this strip were bulldozed and people moved. The zone, mined and full of trapping wire, offered an extensive field of fire for the guards. In 1965 concrete walls began to be raised and, over the years, observation towers were added, while patrols and security were increased.

The “four generations wall”, completed in 1975 was the last version. It was assembled from slabs of 3.6 meters high and 1.2 meters wide. The wall was strengthened with motion sensors, fencing net and barbed wire, trenches against vehicles, and on the crest wall it was mounted a clean pipe, which would have made even problematic to escalate.

The eight passing points were planned particularly for different types of people that could pass through. The most well-known was Checkpoint Charlie, which was meant only to Allied personnel and non-German citizens. During the history of the Wall, military personnel, officials and Allied diplomats could enter East Berlin without passport control. Also, Soviet patrols could enter freely in the West Berlin.

On November 9, 1989 the East German government choose to permit visits to West Germany, but the minister for propaganda was not properly informed therefore a lot of confusion was developed. Tens of thousands of Berliners assailed the crossing points, claiming to move freely in the West. Overwhelmed by tens of thousands of people and in the absence of clear instructions, border guards were not likely to open fire, permitting the crowds to pass over.

The wall has been kept some time after November 9. On June 13, 1990 East German army launched formal demolition, and on July 1 all border crossing points were conventionally abolished. The two Germany halves were finally rejoined on October 3, 1990. Today, there are only three remaining portions of the wall: a section of 80 meters near Postdamer Plaz, a longer section near the river Spree and the third piece, turned into a monument, north of Bernauer Strasse.

It has been almost twenty years since the fall of the Berlin Wall – a wall which once divided East and West Germany – but has since marked a political revolution towards democracy, not only in Germany but also in the rest of Europe, and shocked the Western world. Such phenomenon seemed almost impossible to attain before especially in a country where the bureaucratics are both paranoid and inefficient. Once, individuals were being spied on by their own friends and neighbors, and where the way across the other border is through a small hole in the Berlin wall. Government service is not effective, and there are often lapses in public services. Despite these, the reunification of a Capitalist and Communist regime has shown how peace, though elusive, is possible for nations with differing ideologies.

For twenty eight years, the Berlin Wall served as a barrier to separate two governments – both politically and physically. It was once a symbol for the Iron Curtain, which was the dominant political ideology at that time, especially of the Communist Regime. During the Berlin Wall’s existence, about a hundred people were killed trying to cross the wall. The fall of the Berlin Wall began with a rumor about a possible demonstration of forty people. Such rallies were unheard of before, and almost nobody challenges the government, since freedom of expression was often suppressed. But it took a mass rally of people with four hundred candles for the phenomenon to take hold, spread and escalate across the German cities.

News of the mass demonstrations, people holding candles spread quickly, not only across Europe but across the globe, with images of people standing on the Wall being shown on television. In November 9, 1989, the wall opened unofficially and forever. Political pundits and analysts describe this Revolution as a symbol of the power of democracy, peace and sense of community among Germans and Europeans. The following year, Germany held its very first elections for the German Democratic Republic.

The fall of the Berlin Wall also marked an end to the Communist Regime in the Soviet Union. Prague, Bulgaria, Romania all experienced a change in government and a change in political power. The Baltic states established its independence from the Soviet in the 1990s. By the early nineties, communism is non-existent in Russia. The great thing about all of these is that it took forty candles – spa candles, natural candles, organic candles – to light up the whole of Germany and served as incendiary torches of freedom.

I noticed the scowl on the face of a Vietnamese engineer as I taught about the impact of hardened anger and of the need to forgive. I was sure he wasn’t the only one in this room of managers who felt the emotions his face seemed to reflect. After all, the company was about to go through downsizing, and many were unhappy with the edicts that had been handed down from Corporate.

He never spoke up in the group that day, though others were quite verbal. It wasn’t until we sat together on the long ride back from the remote retreat location that I learned what he had been thinking.

“I heard what you said today about how grudges make you sick in your heart and body. But I can never forgive the Communists. They don’t deserve to be forgiven.”

“Tell me more about it,” I invited.

“I had dreams,” he said. “I left Viet Nam in 1982 in little 30-foot fishing boat with 60 people on board. We landed on Malaysian soil after four scary days and nights at sea. One year later I considered myself and my family very lucky to have been admitted to the U.S. under political asylum status. But I’m getting ahead of myself. You see, the horrible images of the past eight years keep coming back to me. All of my dreams would not have been just dreams if the Communists didn’t invade my country.

“What kind of crime did I committed anyway? Were it a crime to be born in a religious family? Were it a crime to attend an American college? Were it a crime to work for a living?

“Unfortunately, it were from the Communist perspective. Religion were considered a tranquilizer to the People’s Movement. Educated in American school was enough to qualify me as a traitor to the “people.” Working with government-owned Air Viet Nam meant collaborating with the enemy.

“I had such a hard time trying to convince the political officer that I attended an American engineering college because I won a scholarship to have free schooling. I worked for Air Viet Nam just to make a living like anybody else does. I was a Buddhist because I was born in a family that believed in Buddhism for generations. The more I reasoned, the more I appeared not wishing to cooperate with the new government. It was not a surprise to see myself in the “re-education camp” (prison) shortly.

“Four years in re-education camp seemed decades. Days after days, I built the hatred in myself, I hate the Communists so much. They came and took away our future, our hope, our country’s prosperity. I look at the guards like looking at monsters. No human would act the way they act… abusing people, treating people like animals, laughing on people’s suffering. They tried to weaken our body by hard labor and undernourishing in order to control our mind.

“Out of 1200 prisoners in the camp, four hundred died in one year, average more than one a day.

“After 15 years, the hatred are still boiling insides myself as much as the time I was in the camp. All the years living in the U.S., I never touch a book on Communism. I refused to watch movie about Viet Nam. When I talk to someone who says one word that seems like favoring Communism, I walk away. My wife has begs me to go with her to visit family back in Viet Nam, but I cannot set foot there because of what happened.”

This man’s experiences are very different from ours…or are they? The setting is different, but the essential elements are the same.

1. LOSS OF POWER AND CONTROL.

He was literally in a prison. We can feel that way when “life” or certain people create negative experiences for us against our will.

2. UNDESERVED PUNISHMENT.

This man did not commit a crime, yet he received four years of cruel punishment. Some of the hardest things to forgive are those that are totally undeserved, things we did not directly bring on ourselves by our own choices.

3. LOSS OF THINGS WE VALUE.

The psychological losses were the ones that fueled this man’s anger the most – the loss of freedom, the stealing of dreams, the horror of witnessing harm to others. It is also these deeper losses that haunt us. They often convince us that our lives have been snatched from us – and that someone needs to be punished for that.

4. DIFFICULTY LETTING GO.

My friend was still living in the prison from which he had been physically released years before. Are you?

WHAT THOUGHTS KEEP YOU HELD CAPTIVE?

Your thought habits exert a powerful influence on your emotions and behavior. Let’s examine some of the “cognitive culprits” – myths that can paralyze you, embitter you, and keep you from moving forward in your life.

1. If I forgive, I’ll be letting the person get off scot free.

Truth is, the other person is probably not the one held most captive by this. It’s you!

You were already injured. You already had important things stolen from you.

Why perpetuate the harm by keeping yourself trapped in the never-ending reliving of the horror?

Forgive to free YOURSELF!

2. If I forgive, I’ll be saying that what happened doesn’t really matter.

No way. It DID and DOES matter. What happened was very, very wrong. Choosing to forgive does not make any statement to the contrary.

3. If I forgive, he/she will have won.

When you allow yourself to have an unforgiving spirit, you are always the real loser. The collateral losses continue, as the bitterness causes you to become a less effective worker, spouse or partner, parent, and/or friend.

You couldn’t help what happened to you originally. You didn’t cause the first losses. However, if you harbor the anger and revenge, you will create more losses than the perpetrator could inflict. It’s your choice about whether to continue to inflict pain on yourself.

4. If I forgive, I’ll be more vulnerable to harm in the future.

Forgiveness will not prevent your learning the lessons that are essential in your future. What has happened will make you more cautious, true enough.

Yes, your rights were violated. However, the reality is, some of the things we presume are rights are really privileges. Another fact is, some of the assumptions we have about, “This will never happen to me,” are unfounded. No one is immune..not even “good people.”

The difficult realization is, this world may not be as safe as you had previously assumed. However, with that loss of innocence comes a more mature realization that, though there is danger in relationships, in work situations, and in all of life, you can make the choices that make safer choices without becoming paranoid.

If you free yourself from the bitterness that can distort your thinking, perceptions, and reactions…you’ll be able to see the world more clearly. Without the irrationality that accompanies hatred and bitterness, you’ll become a wiser person.

I had planned to get to the “how-to” part in this article, but because of the foundation we needed to lay, that essential information will have to wait til the next Magnetizer. See you then!

Why Marx Was Wrong by Lawrence Eubank is a scholarly and erudite examination and refutation of Karl Marx’s book, which was highly critical of Capitalism, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. The 500 pages of Eubank’s book is intended to serve as a convincing argument pointing out the inaccuracies in Marx’s reasoning and his central accusation that capitalism serves to make capitalists richer by the “exploitation of laborers, through the extraction of unpaid ‘surplus value’ from them.” That is exactly what Why Marx Was Wrong does, refuting Marx’s central argument thoroughly.

In order to refute Karl Marx’s argument completely and point out the philosophical rot inherent in it, Lawrence Eubank takes a look at many of Marx’s statements in his own work and explains why each of them are wrong. To help back up his point-by-point refutation of Marx, Eubank cites other authors who have a similar, pro-capitalist, perspective.

Eubank starts off Why Marx Was Wrong by pondering why millions of people around the world still believe that the central argument of Marx is a valid one, even after, as Eubank puts it, “the utter collapse of Communism.” He adds that Marx’s central argument against Capitalism is still widely-believed, “even in countries that never were subjected to Communist rule.”

Lawrence Eubank deftly shreds Karl Marx’s central argument in Why Marx Was Wrong, beginning with pointing out that even in the very first sentence of Marx’s book, he relies “on unspoken assumptions” in order to present his case against Capitalism. In other words, he states certain assumptions even in the first sentence of his book and expects his readers to blindly accept them as if they are established facts, without backing them up to add credence to his argument.

The first sentence of Karl Marx’s book Capital: A Critique of Political Economy deals with the assumption that “The wealth of those societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails, presents itself as ‘an immense accumulation of commodities,’ its unit being a single commodity.” Marx, taking that assumption as being an accurate statement of fact, then writes that “Our investigation must therefore begin with the analysis of a commodity.”

Both Karl Marx and Lawrence Eubank write about economic systems that have been tried out, experimented with, and have supporters and detractors who often either support or oppose one or the other viewpoint without really knowing the basic tenets and arguments that have been made in favor and against Capitalism and Communism. That might be, at least in part, due to the rather dry nature of economics, in general, though it is an extremely interesting subject to people who are into knowing more about the various economic policies followed by countries around the world and why certain countries seem to become more economically successful than other ones.

One of the most entertaining of the comparisons that Lawrence Eubanks makes is between Marx’s reasoning and that of Adam Smith. The author calls Marx’s labor theory one that is typical of “paranoid conspiracy theories,” while Smith’s theory, which he writes is more of a “labor, rents, and profits” theory, is one based on an observation of facts. Eubank calls Smith “a scientist or investigator of the facts,” and Marx “a medieval Scholastic.”

In Why Marx Was Wrong, author Lawrence Eubank takes various assumptions Marx has made and lambastes them, point-by-point. Through this manner of critiquing Marx’s central argument, he probably makes the subject as entertaining as possible, though reading 500 pages of a refutation of Marx’s argument does require a commitment to want to know the exact specifics of why Marx’s reasoning is flawed. For anyone who has ever been interested in economic theories and/or has wondered why the central argument of Marx against Capitalism has continued to persist, Why Marx Was Wrong is an essential read.

This article is a book review of an excellent book dealing with trends of cold war era nations and politics involving them. Communism’s demise was a victory for western democracy but it also presented new challenges in the form of religious radicalism and ethnic violence in post cold war world.

1. The book provides an introduction to the most important areas of politics within the atmosphere of uncertainty and opportunity created by the end of the cold war written by Martin Slam. Communism’s demise was a victory for western democracy but it also presented new challenges in the form of religious radicalism and ethnic violence.

2. The book is divided into four parts. Part I deals with the theme of politics as a creative human activity. It includes a review of the features considered proper ingredients of a political society as well as of the impact of a particular society’s history and culture on the conduct of politics. Some the important aspects high lighted are as follows:-

a. The Soviet Union’s political system is an excellent example of how a governmental structure can completely fail to provide for the need of its citizens by adhering to an unworkable ideology and institutionalizing corruption and incompetence.

b. Government that actively seeks to provide for the security and overall welfare of its citizens tends both to prosper and receive the loyalty of those under its jurisdiction.

c. The post cold war era is much more complex because of the resurgence of ethnic and religious conflicts.

d. The term Nation – State does not accurately describe most countries on the map. Many societies are breaking down into tribal and clannish affiliations and the central government is having a difficult time retaining authority in such regions. In many cases a central government is having difficulty even establishing control over regions and population it is considered responsible for.

3. Part II deals with the kind of political institutions or processes common place throughout political systems, including basic governments’ structures. Following are some of the important aspect deliberated upon by the author:-

a. Political parties exist in both the democratic and non democratic political system. In the democracies they seek to win the elections, whereas in the non democratic system they are more interested in extending the power and control of the party leadership.

b. Extremist parties often do well in free elections. Their electoral prosperity usually rises during bad economic times or in other cases causes social-unrest to crop up. Within their own regions, separatist parties can often effectively compete with larger parties.

c. A referendum enables an electorate to either petition a legislature on an issue or, in some cases, to override the legislature altogether.

4. Part III explores current themes of politics such as economy, geography, demography and violence that we cannot ignore as critical considerations of nearly every country’s political life. Some of the important aspects covered are as follows:-

a. The world is increasingly becoming a global economy. This economy includes both advantages and dislocations. Substantial regions of the world are extremely poor, while other countries are achieving unprecedented economics advances.

b. Even a country fortunate to have enough to possess substantial natural resources may not have a developed economy that enables growth of a strong middle class or provides most members of the society access to economic opportunity and benefits. Even in progressing countries, economic developments rarely occur or smoothly run across the society.

c. Colonial empires built on expansionist agendas inevitably seem to collapse. The last to do so was the Russian dominated Soviet Union.

d. State terrorists often have substantial longevity and lethal capabilities because they enjoy state sponsorship. If adopted by a state, terrorist can forcefully and indirectly express the state’s foreign policy agenda.

5. Part IV reviews the post cold war international constellation, focusing in the characteristics that have changed it drastically over the past decade and that promise continued influence well into the new century. Some aspects deliberated upon are:-

a. The nation – state system is alive and performing well. More sovereign entities exist than ever before.

b. Collective security is an important and defining feature of international stability. When it is working well, collective security helps to guarantee that no group of countries emerge that are menacing to peace or threatening to the balance of power.

6. It is safe to assume that the international situation will continue to change, substantially and rapidly. The impact of such changes will strongly influence the process of American politics. Very little is static in international relations and the end of Cold War is not the end of history but simply a start of a new and a quite different era.

There's nothing better than a nesting doll to describe the quintessential Russian family. These nesting dolls are ideally represented by a peasant woman with her large brood of children. Russian families are large, with an average family having about 4 to 5 children. The family is very important to a Russian.

And family in Russia does not include the father, mother and children. It is inclusive of everyone; uncles, aunts, great uncles and aunts, grandparents, cousins, nieces, nephews, etc. Everyone is dependent and attached to one another. This could probably be attributed to the years of communism where to get things done; you had to have 'connections' in the right place. What could not be obtained in a straightforward manner, could be got done with help from a contact.

Also, during the communist regime, Russians were not allowed to own apartments. They were given free of cost by the government in return for some social work. But these weren't large and were based on the number of people in the family. With little room for privacy, they had to rely on one another for a lot of things. This can also be attributed to their close bonds with one another in the family.

Ideally the patriarch is the head of the family, but it's the women who are the silent heroes. They work all day long in fields, come home to cook for the family and also make sure that the house is maintained well. In fact, I once read somewhere that if there was just one cow, the Russian peasant women would pull the yoke, with the cow tied on the other end. The man would simply plow it. The matriarch was the bond that held the family together.

Even during feasts, the women of the house worked hard preparing food; all that the men did was to enjoy the feast and get high on vodka. It's commonly believed that harder a woman worked in the kitchen, the better would be the food. Even with all the hard work, they weren't appreciated, with sons being given priority.

And since the man is the head of the family, women are taught very early on in their lives to obey them and respect their authority.

Russians also get married early; mostly when they are studying in universities. In fact, in the olden days, women were known to marry and give birth to children when they were just 15!

This trend is changing and a lot of women now prefer to secure their life before thinking about marriage. A lot of these attitudes towards women are indeed changing and they enjoy the same position as men.

When it comes to quality in products there is no country which is as famous as Germany is. In A. Lange Sohne watches the German stamp of quality is so unambiguously present that the watches are the ultimate symbols of perfection. A.Longe Sohne is the pillar of German watch manufacturing. The romantic halo around the Swiss watch making success need not undermine the German excellence in the field. Finest innovations in this genre do come from Germany.

Glashutte, the tiny town in the Eastern Germany is the family home of the A. Lange Sohne the cradle of the German watch making industry. The name has taken front line in the lore of watch making. The company was founded by Adolph Lange in 1845. After crafting watches for the Various European blue blood the company became a legendary name in the horological circles of Europe. Among the historical clientele of A. Lange Sohne is the name of Kaiser William II (1898) who ordered a watch which was a gift to Sultan Abdul Hamid of the Ottoman Empire. These connections have given the brand an aura of the bygone days.

In the prime of Soviet communism in 1984, the East German Communist government confiscated the company's assets which resulted in the winding up of the production of watches. However, after a brief hiatus, the brand resurrected in 1990 after the collapse of the East German Communist Government. Adolph Lange's great grandson, Ferdinand Adolph resurrected the company and gave it an impetus that pushed the brand as one of the most prestigious watches of modern times. The production of a wearable watch that need to be wound only once in thirty one days is an epoch making achievement in the annals of watch making.

The company makes only 5000 watches every year. Watches are crafted masterpieces and the watch maker is an artist so each watch has the stamp of the artist. These watches are made only from gold and platinum and the unique style of each engraver can be appreciated by the discerning connoisseur.

Today the fascination for the A. Lange Sohne watches has only increased. This is due to the importance of the historical association of the company with legendary men and women of the past. The modern man appreciates this connection with the past. Therefore the number of buyers out numbers the production. Many patrons in fact get certain models of the brand only after a prolonged wait.