Ch.88Ch.6 – Extra

# File #1

The British Empire’s status as the world’s most progressive nation is evident in the fact that no one asks the foolish question, “Are women truly beings capable of intellect?” Such expressions have now become nearly obsolete, found only in literary works from a century ago. This has been the case at least since the era of Charles Babbage’s Analytical Engine and its greatest interpreter, Countess Ada Lovelace.

Of course, it is clear that Ada Lovelace suffered from severe gambling addiction, and that her dedication to implementing the Analytical Engine and developing its decoding language was motivated by her desire to calculate optimal expected values. Calculating odds is the consistent dream of all gamblers, and the Countess Lovelace was no exception.

What distinguished the great “Saint of Machine Language” from ordinary people was that she actually implemented such a program. She reaped enormous profits and brought tremendous wealth to the earldom. The cathartic yet ironic passage in the novel “Lovelace, The Final Gambit,” where she declares “In the end, the casino is always the ultimate winner” while defeating the casino’s godfather with a royal straight flush, though merely a line from a popular novel, encapsulates her life.

Indeed, she was contradictory in many ways. By the time she realized there was no gambling strategy that could ultimately beat the house, she had already driven several gambling establishments in London and Edinburgh to insolvency. When even Her Majesty the Queen expressed concern about her gambling addiction, she had already lost interest in gambling. For someone who could calculate winning strategies, gambling ceased to be gambling at all.

It is considered one of history’s ironies that, thanks to this, the Countess was able to implement Babbage’s Analytical Engine with her vast capital, successfully commercialize it, and receive timely treatment for her cancer. Her greed ultimately advanced both herself and the British Empire. Though the machine was created for purely private gain, history and economics are greatly influenced by such unintended external factors.

Lovelace’s achievements extended far beyond gambling calculations. By automating repetitive and tedious tasks, she contributed to the advancement of mathematics, which in turn influenced engineering, science, physics, and even political economy. The emergence of probability theory, once considered ominous and evil, suggests that human reason can glimpse into the unknown realm of the future.

Furthermore, the process of commercializing Babbage’s Analytical Engine led to remarkable developments in mechanical engineering, precision engineering, materials engineering, clockwork engineering, and steam engineering. This greatly accelerated Britain’s technological advancement. Engineers modestly estimate that these developments put Britain’s technology at least 30 years ahead of other countries. Of course, this was underpinned by Sheffield’s excellent steel technology, Manchester’s outstanding industry, and the logistical capacity of the Liverpool port.

Countess Ada Lovelace died having received honor and praise, living a full life. However, many historians believe that had she lived just three years longer, she would have significantly altered the course of the Great European War. The general consensus, however, is that such praise is somewhat excessive, regardless of how great Lovelace’s achievements were.

Lovelace’s Analytical Engine could derive rational and efficient war scenarios, but it ultimately failed to discover methods to avoid war itself. This was because the Great European War occurred under the most rational decision-making of each nation. The Great European War signified that Machiavellian political logic—that war is merely another aspect of diplomacy—no longer applied.

This interpretation gave rise to two perspectives on the Age of Technological Romanticism.

One is skepticism that technology can no longer make humans great, which evolved into the Neo-Luddite movement. The question posed is: if even the most advanced steam-clockwork-gear computer could not prevent war, what meaning does computer engineering, considered the essence of human reason, truly have?

The other perspective is that of innocence, arguing that technology is blameless and the problem lies in human ambition and aspiration. According to their argument, technology is like a “well-sharpened knife”—whether it is used to stab fruit or people depends entirely on the hand that holds the handle.

The reason the Neo-Luddite movement eventually became obsolete was not due to excessive radicalism. The Neo-Luddite movement ultimately contained a kind of reactionary consciousness advocating a return to the old system. However, Britain’s excellent public, while remembering the romance of that era, also vividly recalled its inconveniences. The Neo-Luddite movement, which proposed abandoning the comfortable advancement of technology, faded away without gaining public sympathy.

Meanwhile, the innocence theory developed in a rather peculiar way. If there is no problem with technology, the philosophical discourse becomes about whose hands should hold the “well-sharpened knife handle.” The person who brought this concern—one typically confined to university professors—into the political and social realm was Rosa Linton-Orman, the founder of the British Fascist Party.

Modeling after Benito Mussolini’s Fascist Party in Italy, she advocated that an excellent state apparatus should govern the people and lead them to an advanced future. However, Rosa Linton-Orman was also well aware of the distinctive conservatism of the British people.

Recognizing early on that simply importing the Italian model would not succeed, she distanced herself from Adolf Hitler’s German National Socialist Workers’ Party (officially NSDAP, and contrary to popular belief, “Nazi” carries a derogatory meaning), which showed signs of violent tendencies, and instead proposed a third path suited to the British Empire’s circumstances.

In her speech at the British Parliament, Rosa Linton-Orman left behind the famous words, “The most effective way to predict the future is to design it,” advocating for the construction of an ideal and rational state that could be predicted and controlled through technocrats and steam-clockwork-gear computers.

She perceived that what the British truly desired was not their own safety and conservatism, but to continue the reputation of “the empire on which the sun never sets.” To achieve this, she argued that the entire nation should function “like a gear-wheel computer,” and that the British mainland should become the “machine brain” of the entire world, ultimately proposing a theory of global unity.

Although Rosa Linton-Orman failed to become Prime Minister, the concepts she established became the commemorative foundation of British National Socialism, emerging as a new alternative to the Democratic and Conservative parties, which had been busy tearing each other apart in political strife. This was termed “technocracy,” meaning dominance over machines and technology, and became the catalyst for young and capable fascist members of parliament to form a majority party and constitute the cabinet.

– Excerpt from Chapter 7 of Secondary History, “Why the British Empire’s Homeland Must Function as the Brain of the World”: Partially excerpted from Karl Polanyi’s “The Small Transformation.” Cambridge University Press.

# File #2

When asked about history, I find myself truly at a loss for how to respond.

Father, have you ever seen a creature called a giraffe? It’s a four-legged animal with a neck as long as a five-story building, which feeds on grass yet is so formidable that even fierce lions dare not disturb it. I suppose this description doesn’t particularly resonate with you.

Of course, this is entirely due to my inadequate ability to convey information, but what I wish to express is that history ultimately depends on how the reader interprets it, and how the interpreter of that interpretation receives it.

This phenomenon occurs because of three different contexts—the era when the actual events took place, the perspective of the reader, and the perspective of the receiver—all differ.

Let me use an example from the Old Testament that we all know. As you’re aware, the sin of incest is considered an unforgivable transgression, yet even in Genesis, there is a passage describing how Lot’s two daughters had relations with him and bore children. The recorder of the Bible documented this because it happened, but our position in receiving this information is merely embarrassing.

In fact, while teaching novice monks, I had to endure quite an ordeal answering when a bright student asked, “Why is such a passage openly displayed in the Bible? What was the purpose of including such content?” For children who held the common sense that the Bible is a book recording sacred words, such content was unacceptable.

Fortunately, those children were intelligent, and I was able to escape such a predicament using the underhanded but effective method of answering questions with questions: “A nation is ultimately a collection of households and bloodlines. Is a nation, then, something worth preserving to the extent of committing the sin of incest?” In any case, these days nationalism is emphasized everywhere.

Of course, it’s true that American President Wilson emphasized national self-determination, but that wasn’t meant to apply to the colonies of the British Empire and France. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the theory that the British Empire’s colonial rule was damaged by the principle of national self-determination.

Rather, I find the cause in the political instability within the British Empire. The traditional two parties, Whig and Tory, collapsed, and the fascist party advocating technocracy emerged as mainstream. Well, this is as different as the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism, or rather, between Catholicism and the Orthodox Church. Of course, the British Empire has completely become a control state governed by technocrats.

The internal situation in Britain is changing so rapidly that it’s difficult to speak with certainty. Currently, forced economic development across the entire country is taking place under the leadership of technocrats.

I boldly intend to call this a planned economic system. It’s important to note that this has nothing to do with socialist undertones or foundations like the liberation of workers. I am witnessing a massive monster where efficiency, collectivity, uniformity, and technology and capital have not just become intertwined but have become one.

You ask if there is no resistance from the citizens? No. Rather, they strive to voluntarily pledge allegiance to the state.

I believe you’ve heard that every British household has at least one steam engine and one clockwork mechanism. The government does not properly supply coal fuel to run steam engines to those who resist. If you cannot operate your household steam engine generator, not only is everyday life impossible, but you also cannot charge portable clockwork devices, which is essentially equivalent to shutting down daily life.

Even more vicious is the introduction of the coal differential supply system, where the state provides 60% of coal as a basic supply to all citizens, but anything beyond that is differentially supplied based on loyalty and contribution to the state. Given these circumstances, British citizens have reached a point where they stratify and divide each other. It’s the same method used to handle colonies—making people subordinate themselves to the strata set by the state.

Father, England is becoming a country not for humans but for steam and gears. The Beveridge Report, which formed the basis for the 60% figure, is classified as confidential, making it difficult even for me to access. However, through various channels, I know that it contains research findings indicating that 60% energy supply is necessary to guarantee a minimally humane life—that is, a life where one can work properly.

Resistance does exist. There are radical forces. Although Neo-Luddites have completely died out, there are still those who rebel against state oppression and control. The Scottish, Welsh, and Irish are among them.

The technology gap is more serious than one might think. If you cannot handle steam and clockwork, you cannot find employment in England, and not finding work in England means not getting quality jobs, which means spending your entire life as a day laborer. As a result, many are attempting to smuggle themselves into America.

The Irish region, in particular, is experiencing significant departure. The English nobles—now more famous as technocrats—don’t care at all about Ireland’s departure, but they thoroughly eradicate any rebellion from Scotland and Wales. The crime of treason was once used jokingly, but now only police, judges, and journalists directly mention that law. Among the general public, it’s referred to vaguely as “that law.”

At the center of this is “Circus,” the British Intelligence Service. The expertise once used to manage colonies around the world is now being used on their own citizens. Currently, the intelligence service is trying to prevent technology leakage, and there’s news that some professors from Cambridge and Oxford have fled. The media reported that they were all arrested and subjected to the steam power plant chimney-type execution, but the reality I know is somewhat different.

Father, we already know about the apostate, Judas, the excommunicated Ishmael Van Helsing. He is not dead. He eventually became an executive of the Soviet secret organization and is now visiting London brazenly and shamelessly with a group of young Soviet officers. Of course, the clockwork engineering procedure he received was basic and primitive, requiring continuous maintenance. It is clear that behind this recent failed escape attempt of clockwork engineering professors is that man, Van Helsing, once called Vladimir and now known as Arkady Ivanovich Svidrigailov.

Currently, the entire Soviet youth officer corps has withdrawn, and Svidrigailov’s whereabouts are unknown. As instructed by the Cardinal, I passed information about him to the Circus. Although I wasn’t entirely comfortable handing over an apostate to fascists for disposal, I did so. According to our long-standing covenant, we do not ask the Circus uncomfortable questions about whether he is alive or dead.

– Letter from London, Brother Gaspar

# File #3

From: Federal Security Bureau Deputy Director Mitch Skinner

To: Federal Security Bureau Special Agent Katherine Scully

Subject: Instructions #55-121-1, 2

Notification:

The clockwork equipment fragments found at the scene of the Kingsport Police Station tragedy have been confirmed as designs by Professor James Moriarty, who taught mathematics and clockwork engineering at Cambridge University.

Instruction 1:

Alpha Red Team will actively cooperate with British Intelligence Officer Clarice Holmes in the arrest of Professor James Moriarty.

Instruction 2:

Agent Henry Payne will be deployed to the front line as soon as his injuries recover.

Special instructions from Director Hood (unlike the rest of the document typed on a typewriter, this section is handwritten by Mitch Skinner):

Find out which mole leaked the operation information and report back. Separate investigations are being conducted for Arkham and Kingsport, so proceed with an investigation of the Pollard police. However, conduct it without the knowledge of the newly appointed police chief. Plan to capture alive as we intend to flay them alive.

End.