April 6, 2008

"Every woman will eventually vote — for Gold Dust."

More old subway ads from the NY Transit Museum.

Ads in old subway cars

(Enlarge.) You never see subway ads with the word "cravat" anymore. And the hyphenation! "Cra-vat" — ironically, when talking about things that fit perfectly.

Here's what the whole interior of the car looked like:

Old subway car

See those bare light bulbs? It made it very hard to take decent pictures of the wonderful old ads, so please excuse the low quality of the next few.

I was not trying to be snide and make this one say "buy more war." I was just cropping out a terrible glare:

Ads in old subway cars

Maybe you can figure out what year it was from the cutesy cartoon take on Hitler.

This one is pretty offensive too, but the City of New York has it on display:

Ads in old subway cars

(Enlarge.)

Food will win the war:

Ads in old subway cars

Carry out all conservation rules of the U.S. Food Administration. We're soft today, aren't we? Do you find yourself laughing at the notion that "food will win the war" and thinking it would do just as well to cut your wheat intake in half for 2 days a week as to have one wheatless day and who eats pork every day anyway?

32 comments:

rhhardin said...

National Lampoon WWII issue : Don't discuss bus schedules

I had a $25 Liberty Bond, a gift from a grandfather; I cashed it in when it matured after 40 years of earning interest. Who can guess what it was worth? The magic of compound interest!

About $75.

Middle Class Guy said...

You also do not see the term braces anymore in reference to men's haberdashery.

Maguro said...

I think a lot of people used to eat pork every day for breakfast. My grandfather ate bacon and eggs for breakfast every day of his adult life.

ricpic said...

Offensive? Speak for yourself. Pickaninnies don't offend me.

Larry said...

My wife with rare exception has eggs, toast, either sausage or bacon, and eggs every day.

Goatwhacker said...

My wife with rare exception has eggs, toast, either sausage or bacon, and eggs every day.

She really likes those eggs, I guess.

rhhardin said...

Morningstar Breakfast Strips are a very good substitute for bacon, provided you don't overnuke them. Cook them soft, they harden up.

In fact I prefer them.

Overnuked they're wretched. Even the dog won't touch them. You'll see.

Larry said...

Heh. I probably should have written: "My wife with rare exception has eggs, toast, either sausage or bacon, and either sausage or bacon every day.

My mother in her later years when there were people visiting would often serve bacon and link sausage and sausage patties.

Probably because she could. We knew what that meatless, porkless, wheatless stuff was about. We couldn't afford it anyway.

joe said...

I remember riding those straw-seat trains with my dad. Damn, I got old fast.

Lawgiver said...

I think a lot of people used to eat pork every day for breakfast.

What do you mean? Pork is the most widely eaten meat in the world. Humans ate about 100 million metric tons of it in 2006. US bacon consumption has risen about 40% in the last 5 years thanks in part to low/no carb diets. A lot of people eat pork not just for breakfast but for every meal. Bacon, ummmmmm good!

peter hoh said...

Yes, we are soft. Friday evening, my 13 year old daughter and I watched a History Channel show about the Pacific Theater in WWII.

Among other questions, she asked why we don't have rationing like they did in WWII.

It dawned on her that the current war has gone on longer than WWII. I tried to explain that there was a difference between war and occupation, but I don't think she bought it.

Eli Blake said...

It dawned on her that the current war has gone on longer than WWII. I tried to explain that there was a difference between war and occupation, but I don't think she bought it.

She shouldn't have bought it either.

The difference is really only a question about whether you are on defense of offense. In WWII we didn't 'occupy,' but rather 'liberated' because places like France and the Micronesia had already been 'occupied' by the enemy. We did occupy Germany and Japan, but for example in the immediate postwar period Germany was literally occupied by a number of allied troops equal to one-sixth of the population which made a guerilla war impossible. In Japan the culture was different and the allies were smart enough to let them keep their emperor so that when he ordered that there would be no further resistance, there was none, because most of the people were sworn to live or die by his decree.

One of the reasons why support for the Iraq was has eroded as fast as it has, is because Americans really see nothing of it except for he dead coming back. Most of us are asked to do nothing in the way of sacrifice (even the bills are charged to the national credit card to be paid in the future) so it seems grossly unfair that we are putting so much burden on a relative handful of Americans while the rest of us are asked to do nothing.

former law student said...

What is offensive about two hardworking, cherubic black infants? Should black icons be banned from advertising? Should the gold dust twins have been replaced with a couple of Gerber babies?

Food was rationed in the US during World War II to make sure that our fighting men and women would have enough. Plus there was little else to buy, civilian manufacturing having been turned over to military production, while labor supply and demand meant wages were good.

As a side note, to conserve cereal grains in England during World War I, breweries lowered the strength of beer to 3% by weight, much less than the 3.2% by volume beer that was drunk to end Prohibition in the US. The strength of everyday beer remains 3% to this day in the UK, while it is 5% in the US, requiring the drinking of two-thirds more British beer to get an American-level buzz.

Hoosier Daddy said...

One of the reasons why support for the Iraq was has eroded as fast as it has, is because Americans really see nothing of it except for he dead coming back.

Probably because the MSM ensures that's all that is seen from it too.

Then again, censored news like we did in WW2 would only be viewed as further evidence of the Bushitler regime.

so it seems grossly unfair that we are putting so much burden on a relative handful of Americans while the rest of us are asked to do nothing.

Yes of course. Then again, FDR didn't ask for rationing, it was imposed. Volunteers weren't requested, they were drafted. The news wasn't fair and balanced, it was cherry picked and censored. FDR not only wiretapped, he imprisoned thousands of Japanese Americans to boot.

Think anyone would buy that today Eli?

George said...

If your peach


Keeps out


Of reach


Better practice


What we preach


Burma-Shave

Pogo said...

because Americans really see nothing of it except for he dead coming back.

Hoosier's right. You can blame CNN, MSNBC, NYT, WaPo, USA Today, Boston Globe, LA Times, NPR, CBS, ABC, and NBC for the lack of honesty in reporting.

Thankfully, many of those organizations are dying, and I watch their fall with pleasure. NPR is asking listeners to object to plans to cut their federal funding. I say good riddance.

Der Hahn said...

Squint at that last sign a little bit ...

"Food will win the War (on fat) … and carry out all the (nutrition) rules of the US Food Administration."

and think about today's calls for 'sacrifice' from the left.

Robert Burnham said...

The U.S. Food Administration existed from 1917 to 1920. It was created during World War I, and it was part of the total transformation of U.S. society sought by Woodrow Wilson's administration.

For more about the USFA, see: http://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/004.html

And to learn more about how Wilson (and Progressives) changed America, see Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism.

former law student said...

to learn more about how Wilson (and Progressives) changed America, see Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism.

Picking that title tells me all about Goldberg that I need to know. He should learn that while Progressives changed candidate selection from smoke-filled rooms to Presidential primaries, real Fascists changed people named Goldberg to ashes and chimney smoke, with the occasional diversion to soap and lampshades.

Robert Burnham said...

Dear former law student,

Before you get yourself stuck any deeper, you really need to read the book.

Sincerely,
Someone who wishes you well

former law student said...

you really need to read the book.

By choosing such a title, the author has done me the favor of advertising his lack of judgment and lack of a sense of proportion. My reading the book despite these warnings would show that I lacked common sense, as well. No thank you.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Picking that title tells me all about Goldberg that I need to know.

Ahhh nothing as enlightened as the closed mind.

You might try actually reading the book and learning something about the origins of the term Fascism which has not that much to do with Hitler and his gang The National Socialist Party.

I've been blogging recently on my food blog about food, the Depression, rationing and WWII....just in case anyone is interested.

And for another now politically inorrect advertisement try this one

Pogo said...

FLS, if the title tells you "all you need to know", then you don't know much.

Try at least reading the condensed version; the title may be more palatable.

A half century's slander: it isn't conservatives who must answer for fascism.

kimsch said...

I saw this ad in an antique passenger car at the Illinois Railway Museum in Union, Illinois last summer.

Hoosier Daddy said...

real Fascists changed people named Goldberg to ashes and chimney smoke, with the occasional diversion to soap and lampshades.

Actually the real fascists were in Italy and Spain.

Those pre-conceived notions you have would really take a beating if you did in fact do a little reading of history.

former law student said...

A half century's slander: it isn't conservatives who must answer for fascism.

Appears to be a mish-mash of straw man arguments, as if the entire book were compressed into one page. For example, if Naziism were really "socialist", German steel magnates like Thyssen and von Krupp wouldn't have backed Hitler and the Nazi party from 1924 on, any more than Ford and the DuPonts would have supported a socialist. Big German businesses like AEG and IG Farben wouldn't have supported Hitler from the time he became Reichskanzler, and so on.

Naziism was just one flavor of fascism. Hitler was a totalitarian whose "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein F├╝hrer!" (One people, one government, one leader) was echoed by Italian Fascism's nationalism, exaltation of the state above all, with Il Duce as the leader. Spanish Nationalist state was nationalist, obviously, led by El Caudillo as the leader, but I don't know if it was marked by overarching state power.

Other than reflecting Goldberg's feelings being hurt by hecklers, ("Your teh fascist, not me! Hahahahaha!") I don't see the logic behind the essay. I would like to see some of the footnotes: I can't picture good old jobs exporter, welfare eliminator, cigar inserter Billy Jeff ever describing anything Republican as "fascist."

Dust Bunny Queen said...

I don't see the logic behind the essay.

Of course you don't since you refuse to open your eyes and read the book. Are you afraid that the words will strike you blind? Corrupt your mind? Give you another point of view and confuse your preconcieved ideas? Naaaah. No point in thinking outside of your comfort zone. Ooohhhhmmmm...liberalism is goooooood.....ooooohhhmmmmm....liberalism does no harm......ooooohhhhmmm

If I didn't already know that it would be a colossal waste of breath, I would suggest you also read "The Forgotten Man" by Amity Shlaes or even...God Forbid!! Free to Chose by Milton Friedman.

former law student said...

Sure I'd read Milton Friedman. You do mean the former Keynesian who worked for New Deal agencies when he couldn't find a job in 1935? The fellow who helped invent the payroll withholding tax in 1942?

I don't read people with axes to grind.

Pogo said...

I don't see the logic behind the essay.
Well, it was worth a shot. It is indeed a compression of the book, and as such is limited in its ability to provide evidence persuasive to those who refuse to read the details (and then complain about being incomplete, which I find odd).

The nuns used to call that the state of 'invincible ignorance'.

if Naziism were really "socialist", German steel magnates like Thyssen and von Krupp wouldn't have backed Hitler
Goldberg easily answers that concern, but you won't ever know.

The fellow who helped invent the payroll withholding tax in 1942?
Yeah, that guy. The one who repudiated those ideas and later won a Nobel in economics "for his achievements in the fields of consumption analysis, monetary history and theory and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy".

That is, the ideas that helped prove socialism wrong.

former law student said...

if Naziism were really "socialist", German steel magnates like Thyssen and von Krupp wouldn't have backed Hitler

Goldberg easily answers that concern, but you won't ever know.

The only possible way is through sleight of hand. Hitler assured big businessmen that they could continue to be "Masters in their own houses." Maintaining the capitalist status quo is incompatible with socialism.

Larry said...

Has socialism ever gotten the upper hand without the connivance of owners of capital that thought somehow it would not apply to them?

Nichevo said...

fls/fhb, before showing us how ill-informed you are, have you read Shirer's canonical book? No, right? If so, do you have a copy handy? Because I will use that to explain it in small words for your cognitive pleasure. I could do it allegorically with Atlas Shrugged if that's easier.

"Masters of their own house" does not mean what you think it means.

Oh, why am I wasting breath?