History Unplugged Podcast

America's Founding Fathers feared a standing army would inevitably threaten civilian governance. Yet 250 years later, the U.S. military remains a strange outlier among nearly every nation that has ever existed—maintaining its strength and popularity while never attempting a coup. How did America get this right when so many other nations, from Turkey to Latin America, have seen their militaries seize power?
The story begins with George Washington, who inspired mutinous soldiers to become the first army in a thousand years not to threaten democracy. But Washington's example alone doesn't explain America's success. Structural factors—dispersed urban centers, a benign international security environment, and urgent domestic threats from Native American conflicts—created a weak federal army and strong militia system that prevented military consolidation of power.
Today's guest is Kori Schake, author of The State and the Soldier: A History of Civil-Military Relations in the United States. We see many counter-intuitivie things, like how the Founding Fathers had it backwards. The creation of a professional military actually reduced challenges to civilian control. We know this because key crises tested this system that the US military was able to overcome without seizing power. They include Alexander Hamilton's ambitions to raise an army for foreign conquest, Aaron Burr's plot to overthrow the United States, Andrew Jackson's unauthorized invasion of Florida, Ulysses S. Grant navigating feuds between president and Congress, Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, Truman's firing of MacArthur during the Korean War, and confusion over nuclear launch authority during the Cold War.
As the public increasingly pulls the military into partisan divisions, the question remains: can America's exceptional civil-military relations endure?
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Thomas Jefferson’s 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists famously described the First Amendment as building a "wall of separation between church and State." This line has been the gold standard for those who point to the secular origins of America and the threat of funding any sort of religious activity. But this idea of America as a secular republic built on Enlightenment ideals misses a critical truth: Christianity has been at the center of American public life since European colonization began 500 years ago. The Constitution didn't create a wall between church and state—it inadvertently created a "free market" for religion that allowed Christian activists to expand their influence in unexpected ways.
Today's guest is Matthew Avery Sutton, author of Chosen Land: How Christianity Made America and Americans Remade Christianity. We see the different versions of Christianity imported during European colonization and how the absence of state control unleashed wildly eccentric religious movements that couldn't have happened in Europe. From revivalist preachers like Jonathan Edwards and Peter Cartwright to Billy Graham, and from liberal Congregationalists to twentieth-century mainline denominations, American Christianity constantly evolved.
We see this in the story of Abraham Lincoln, whose skepticism toward traditional Christianity in his twenties nearly derailed his political career. In his 1846 race against Methodist circuit rider Peter Cartwright, Lincoln faced accusations of being an infidel after openly rejecting his family's Christian faith. This episode reveals how, contrary to popular belief, America's founding generation allowed religious liberty not out of principle, but pragmatism—they needed to keep a fractious coalition together.
To understand what makes America unique, we must account for how Christianity shaped—and was shaped by—every major historical development in U.S. history. From tent revivals to megachurches, from abolition to segregation, Christianity's "free-market" evolution in America created something unlike anywhere else in the world.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There’s an argument to be made that every technology advance in communication – from cave paintings to fake AI movie trailers – is at its root an attempt to tell stories. Our first night-fires created the earliest audiences for spoken stories. In time, the development of rhyme, song, and other mnemonic devices allowed those spoken stories to be preserved for generations; pictures drawn on cave walls turned preservation into permanence, telling stories we still experience thousands of years later; writing enabled storytellers to spread tales to faraway places; the Chinese invented printing with moveable metal type around 700 AD; the Toltecs independently invented it at about the same time; 750 years later Gutenberg independently invented it again, adding a converted wine press to create the mass production of mass communication. Over time, printing presses increased the number of storytellers and the size of their audiences by many orders of magnitude, a trend which led us to great revolutions, and electric, then electronic, then digital storytelling and all our storytelling tools of today—and tomorrow’s.
Today’s guest is Kevin Ashton, author of “The Story of Stories: The Million-Year History of a Uniquely Human Art.” We see how humans alone possess the desire to share our hopes and beliefs, to understand and connect with others, to process events that have come before and anticipate events that will come next. That innate urge to communicate has impacted every aspect of human history, and it is so ingrained in the fabric of our existence that language did not come to being so that we could tell stories—stories gave us language. Human storytelling has led to innovations in astronomy, entertainment, technology, and beyond, and brought about revolutions, religions, political movements, and so much more.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

During the Holocaust, Josef Mengele discarded every medical ethic to perform horrific human experiments at Auschwitz, including non-consensual vivisections, limb transplants, and agonizing surgeries conducted without anesthesia. Japan had its own program that is less known but equally brutal. In occupied China, the Imperial Japanese Army’s Unit 731 operated a vast complex where thousands were subjected to biological warfare tests and lethal physiological experiments to further military research.
During the occupation of Japan after WWII, the US had an important decision to make. Should they hold those responsible for atrocities during the war accountable or should they take the information to advance the national interest? There was extremely valuable data on bioweapons and survival techniques in the face of extreme cold or low oxygen that could save the lives of thousands of soldiers.

Here's what happened. The researchers who worked at Unit 731 were given immunity in exchange for their research data. Most of these scientists lived peacefully after WWII, with a few of them having to go through a 1949 Soviet Trial, which was deemed by the West as communist propaganda. They basically traded their knowledge for freedom and avoided prosecution, like the German scientists who came to America as part of Operation Paperclip.

​Most of the horrors on Unit 731 had been hearsays and rumors until recently with the passing of the Freedom of Information Act. Today’s guest is Jenny Chan, and she’s published the book “Unit 731 Cover-up: The Operation Paperclip of the East.” This book is based on documents found in the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Russian archival documents, and translations of the Khabarovsk Trial to paint a complete picture of the cover-up of the atrocious act of Unit 731. We look at the war crimes themselves, what happened to the scientists, and the question of whether war crimes should ever be covered up in the name of national interest.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Since the era of Joseph Stalin, Moscow’s rulers have sent Russian athletes into the Summer and Winter Olympics with one command: you must win. These competitors operated under a "win-at-all-costs" doctrine most notably through the use of "shamateurism." By giving elite hockey stars nominal titles as military officers or factory workers, the USSR bypassed amateur requirements to field seasoned professionals against genuine Western students—a disparity that defined the Cold War sporting era.
But the deception went deeper than employment records; it extended into the very biology of the athletes, particularly in high-strength disciplines like weightlifting and powerlifting. Athletes such as Vasily Alekseyev, the super-heavyweight lifter who set 80 world records and weighed 360 pounds, were often the face of a system later revealed to be fueled by state-mandated anabolic steroids
Today’s guest is Bruce Berglund, author of “The Moscow Playbook: How Russia Used, Abused, and Transformed Sports in the Hunt for Gold.” We look at the intersection of Russian sports and geopolitical power, from the dominant Soviet teams of past Olympics to recent doping scandals and international sanctions. With new research from Olympic archives, records of the Soviet bloc and current Russian media, Berglund shows how Moscow’s leaders have defied the rules of the game for decades as the world’s governing bodies turned a blind eye.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.