 The loss of history is an endless struggle for documentary evidence of what took place in the past, but there is not always evidence documented from certain events physically available to call upon as we seek out historical accuracies. In some cases we only remember that things took place through human remembrance, and we can't stress the importance of this enough. The oral tradition of remembering things is part of our civilization journey here on Earth. From the earliest of times we have told stories from generations to generation, with nothing else but our memories to call upon as the story ages the people involved in the events die out, but the story remains in the families of the involved. We do constantly say in this day and age when someone tells you something incredible about past events. We say prove it, and therein lies the seeds of doubt that it ever took place, for if evidence no longer exists of certain things that existed or took place, then we have no reason to believe it ever was real in the first place. And the longer history is stretched out into time, the more inevitable this will become. In some cases, even with undeniable evidence of a technologically advanced past, we still don't believe it because the today and now we live in is seen as the pinnacle of all that has ever been. Now we are not saying to believe everything you hear to be true, not at all. What we are saying, however, is that if there is a widespread oral tradition of remembrance in say the lighthouse of Alexandria or the Colossus of Rhodes, even with no physical evidence these things ever existed, there is still a massive foundation from where these stories originated, so they obviously existed. One of the remaining wonders of the ancient world is the Great Pyramid. Now get this, no inscriptions exist anywhere about these things. Nowhere does it say what it is. Who built it? Or why? It is just sitting there with no apparent reason as to its existence. Now if that had been blown up or destroyed somehow in the past before we started documenting its existence, would we believe this thing was ever real? Or would it be glassed as a mythological fantasy like so many other things from history? The fact we are actively documenting every little thing these days proves that us humans have memory problems. Maybe subconsciously this is our new way of remembering, but we also need to not become reliant on artificially remembering things and the oral tradition is still our most important tool. Now what if we were to tell you that in the months that followed the end of the First World War, striking workers in Glasgow went out in protest at the long working week. They wanted their hours reduced to 40 hours per week to make jobs available for men returning home from the front lines of war. These events took place in the second city of the British Empire and what unfolded will shock you, so wait till you hear this. 100 years ago on Friday the 31st of January 1919 there was a sense of change in the air. Workers were instructed by their union leaders to march on George Square to hear the government's response to a change of working hours from 56 hours per week to 40 hours per week to free up space for soldiers as there was no job opportunities available. Instead of agreeing to which now seems like a no-brainer in today's world, thousands of workers were astonishingly read the riot act. This was a 200-year-old doctrine that allowed the British government to take punitive measures against a crowd of 12 or more people who had gathered unlawfully. The horrors that followed are shocking. During the Great War, Glasgow and her hard working industry were key to the overall outcome of war. Not only was the city sending troops to the front line, but also supplying in manufacturing munitions and the latest weapons and armory of the day, as well as playing a vital role in the Royal Navy's blockade of Germany, which is considered a key element in the outcome of the conflict. The altruistic move to create jobs was just another inventive and forward-thinking idea that seemed pretty tight, and it is hard to see what the problem was with the idea today. Well, the government never thought of it first, maybe that was the problem. A strike was called on January 27, 1919. Two days later, the city's Lord Provost put these demands to the government in London. With the threat of further strike action crippling the industry, the government were more concerned that what was unfolding in the second largest city in Britain was in fact the rise of something more sinister. As we mentioned, thousands marched on George Square on the morning of the 31st January, 1919. They had aloft a red flag, which was a symbol of Marx's socialism. As the Lord Provost read out the government's response, and as the riot act was read for the last time on the British mainland, the police charged the crowd, beating the people indiscriminately with their batons. Union leaders pleaded with police to stop the violence, but were also badly beaten for their efforts. Some of the crowd dispersed while others fought back, as the fighting raged on into the alleyways and streets surrounding the square. A lorry full of bottles were used as missiles to drive the police back. While in London, a war committee was meeting, and it was described that what was happening in Glasgow were the effects of a Bolshevist uprising. That day and throughout the night an estimated 20,000 troops were sent by train to Glasgow City. Tanks were deployed, armored glories were rolled out, and machine gun posts were established across the city center at strategic locations. They were preparing to quash and kill any signs of a revolt. Ten armored tanks were now patrolling the second city of the British Empire, along with 20,000 armed soldiers. Pretty ironic that soldiers were deployed as the point of the strike was to support the soldiers. But these were young men, teenagers in some cases, and willing to carry out orders, whatever they may be. The measures the British government took against its own people were uncalled for. But at the same time, tensions were high back then. Paranoia was rife and any hint of uprising was quashed. The government compromised with the workers, reducing the working week to 47 hours. But the union leaders were all put to trial, where it was found that the strike did not challenge the authority of the government, and it was indeed the reaction of the government that ensued the riot. The judge declared the riot act of 1714 was never to be read or enforced to a public gathering on the British Isles ever again. In this sense, the workers won and justice prevailed to a certain degree. The military remained in Glasgow until February 17th that year. These events later became known as the Battle of George Square. This is one of those events we were speaking about earlier, largely undocumented with the exception of a 1970s documentary, which recorded the eyewitness testimonies of some of the striking workers. Events like these can easily be lost to history because a great empire is unlikely to document such events to the rest of the world. They would rather portray the land to be stable, united, and hard working. And of course, this is the case, but in times of war, even the top brass are guilty of paranoia and bad judgment. And in this case, it is probably the striking workers who prevented the escalation because their government seemingly were willing to kill them. The message of the people prevails, however, above all else. It's crazy times we live into the guys, but it was even more crazy back then. All that is changing is the times, the technology, and the people, but the madness surrounding our civilization is still very apparent. That's all from us for the moment, and we will of course be back just shortly with more lost history for you guys. We will speak with you below, so please comment, and as always, thank you for watching.