“Antoine Lavoisier, who oversaw France’s national powder works, had revolutionized gunpowder chemistry, producing what he declared “the best in Europe.” Lavoisier’s published formulas set the standard that American powder makers would follow for a generation.”
This scenario could scarcely be imagined now. Anyone with a new formula for a critical process would obtain a patent and charge enormous license fees. Or more likely the patent would be bought by a single manufacturer who could then charge exorbitant prices. The entire enterprise would be protected by laws related to trade secrets. Indeed nowadays huge companies buy small innovative companies solely for their intellectual property, sometimes even ceasing production of a competitive product to protect the market for an inferior one.
Intellectual property law might be due for a reexamination and analysis of how it may truly benefit or harm innovation in the United States. Given that IP law is specifically designed to grant a government monopoly it might be useful to think about the consequences of how this fits in a capitalist market system that requires competition to be relevant.
I agree with the intent of the National Environmental Policy Act to incorporate environmental considerations along with economic and national security considerations in land use decisions. However, I have observed the way that, in conjunction with the Endangered Species Act it often delays or greatly adds to the cost of projects based upon highly speculative claims of substantial negative environmental impacts, or on impacts to minor allegedly endangered species like clams or spiders that nobody other than specialized biologists would ever be likely to see, recognize, or benefit from in any way. There needs to be a better balance between the multiple objectives of public land use policy.
It came a bit later (1802) but the saga of DuPont is illustrative. Starting as a powder mill, it expanded into virtually everything. A lot of it was government connected and some wasn't. GM, Hanford, nylon, kevlar, teflon, nomex, freon are part of the portfolio. It seems they were always globalist with connections with other governments-good and bad.
Great historical dive into our nation’s founding and how something as humble as gunpowder could be so crucial for our nations existence! Now we need to realize that drones are the new muskets and rare earth the new gunpowder 😎
This is the comment I wrote per the story below for the New York Times:
"For those who think that it's not the American way for government to get involved in business decisions, and that the free market should be the determiner, well, if not for government involvement there might not be a United States of America.
Per an article in the conservative economic website Commonplace, when the Continental Army was first formed in 1776, George Washington was horrified to learn that there was only enough gunpowder for 10 days of fighting.
John Adams wielded the power of the fledgling Continental Congress to order colonies to begin building gunpowder producing plants. He also sent an emissary to France to secure gunpowder. Without these actions, there probably wouldn't be a United States.
Also noted is that now we are desperately short of rare earths mining and processing. We are dependent on guess who? Of course, China. Rare earth minerals are vital to so many modern products, including weapons. Rare earths is our gunpowder dilemma.
Our government needs to get involved in the rare earths industry, from mining to processing. Without this, Taiwan will be up for grabs by China, and the United States just may be at war against China. As it now stands, we will lose."
I added this graf: The name of the article I'm referring to at the Commonplace website is "The Industrial Foundation of America" In both gunpowder and policy, the Continental Congress holds lessons for today by Conner Brace. too:
There's an article in today's (July 7) New York Times that's right in line with what Connor Brace is saying, "The Bessent Doctrine: The Days of America Being Played Are Over," by By Mohamed A. El-Erian
"...the decades-long prioritization of pure economic efficiency is scaled back in favor of protecting vulnerable domestic industrial segments, bringing back priority processes such as chip fabrication, building backup supply chains and protecting jobs. The laissez-faire capitalism championed by economists like Adam Smith and Milton Friedman will face a much heavier government hand."
“Antoine Lavoisier, who oversaw France’s national powder works, had revolutionized gunpowder chemistry, producing what he declared “the best in Europe.” Lavoisier’s published formulas set the standard that American powder makers would follow for a generation.”
This scenario could scarcely be imagined now. Anyone with a new formula for a critical process would obtain a patent and charge enormous license fees. Or more likely the patent would be bought by a single manufacturer who could then charge exorbitant prices. The entire enterprise would be protected by laws related to trade secrets. Indeed nowadays huge companies buy small innovative companies solely for their intellectual property, sometimes even ceasing production of a competitive product to protect the market for an inferior one.
Intellectual property law might be due for a reexamination and analysis of how it may truly benefit or harm innovation in the United States. Given that IP law is specifically designed to grant a government monopoly it might be useful to think about the consequences of how this fits in a capitalist market system that requires competition to be relevant.
I agree with the intent of the National Environmental Policy Act to incorporate environmental considerations along with economic and national security considerations in land use decisions. However, I have observed the way that, in conjunction with the Endangered Species Act it often delays or greatly adds to the cost of projects based upon highly speculative claims of substantial negative environmental impacts, or on impacts to minor allegedly endangered species like clams or spiders that nobody other than specialized biologists would ever be likely to see, recognize, or benefit from in any way. There needs to be a better balance between the multiple objectives of public land use policy.
It came a bit later (1802) but the saga of DuPont is illustrative. Starting as a powder mill, it expanded into virtually everything. A lot of it was government connected and some wasn't. GM, Hanford, nylon, kevlar, teflon, nomex, freon are part of the portfolio. It seems they were always globalist with connections with other governments-good and bad.
Great historical dive into our nation’s founding and how something as humble as gunpowder could be so crucial for our nations existence! Now we need to realize that drones are the new muskets and rare earth the new gunpowder 😎
Biden realized it…Hegseth is focused on the last war.
This is the comment I wrote per the story below for the New York Times:
"For those who think that it's not the American way for government to get involved in business decisions, and that the free market should be the determiner, well, if not for government involvement there might not be a United States of America.
Per an article in the conservative economic website Commonplace, when the Continental Army was first formed in 1776, George Washington was horrified to learn that there was only enough gunpowder for 10 days of fighting.
John Adams wielded the power of the fledgling Continental Congress to order colonies to begin building gunpowder producing plants. He also sent an emissary to France to secure gunpowder. Without these actions, there probably wouldn't be a United States.
Also noted is that now we are desperately short of rare earths mining and processing. We are dependent on guess who? Of course, China. Rare earth minerals are vital to so many modern products, including weapons. Rare earths is our gunpowder dilemma.
Our government needs to get involved in the rare earths industry, from mining to processing. Without this, Taiwan will be up for grabs by China, and the United States just may be at war against China. As it now stands, we will lose."
I added this graf: The name of the article I'm referring to at the Commonplace website is "The Industrial Foundation of America" In both gunpowder and policy, the Continental Congress holds lessons for today by Conner Brace. too:
There's an article in today's (July 7) New York Times that's right in line with what Connor Brace is saying, "The Bessent Doctrine: The Days of America Being Played Are Over," by By Mohamed A. El-Erian
"...the decades-long prioritization of pure economic efficiency is scaled back in favor of protecting vulnerable domestic industrial segments, bringing back priority processes such as chip fabrication, building backup supply chains and protecting jobs. The laissez-faire capitalism championed by economists like Adam Smith and Milton Friedman will face a much heavier government hand."
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/07/opinion/scott-bessent-trade-economy.html
As the empire grew, liberties moved conversely and the panopticon ensured conformity.