Comeback

Comeback (pronounced kuhm-bak)

(1) A return to a former higher rank, popularity, position, prosperity etc, typically after an extended period of obscurity, under-performance etc.

(2) In sporting competition, a team or individual overcoming a substantial disadvantage in points to win or draw.

(3) Of products, ideas, practices etc, to again become fashionable.

(4) To reply after a period of consideration (as in “to come back” to someone).

(5) A clever or effective retort; a rejoinder; a retort; a riposte (especially if recriminatory).

(6) In informal use, a basis or cause of complaint.

(7) To return (in the sense “come back”).

(8) Of something forgotten, to return to one's memory.

1815–1825: A noun use of verb phrase “come back”, the construct being come + back.  Come was from the Middle English comen & cumen, from the Old English cuman, from the Proto-West Germanic kweman, from the Proto-Germanic kwemaną (to come), from the primitive Indo-European gwémt (to step), from gwem- (to step).  Back was from the Middle English bak, from the Old English bæc, from the Middle Low German bak (back), from the Old Saxon bak, from the Proto-West Germanic bak, from the Proto-Germanic baką, possibly from the primitive Indo-European bheg- (to bend). The adverb represents an aphetic (in phonetics, linguistics & prosody, of, relating to, or formed by aphesis (the loss of the initial unstressed vowel of a word)) form of aback.  Similar forms included the West Frisian bekling (chair back), the Old High German bah and the Swedish and Norwegian bak.  The use of comeback (for long used also as “come-back”) in the sense of a verbal (usually oral) retort dates form 1889 and was an adaptation of the verbal phrase, the implication especially of a “quick or clever response”.  The familiar modern meaning “recovery, return to former position or condition after retirement or loss” was a creation of American English, documented since 1908.  Comeback is a noun (the use as a verb is a misspelling of “come back”; the noun plural is comebacks.

In idiomatic use a “comeback kid” is a person who on more than one occasion had demonstrated a propensity to overcome tragedy, reversal or failure and rebound to triumph and victory.  It has also been used of someone who has achieved such a thing only once but in an especially notable or dramatic way such as Bill Clinton (b 1946; US president 1993-2001) who recovered from a mediocre performance in the 1992 Iowa Caucus but managed to secure an unexpected second place in the New Hampshire primary, despite (cynics would say “because”) reports of his extramarital affair with Gennifer Flowers (b 1950; “Gennifer with a ‘G’”).  Variations include “comeback king”, “comeback queen”, “comeback specialist” etc and those for whom comebacks seem to be a calling are said to stage “serial comebacks”.  When writing of comebacks (usually in sport, politics or entertainment), it not uncommon for them to be described as a “rebound”, “resurgence”, “return”, “revival”, “resurrection” or “resuscitation” (or a “redux” for those wanting something more literary).  In gambling, “comeback money” is that used by an agent of a bookie to place a large bet on a horse at large odds, thereby causing the odds on that horse to decline, reducing the bookie's potential losses in the event that the horse wins.

Thames Comeback Sauce.

Comeback sauce is a dipping sauce and salad dressing, most associated with central Mississippi and while there are variations, the classic recipes typically are based on mayonnaise and chili sauce.  A creamy & tangy Southern condiment, someback sauce is a Mississippi staple and has spread far beyond the city of Jackson, where it originated as an example of “fusion cuisine” (in this case Greek + Mississippi influences).  It’s thought the sauce's name is merely the idea “it tastes so good diners keep ‘coming back’ for more”.  It was first served in Greek-owned restaurants (some claim the Mayflower Cafe was first) in Mississippi in the mid-twentieth century and it has much evolved and in addition to the base of mayonnaise and chili sauce, other popular ingredients include ketchup, spices and Worcestershire hot sauce.

Noted comebacks in modern US politics

F Scott Fitzgerald’s (1896–1940) oft-quoted phrase “there are no second acts in American lives” appears as a fragment in his posthumously published, unfinished novel The Last Tycoon (1941) but he first published it in the early 1930s in the essay My Lost City, a kind of love letter to New York.  The quote is frequently misunderstood as an observation that for those Americans who suffer disgrace or destitution, there is no redemption, no comeback.  However, from politics to pop culture (there is still some slight distinction), there are many examples of temporarily disreputable Americans resurrecting their public lives from all but the most ignominious opprobrium.  Fitzgerald was a professional writer and his observation was an allusion to the structure used by playwrights in traditional three-act theater: (1) problem, (2) complication & (3) solution.  He thought the nature of the American mind was to prefer to skip the second act, going straight from a problem to finding a solution.  His point was well-made and it’s one of the themes of the narrative which underlies the discussions (which became arguments and sometimes squabbles) of military and political strategy between Washington and London during the World War II (1939-1945).

The concept of the comeback is well understood and the zeitgeisters at The Cut (an online publication of New York magazine) noted the phenomenon, in September 2024 posting a piece which looked at Lindsay Lohan’s latest comeback and reviewed those of the last ten-odd years.

That photograph.

What Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021; president elect since 5 Nov 2024) did in regaining the presidency in the 2024 presidential election was perhaps the most remarkable comeback in modern US political history and as notable as any that has happened anywhere.  When one considers the prelude to the 2024 triumph, (Trump (1) lost the popular vote in 2016, (2) lost the popular vote and the electoral college (and thus the presidency) in 2020 and (3) suffered between 2021-2024 a myriad of legal problems including civil judgements in which he was found liable for hundreds of millions in damages and even a felony conviction, a historic first for a US president), his comeback seems more remarkable still.  It’s something even the Trump haters (of which there seem to be a few) must acknowledge, even if it’s not a thing of which they dare speak.

The analysis of the voting patterns in 2024 have revealed some interesting findings but talk of a “political realignment” (such as the shift of the South from the Democrats to the Republicans in the wake of the civil rights legislation of the 1960s) may be premature because there seems still not to be an understanding of just how bizarrely unique a political figure Mr Trump is.  His effect on the political dynamic is undeniable but it may be that it’s something unique to his very existence and that when he departs (God forbid), the construct called MAGA Republicanism, while it may live on as a label, ceases to exert its pull.  These personal creations do seem to behave like that, Gaullism (from Charles de Gaulle (1890-1970; President of France 1959-1969) in France and Peronism (from Juan Perón (1895–1974; President of Argentina 1946-1955 & 1973-1974) in Argentina both surviving as labels but those who have in recent decades appropriated them haven’t always pursued policies of which the two men would have approved; nor have they always aligned with the definitions political scientists have constructed.

The 2024 election:  Conde Nast's Vanity Fair makes clear its editorial position.

It was a strange election campaign.  Trump actually talked much about specifics, there were a lot of policies and many specific details: what he was going to do and to whom.  Kamala Harris (b 1964; US vice president since 2021) however appeared to have only three items on the campaign clipboard: (1) I am not Donald Trump, (2) I am not Joe Biden and (3) abortion on demand.  Had the Trump brand been as toxic as her team seemed to believe the her tactic of basing every appearance around platitudes, slogans and clichés endlessly recited (obediently to be repeated by the crowd), that might have won the election (it’s been done before) but clearly, Trump had more appeal for enough of those in the demographics the Democrats had pencilled in as “ours”.  Quickly, the analysts “scoped down” on the voting patterns and discovered (1) there were women for whom abortion was not the central issue (although it is clear women also took advantage of differential voting where possible, voting to making abortion available in their state wheen the option was on the ballot while also voting for Trump), (2) a significant proportion of Latino voters appeared to be motivated by self-interest rather than ethnic solidarity (which the Democrats seemed to assume they’d made compulsory) and (3) the black male vote for the Democrats was lower that was achieved by Barack Obama (b 1961; US president 2009-2017) in 2008 & 2012.  That last statistic intrigued some who drew what may have been a long bow in speculating that while black men don’t like being told what to do by a white man, at least they’ve had several centuries to get used to it whereas the thought of being told what to do by a black woman is just unthinkable.  It was an opportunistic conclusion to draw from an electoral behaviour which happened only at the margins but it was that sort of election.

Interest now shifts to the second Trump administration and whether it will be Trump 1.1 (ie more of the same which was experienced in the first term) or Trump 2.0 (something different).  Many analysts are suggesting it will be combination of both and structurally, the possibilities available to Mr Trump if the Republicans hold working majorities in both chambers of congress are more inviting.  Mr Trump will have learned lessons from his first term and at least some mistakes (not a word he's believed often to have used of himself) presumably won't be repeated and it's no secret a whole industry of lobbyists, specialists and obsessives have been for four years at work crafting documents detailing how they think things should be done so he won't lack for advice.  There is much talk about the "shift to conservatism" in the US (and elsewhere) but a second Trump administration promises to be one of the more radical seen since the 1960s.    

Four dead white men, left to right: Barry Goldwater, Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon and Thomas Dewey, meeting to discuss the Republican platform for the 1966 mid-term elections, Washington DC, 1 June 1965.  It was a meeting of some significance because this period was the high point of the Democratic Party's control of all branches of government.

Until Trump did what he did, the greatest political comeback in the US was probably that achieved in 1968 by Richard Nixon (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974).  After two terms as VPOTUS (Vice President of the United States) to Dwight Eisenhower (1890-1969; US president 1953-1961), Nixon lost the 1960 presidential election to John Kennedy (JFK, 1917–1963; US president 1961-1963), the margin described at the time as “an electoral eyelash”.  Although it was made clear to Nixon JFK’s victory had probably been made possible by old Joe Kennedy (1888–1969 and JFK’s father) using his money to arrange some blatant vote rigging, Nixon declined to pursue his right to mount a legal challenge, arguing the institution of the office was too important to taint with scandal and telling aides: “Nobody steals the presidency of the United States”, a very different attitude that that taken in 2020 by Mr Trump  Politically, the loss in 1960 may not have been fatal but what did seem to write finis was his loss in 1962 in the Californian gubernatorial contest, an event which would now be forgotten had not Nixon, the day after, held what he called his “last press conference”.  California was then a solidly Republican state and Nixon’s loss was a surprise to most and a shock to some, most conspicuously the defeated candidate who, at the Beverly Hilton Hotel, delivered a quarter-hour tongue-lashing to the assembled press pack, accusing them, not without justification, of having hated him since first he came to prominence in 1948 and having since assiduously and unfairly worked against him.  He concluded: “I leave you gentlemen now.  And you will now write it.  You will interpret it.  That's your right.  But as I leave you, I want you to know—just think how much you're going to be missing.  You don't have Nixon to kick around anymore.  Because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.”  Nixon sat out the 1964 presidential election, appearing at the Republican National Convention only as “a simple soldier in the ranks” to nominate Barry Goldwater (1909–1998) who he described as “Mr Conservative” and the 1964 convention was the only one between 1952-1972 from which Nixon didn’t emerge as the party’s nominee for POTUS (President of the United States) or VPOTUS.  Goldwater lost the 1964 election to Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; US president 1963-1969) in one of the biggest landslides ever but Goldwater managed to engineer his own, somewhat abstract, comeback, later arguing the victory of Ronald Reagan (1911-2004; US president 1981-1989) was really him winning, sixteen years on.  Barry invented the “proto-virtual comeback”.

Harry Truman, St. Louis Union Station, St. Louis, Missouri, 3 November 1948.  United States.  In Florida, 76 years later, Donald Trump would wear the same smile.

Harry Truman’s (1884–1972; US president 1945-1953) comeback victory in the 1948 presidential election was one of those events remember for one photograph: that of a smirking Truman holding aloft the 3 November 1948 edition of the Chicago Daily Tribune, the front page’s banner headline reading: “DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN”.  Really, the Tribune was unlucky because for reasons both technical and related to labor relations, the Wednesday edition had “gone to bed” and been printed earlier that the historic practice, the staff relying on the early returns which they interpreted as guaranteeing a solid Republican victory, not only Thomas Dewey (1902–1971) taking the White House but also both houses of congress; as things turned out, the Democrats secured all three.  For Truman, the 1948 victory was a remarkable comeback because he’d inherited the presidency only because Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR, 1882–1945, US president 1933-1945) had died on the eve of victory in World War II (1939-1945) and, compared with his illustrious predecessor, he seemed plain and uncharismatic, his reputation not helped as post-war economic struggles, labor strikes, and internal divisions within the Democratic Party soon took the gloss of the celebrations which had greeted the end of four years of war.  By 1948, almost universally he was expected to lose the 1948 election.

What Truman did was return to what seemed to most a kind of “pre-modern” campaign strategy in which he embarked on what came to be known as the “Whistle Stop Tour”, traveling around the nation by train, speaking in person to the voters rather than having them receive his words on the airways or in the newspapers.  Although now remembered more as part of the political lexicon, the term “whistle stop” was originally US railroad jargon and terminology and referred to small towns or rural stations where trains would only stop “on signal” and usually only if there was something or someone to pick-up or deliver (or if the conductor had, in advance, been notified).  Such stops often had little infrastructure (sometimes only the most rudimentary “platform”) and as the trains slowed down, the driver would blow the “whistle” to announce their arrival.  Although now rarely undertaken by train, the term “whistle-stop tour” remains widely used to describe campaigns that involve making multiple brief appearances in many locations.  Truman’s trip proved a great success, often delivering his speeches from the back of the railcar, his team having travelled ahead to ensure he always had an audience and in the pre internet age, he had the advantage also of being able to recycle the same text, often changing only the odd reference to “localize” the context.  His straightforward, relatable and fiery style was quite a change from the elegant, patrician FDR but it resonated with the voters who warmed to his populist message of fighting the “…do-nothing [Republican] Congress."  Against all expectations (possibly even his own), Truman enjoyed a comeback victory in what was a major upset, proving a persistent campaign with the right message can succeed even the most daunting odds.

Ekpyrosis

Ekpyrosis (pronounced eck-pyh-row-sys)

(1) In modern cosmology, a speculative theory proposing the known universe originated in the collision of two other three-dimensional universes traveling in a hidden fourth dimension. This scenario does not require a singularity at the moment of the Big Bang.

(2) In the philosophy of the Stoic school in Antiquity, the idea that all existence is cyclical in nature and universe is the result of a recurring conflagration in which the all is destroyed and reborn in the same process.  Among the Stoics,

1590s (in English): From the Ancient Greek ἐκπύρωσις (ekpúrōsis) (conflagration, cyclically recurring conflagration in which the universe is destroyed and reborn according to some factions in Stoic philosophy), the construct being the Ancient Greek ἐκ (ek) (out of; from) + πύρωσις (pyrōsis), from πῦρ (pyr) (fire) + -ōsis (the suffix).  While there’s no direct relationship between the modern “big bang theory” and the Stoic’s notion of periodic cosmic conflagration (the idea the universe is periodically destroyed by fire and then recreated), the conceptual similarity is obvious.  The Stoic philosophy reflected the general Greek (and indeed Roman) view of fire representing both destruction and renewal.  In English, ekpyrosis first appeared in the late sixteenth century translations or descriptions of ancient Stoic philosophy, particularly in relation to their cosmological theories and it came to be used either as the Stoics applied it or in some analogous way.  It was one of a number of words which during the Renaissance came to the attention of scholars in the West, a period which saw a revival of interest in ancient Greek and Roman thought, art & architecture and for centuries many of the somewhat idealized descriptions and visions of the epoch were those constructed (sometimes rather imaginatively) during the Renaissance.  The alternative spelling was ecpyrosis.  Ekpyrosis is a noun and ekpyrotic is an adjective; the noun plural is ekpyroses.

In stoic philosophy, ekpyrosis was described sometimes as a recurring, unitary process (the periodic destruction & rebirth of the universe in a single conflagration) and sometimes and the final stage of one existence (destruction) which was the source of a palingenesis (the subsequent rebirth).  Palingenesis was almost certainly a variant of palingenesia (rebirth; regeneration) with the appending of the suffix -genesis (used to suggest “origin; production”).  Palingenesia was a learned borrowing from the Late Latin palingenesia (rebirth; regeneration), from the Koine Greek παλιγγενεσία (palingenesía) (rebirth), the construct being the Ancient Greek πᾰ́λῐν (pálin) (again, anew, once more), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European kwel (to turn (end-over-end); to revolve around; to dwell; a sojourn)) + γένεσις (genesis) (creation; manner of birth; origin, source).  The construct of the suffix was from the primitive Indo-European ǵenh- (to beget; to give birth; to produce”) + -ῐ́ᾱ (-íā) (the suffix used to form feminine abstract nouns).

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December, 2011.

In biology, the word was in the nineteenth century was adopted to describe “an apparent repetition, during the development of a single embryo, of changes that occurred previously in the evolution of its species) came directly from the German Palingenesis (the first papers published in Berlin).  In geology & vulcanology, it was used to mean “regeneration of magma by the melting of metamorphic rocks”) and came from the Swedish palingenes (which, like the German, came from the Greek).  In the study of history, palingenesis could be used to describe (often rather loosely) the recurrence of historical events in the same order, the implication being that was the natural pattern of history which would emerge if assessed over a sufficiently long time.  When such things used to be part of respectable philosophy, it was used to mean “a spiritual rebirth through the transmigration of the soul”, a notion which exists in some theological traditions and it has an inevitable attraction for the new-age set.

The Death of Seneca (1773), oil on canvas by Jacques-Louis David (1748–1825), Petit Palais, Musée Des Beaux-Arts, De La Ville De Paris, France.  Lucius Annaeus Seneca (Seneca the Younger, (circa 4 BC–65 AD)) was one of the best known of the Roman Stoics and the painting is a classic example of the modern understanding of stoicism, Seneca calmly accepting being compelled to commit suicide, condenmed after being implicated in a conspiracy to assassinate the Nero (37-68; Roman emperor  54-68).  The consensus among historians is seems to be Seneca was likely “aware of but not involved in” the plot.  There are many paintings depicting the death of Seneca, most showing him affecting the same air of “resigned acceptance” to his fate.

The Stoics were a group of philosophers whose school of thought was for centuries among the most influential in Antiquity.  Although the word “stoic” is now most often used to refer to someone indifferent to pleasure or pain and who is able gracefully to handle the vicissitudes of life, that’s as misleading as suggesting the Ancient Epicureans were interested only in feasting.  What Stoicism emphasized was living a virtuous life, humans like any part of the universe created and governed by Logos and thus it was essential to at all times remain in harmony with the universe.  Interestingly, although the notion of ekpyrosis was one of the distinctive tenants of the school, there was a Stoic faction which thought devoting much energy to such thoughts was something of a waste of energy and that they should devote themselves to the best way to live, harmony with logos the key to avoiding suffering.  Their ideas live on in notions like “virtue is its own reward” and ultimately more rewarding than indulgence or worldly goods which are mere transitory vanities.

While the speculative theory of an ekpyrotic universe in modern cosmology and the ancient Stoic idea of ekpyrosis both revolve around a cyclical process of destruction and renewal, they differ significantly in detail and the phenomena they describe.  Most significantly, in modern cosmology there’s no conception of this having an underlying motivation, something of great matter in Antiquity.  The modern theory is an alternative to what is now the orthodoxy of the Big Bang theory; it contends the universe did not with a “big bang” (originally a term of derision but later adopted by all) begin from a singular point of infinite density in but rather emerged from the collision of two large, parallel branes (membranes) in higher-dimensional space.  In the mysterious brane cosmology, the universe is imagined as a three- dimensional “brane” within a higher-dimensional space (which tends to be called the “bulk”).  It’s the great, cataclysmic collision of two branes which triggers each defining event in the endless cycle of cosmic evolution.  In common with the Stoics, the process is described as cyclical and after each collusion, the universe undergoes a long period of contraction, followed by another collision that causes a new expansion.  Thus, elements are shared with the “Big Bang” & “Big Crunch” cycles but the critical variations are (1) there’s no conception of a singularity (2) although this isn’t entirely clear according to some, time never actually has to “begin” which critics have called a bit of a “fudge” because it avoids the implications of physical laws breaking down (inherent in the Big Bang’s singularity) and assumes cosmic events occur smoothly (in the sense of physics rather than violence) during brane collisions.

Bust of Marcus Aurelius (121–180; Roman emperor 161-180), Musée Saint-Raymond, Toulouse, France.

Something in the vein of the “philosopher kings” many imagine they’d like to live under (until finding the actual experience less pleasant than they’d hoped), Marcus Aurelius was a Stoic philosopher who has always been admired for his admirable brevity of expression, the stoic world-view encapsulated in his phases such as “Waste no more time arguing about what a good man should be.  Be one.”, “The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts.” and “Our life is what our thoughts make it.”  Marcus Aurelius was the last emperor of Pax Romana (Roman peace, 27 BC-180 AD), a golden age of Roman imperial power and prosperity.  

To the Stoics of Antiquity, ekpyrosis described the periodic destruction of the universe by a great cosmic fire, followed by its rebirth, fire in the Classical epoch a common symbol both of destruction and creation; the Stoic universe was a deterministic place.  In the metaphysics of the ancients, the notion of fire and the central event was not unreasonable because people for millennia had been watching conflagrations which seemed so destructive yet after which life emerged, endured and flourished and the idea was the same conflagration which wrote finis to all was the same primordial fire from which all that was new would be born.  More to the point however, it would be re-born, the Stoics idea always that the universe would re-emerge exactly as it had been before.  The notion of eternal recurrence doesn’t actually depend on the new being the same as the old but clearly, the Greeks liked things the way they were and didn’t want anything to change.  That too was deterministic because it was Logos which didn’t want anything to change.  The Stoics knew all that had been, all this is and all that would be were all governed by Logos (rational principle or divine reason) and it was this which ensured the balance, order and harmony of the universe, destruction and re-birth just parts of that.  Logos had motivation and that was to maintain the rational, natural order but in modern cosmology there’s no motivation in the laws of physics, stuff just happens by virtue of their operation.

Floppy

Floppy (pronounced flop-ee)

(1) A tendency to flop.

(2) Limp, flexible, not hard, firm, or rigid; flexible; hanging loosely.

(3) In IT, a clipping of “floppy diskette”.

(4) In historic military slang (Apartheid-era South Africa & Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), an insurgent in the Rhodesian Bush War (the “Second Chimurenga” (from the Shona chimurenga (revolution)) 1964-1979), the use a reference to the way they were (in sardonic military humor) said to “flop” when shot.

(5) In informal use, a publication with covers made with a paper stock little heavier and more rigid that that used for the pages; Used mostly for comic books.

(6) In slang, a habitué of a flop-house (a cheap hotel, often used as permanent or semi-permanent accommodation by the poor or itinerant who would go there to “flop down” for a night) (archaic).

(7) In slang, as “floppy cats”, the breeders’ informal term for the ragdoll breed of cat, so named for their propensity to “go limp” when picked up (apparently because of a genetic mutation).

1855-1860: The construct was flop + -y.  Flop dates from 1595–1605 and was a variant of the verb “flap” (with the implication of a duller, heavier sound).  Flop has over the centuries gained many uses in slang and idiomatic form but in this context it meant “loosely to swing; to flap about”.  The sense of “fall or drop heavily” was in use by the mid-1830s and it was used to mean “totally to fail” in 1919 in the wake of the end of World War I (1914-1918), the conflict which wrote finis to the dynastic rule of centuries also of the Romanovs in Russia, the Habsburgs in Austria-Hungary and the Ottomans in Constantinople although in the 1890s it was recorded as meaning “some degree of failure”.  The comparative is floppier, the superlative floppiest.  Floppy a noun & adjective, floppiness is a noun, flopped is a noun & verb, flopping is a verb, floppier& floppiest are adjectives and floppily is an adverb; the noun plural is floppies.  The adjective floppish is non-standard and used in the entertainment & publishing industries to refer to something which hasn’t exactly “flopped” (failed) but which had not fulfilled the commercial expectations.

Lindsay Lohan in "floppy-brim" hat, on-set during filming of Liz & Dick (2012).  In fashion, many "floppy-brim" hats actually have a stiff brim, formed in a permanently "floppy" shape.  The true "floppy hats" are those worn while playing sport or as beachwear etc.

The word is used as a modifier in pediatric medicine (floppy baby syndrome; floppy infant syndrome) and as “floppy-wristed” (synonymous with “limp-wristed”) was used as a gay slur.  “Flippy-floppy” was IT slang for “floppy diskette” and unrelated to the previous use of “flip-flop” or “flippy-floppy” which, dating from the 1880s was used to mean “a complete reversal of direction or change of position” and used in politics to suggest inconsistency.  In the febrile world of modern US politics, to be labelled a “flip-flopper” can be damaging because it carries with it the implication what one says can’t be relied upon and campaign “promises” might thus not be honored.  Whether that differs much from the politicians’ usual behaviour can be debated but still, few enjoy being accused of flip-floppery (definitely a non-standard noun).  The classic rejoinder to being called a flip-flopper is the quote: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”  That’s often attributed to the English economist and philosopher Lord Keynes (John Maynard Keynes, 1883-1946) but it was said originally by US economist Paul Samuelson (1915–2009) the 1970 Nobel laureate in Economics.  In the popular imagination Keynes is often the “go to” economist for quote attribution in the way William Shakespeare (1564–1616) is a “go to author” and Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) a “go to politician”, both credited with thing they never said but might have said.  I phraseology, the quality of “Shakespearian” or “Churchillian” not exactly definable but certainly recognizable.  In the jargon of early twentieth century electronics, a “flip-flop” was a reference to switching circuits that alternate between two states.

Childless cat lady Taylor Swift with her “floppy cat”, Benjamin Button (as stole).  Time magazine cover, 25 December 2023, announcing Ms Swift as their 2023 Person of the Year.  "Floppy cat" is the the breeders' informal term for the ragdoll breed an allusion to their tendency to “go limp” when picked up, a behavior believed caused by a genetic mutation.

The other use of flop in IT is the initialism FLOP (floating point operations per second).  Floating-point (FB) arithmetic (FP) a way of handling big real numbers using an integer with a fixed precision, scaled by an integer exponent of a fixed base; FP doesn’t really make possible what would not in theory be achievable using real numbers but does make this faster and practical and the concept became familiar in the 1980s when Intel made available FPUs (floating point units, also known as math co-processors) which could supplement the CPUs (central processing units) of their x86 family.  The 8087 FPU worked with the 8086 CPU and others followed (80286/80287, 80386/80387, i486/i487 etc) until eventually the FPU for the Pentium range was integrated into the CPU, the early implementation something of a debacle still used as a case study in a number of fields departments including management and public relations.

FLOPs are an expression of specific performance and are used to measure those computations requiring floating-point calculations (typically in math-intensive work) and for purposes of “benchmarking” or determining “real-world” performance under those conditions, it’s a more informative number than the traditional rating of instructions per second (iSec).  The FLOPs became something of a cult in the 1990s when the supercomputers of the era first breached the trillion FLOP mark and as speeds rose, the appropriate terms were created:

kiloFLOPS: (kFLOPS, 10³)
megaflops: (MFLOPS, 10⁶)
gigaflops: GFLOPS, 10⁹)
teraflops: TFLOPS, 10¹²)
petaFLOPS: PFLOPS, 10¹⁵)
exaFLOPS: (EFLOPS, 10¹⁸)
zettaFLOPS: ZFLOPS, 10²¹)
yottaFLOPS: YFLOPS, 10²⁴)
ronnaFLOPS: RFLOPS, 10²⁷)
quettaFLOPS: QFLOPS, 10³⁰)

In the mysterious world of quantum computing, FLOPs are not directly applicable because the architecture and methods of operation differ fundamentally from those of classical computers.  Rather than FLOPs, the performance of quantum computers tends to be measured in qubits (quantum bits) and quantum gates (the operations that manipulate qubits).  The architectural difference is profound and explained with the concepts of superposition and entanglement:  Because a qubit simultaneously can represent both “0” & “1” (superposition) and these can be can be entangled (a relationship in which distance is, at least in theory, irrelevant; under parallelism, performance cannot easily be reduced to simple arithmetic or floating-point operations which remain the domain of classical computers which operate using the binary distinction between “O” (off) and “1” (on).

Evolution of the floppy diskette: 8 inch (left), 5¼ inch (centre) & 3½ inch (right).  The track of the floppy for the past half-century has been emblematic of the IT industry in toto: smaller, higher capacity and cheaper.  Genuinely it was one of the design parameters for the 3½ inch design that it fit into a man's shirt pocket.

In IT, the term “floppy diskette” used the WORM (write once, read many, ie "read only" after being written) principle first appeared in 1971 (soon doubtless clipped to “floppy” although the first known use of this dates from 1974).  The first floppy diskettes were in an 8 inch (2023 mm) format which may sound profligate for something with a capacity of 80 kB (kilobyte) but the 10-20 MB (megabit) hard drives of the time were typically the same diameter as the aperture of domestic front-loading washing machine so genuinely they deserved the diminutive suffix (-ette, from the Middle English -ette, a borrowing from the Old French -ette, from the Latin -itta, the feminine form of -ittus.  It was used to form nouns meaning a smaller form of something).  They were an advance also in convenience because until they became available, the usual way to transfer files between devices was to hard-wire them together.  Introduced by IBM in 1971, the capacity was two years later raised to 256 kB and by 1977 to a heady 1.2 MB (megabyte) with the advent of a double-sided, double-density format.  However, even then it was obvious the future was physically smaller media and in 1978 the 5¼ inch (133 mm) floppy debuted, initially with a formatted capacity of 360 kB but by 1982 this too had be raised to 1.2 MB using the technological advance if a HD (high density) file system and it was the 5¼ floppy which would become the first widely adopted industry “standard” for both home and business use, creating the neologism “sneakernet”, the construct being sneaker + net(work), the image being of IT nerds in their jeans and sneakers walking between various (unconnected) computers and exchanging files via diskette.  Until well into the twenty-first century the practice was far from functionally extinct and it persists even today with the use of USB sticks.

Kim Jong-un (Kim III, b 1982; Supreme Leader of DPRK (North Korea) since 2011) with 3½ inch floppy diskette (believed to be a HD (1.44 MB)).

The meme-makers use the floppy because it has become a symbol of technological bankruptcy. In OS (operating system) GUIs (graphical user interface) however, it does endure as the "save" icon and all the evidence to date does suggest that symbolic objects like icons do tend to outlive their source, thus the ongoing use in IT of analogue, rotary dial phones in iconography and the sound of a camera's physical shutter in smart phones.  Decades from now, we may still see representations of floppy diskettes.

The last of the mainstream floppy diskettes was the 3½ inch (89 mm) unit, introduced in 1983 in double density form with a capacity of 720 KB (although in one of their quixotic moves IBM used a unique 360 kB version for their JX range aimed at the educational market) but the classic 3½ was the HD 1.44 MB unit, released in 1986.  That really was the end of the line for the format because although in 1987 a 2.88 MB version was made available, few computer manufacturers offered the gesture of adding support at the BIOS (basic input output system) so adoption was infinitesimal.  The 3½ inch diskette continued in wide use and there was even the DMF (Distribution Media Format) with a 1.7 MB capacity which attracted companies like Microsoft, not because it wanted more space but to attempt to counter software piracy; within hours of Microsoft Office appearing in shrink-wrap with, copying cracks appeared on the bulletin boards (where nerds did stuff before the www (worldwideweb).  It was clear the floppy diskette was heading for extinction although slighter larger versions with capacities as high as 750 MB did appear but, expensive and needing different drive hardware, they were only ever a niche product seen mostly inside corporations.  By the time the CD-ROM (Compact Disc-Read-only Memory) reached critical mass in the mid-late 1990s the once ubiquitous diskette began rapid to fade from use, the release in the next decade of the USB sticks (pen drives) a final nail in the coffin for most.

In the mid 1990s, installing OS/2 Warp 4.0 (Merlin) with the optional packs and a service pack could require a user to insert and swap up to 47 diskettes.  It could take hours, assuming one didn't suffer the dreaded "floppy failure".

That was something which pleased everyone except the floppy diskette manufacturers who had in the early 1990s experienced a remarkable boom in demand for their product when Microsoft Windows 3.1 (7 diskettes) and IBM’s OS/2 2.0 (21 diskettes) were released. Not only was the CD-ROM a cheaper solution than multiple diskettes (a remarkably labor-intensive business for software distributors) but it was also much more reliable, tales of an installation process failing on the “final diskette” legion and while some doubtlessly were apocryphal, "floppy failure" was far from unknown.  By the time OS/2 Warp 3.0 was released in 1994, it required a minimum of 23 floppy diskettes and version 4.0 shipped with a hefty 30 for a base installation.  Few mourned the floppy diskette and quickly learned to love the CD-ROM.

What lay inside a 3½ inch floppy diskette.

Unlike optical discs (CD-ROM, DVD (Digital Versatile Disc) & Blu-Ray) which were written and read with the light of a laser, floppy diskettes were read with magnetic heads.  Inside the vinyl sleeve was a woven liner impregnated with a lubricant, this to reduce friction on the spinning media and help keep the surfaces clean.

Curiously though, niches remained where the floppy lived on and it was only in 2019 the USAF (US Air Force) finally retired the use of floppy diskettes which since the 1970s had been the standard method for maintaining and distributing the data related to the nation’s nuclear weapons deployment.  The attractions of the system for the military were (1) it worked, (2) it was cheap and (3) it was impervious to outside tampering.  Global thermo-nuclear war being a serious business, the USAF wanted something secure and knew that once data was on a device in some way connected to the outside world there was no way it could be guaranteed to be secure from those with malign intent (ayatollahs, the Secret Society of the Les Clefs d'Or, the CCP (Chinese Communist Party), the Freemasons, those in the Kremlin or Pyongyang et al) whereas a diskette locked in briefcase or a safe was, paradoxically, the state of twenty-first century security, the same philosophy which has seen some diplomatic posts in certain countries revert to typewriters & carbon paper for the preparation of certain documents.  In 2019 however, the USAF announced that after much development, the floppies had been retired and replaced with what the Pentagon described as a “highly-secure solid-state digital storage solution which work with the Strategic Automated Command and Control System (SACCS).”

It can still be done: Although no longer included in PCs & laptops, USB floppy diskette drives remain available (although support for Windows 11 systems is said to be "inconsistent").  Even 5¼ inch units have been built.

It thus came as a surprise in 2024 to learn Japan, the nation which had invented motorcycles which didn’t leak oil (the British though they’d proved that couldn’t be done) and the QR (quick response) code, finally was abandoning the floppy diskette.  Remarkably, even in 2024, the government of Japan still routinely asked corporations and citizens to submit documents on floppies, over 1000 statutes and regulations mandating the format.  The official in charge of updating things (in 2021 he’d “declared war” on floppy diskettes) in July 2024 announced “We have won the war on floppy disks!” which must have be satisfying because he’d earlier been forced to admit defeat in his attempt to defenestrate the country’s facsimile (fax) machines, the “pushback” just too great to overcome.  The news created some interest on Japanese social media, one tweet on X (formerly known as Twitter) damning the modest but enduring floppy as a “symbol of an anachronistic administration”, presumably as much a jab at the “tired old men” of the ruling LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) as the devices.  There may however been an element of technological determinism in the reform because Sony, the last manufacturer of the floppy, ended production of them in 2011 so while many remain extant, the world’s supply is dwindling.  In some ways so modern and innovative, in other ways Japanese technology sometimes remains frozen, many businesses still demanding official documents to be endorsed using carved personal stamps called the印鑑 (ikan) or 判子 (hanko); despite the government's efforts to phase them out, their retirement is said to be proceeding at a “glacial pace”.  The other controversial aspect of the hanko is that the most prized are carved from ivory and it’s believed a significant part of the demand for black-market ivory comes from the hanko makers, most apparently passing through Hong Kong, for generations a home to “sanctions busters”.

Holy

Holy (pronounced hoh-lee)

(1) Specially recognized as or declared sacred by religious use or authority; consecrated.

(2) Dedicated or devoted to the service of God, the church, or religion; godly, or virtuous; of, relating to, or associated with God or a deity; sacred.

(3) Saintly; godly; pious; devout; having a spiritually pure quality; endowed or invested with extreme purity or sublimity.

(4) Entitled to worship or veneration as or as if sacred.

(5) A place of worship; sacred place; sanctuary.

(6) Inspiring fear, awe, or grave distress (archaic).

Pre 900: From the Middle English holi & hali, from the Old English hālig, hāleġ & hǣlig, (holy, consecrated, sacred, venerated, godly, saintly, ecclesiastical, pacific, tame), a variant of the Old English hālig, hǣlig & hāleg, the construct being hāl (whole) + -eg (-y), from the Proto-West Germanic hailag, from Proto-Germanic hailaga & hailagaz (holy, bringing health).  It was cognate with the Old Saxon hēlag, the Gothic hailags the Dutch & German heilig, the Old Frisian helich and the Old Norse heilagr.  Ultimate root was the primitive Indo-European kóhzilus (healthy, whole).  It was adopted at conversion for the Latin sanctus although the Middle English form emerged as holi which remained a common spelling until the sixteenth century.  Holy is a nown & adjective. holiness (the spellings holinesse, holyness & holynesse all obsolete) is a noun and holier & holiest are adjectives; the noun plural is holies.  The noun holiosity is non-standard and is used in humor when referring to those for who religion has become an obsession and often one they think should be imposed on others.

Lindsay Lohan bringing holiness, Machete (2010).  The weapon is a Smith & Wesson .50 Magnum revolver with 8" barrel (S&W500: SKU 163501).

The primary (pre-Christian) meaning is not possible to determine; documentary evidence simply doesn’t exist but most think it probably meant something like “that must be preserved whole or intact, that cannot be transgressed or violated” and was connected with the Old English hal (health) and the Old High German heil (health, happiness, good luck (source of the German salutation Heil which became so well-known in the 1930s)).  Holy water was in Old English and holy has been used as an intensifying word from 1837 and used in expletives since the 1880s; a “holy terror” generally meaning “a difficult or frightening person” but which in Irish informal use means a man thought a habitual gambler, womanizer etc.  The adjectival forms are holier (comparative) & holiest (superlative) while the noun plural is holies but “the holy” functions as a plural when referring to persons or things (eh holy relics) invested with holiness.  When used in a religious context, it’s common to use an initial capital and probably obligatory when referencing the Christian God, or Christ.  The old alternative spellings holi, hali, holie & hooly are all obsolete.  Words that depending on context may be synonymous or merely related include divine, hallowed, humble, pure, revered, righteous, spiritual, sublime, believing, clean, devotional, faithful, good, innocent, moral, perfect, upright, angelic, blessed & chaste.

The Old Testament's Book of Leviticus is regarded by many as a long list of proscriptions, noted especially for the things declared an abomination to the Lord and within the text (Leviticus 17-26) that surprisingly succinct list is known as the “Holiness code” (often referred to in biblical scholarship as the “H texts”), "Holy" in this context understood as “set apart”.  The Holiness code exists explicitly as the set of fundamental rules which the ancient Israelites were required to follow believed they had to follow in order to be close to God and in that sense are the foundational basis for all the moral imperatives in scripture.  What makes them especially interesting historically is the suggestion by a number of scholars that additional laws, written in a style discordant with the rest of the Holiness Code yet in accord with the remainder of Leviticus, were interpolated into the code by a later priest or priests, notably some concerning matters of ritual and procedure hardly in keeping with high moral tone of the apparently original entries.  The contested passages include:

The prohibition against an anointed high priest uncovering his head or rending his clothes (21:10).

The prohibition against offerings by Aaronic priests who are blemished (21:21–22).

The order to keep the sabbath, passover, and feast of unleavened bread (23:1–10a).

The order to keep Yom Kippur, and Sukkot (23:23–44).

The order for continual bread and oil (24:1–9).

Case law concerning a blasphemer (24:10–15a and 24:23).

The order for a trumpet sounding on Yom Kippur (25:9b).

Rules concerning redeeming property (25:23 and 25:26–34).

Order to release Israelite slaves at the year of jubilee (25:40, 25:42, 25:44–46).

Rules concerning redeeming people (25:48–52, and 25:54).

The Holy Alliance

The Holy Alliance (styled in some contemporary documents as “The Grand Alliance”) was something not quite a treaty yet more than a modus vivendi (memorandum of agreement).  Executed soon after the conclusion of the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815), it linked three of the monarchist great states of Europe (Austria, Prussia, and Russia) and existed very much at the behest of Tsar Alexander I (1777–1825; Emperor of Russia from 1801-1825) who had observed the French Revolution (1789) and the convulsions which spread across the continent in its wake and, having little taste for the idea of the mob leading kings to their execution by the guillotine, sought an alliance which would hold in check the forces of secular liberalism.  It was a moment something like that noted by George VI (1895–1952; King of the United Kingdom 1936-1952) who, traveling through the Surrey countryside, pointed at Runnymede (where in 1215 the Magna Carta was forced on a reluctant King John (1166–1216; King of England 1199-1216), saying to his companion: "That's where the trouble started."  

The origin of the Holy Alliance, 1815.

The Tsar envisaged the UK being part of the Holy Alliance but Lord Castlereagh (1769–1822; UK foreign secretary 1812-1822) belonged to the long tradition of trying not become involved in European affairs unless necessary and called it “sublime mysticism and nonsense.”  The troubled Castlereagh committed suicide and in his papers there's no indication of the sense in which he used the word "sublime" but in late fourteenth century it was used as a verb meaning "alchemy".

So inconsequential did Castle think the treaty that he anyway recommended it be joined by the UK, a course of action the Cabinet declined to pursue and the supportive gesture of George IV (1762–1830; prince regent of the UK 1911-1820, king 1820-1830) adding his signature as King of Hanover had the most negligible political or military significance.  Despite London’s reserve, Austria, Prussia, Russia, & the UK did later in 1815 formalize the Quadruple Alliance which had for some time existed in effect to counter the military and revolutionary threat presented by the expansion of the First French Empire under Napoleon I (Napoleon Bonaparte, 1769–1821; First Consul of the French Republic 1799-1804 & Emperor of the French from 1804-1814 & 1815).  Although Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo wrote finis to that venture, the four powers thought the Quadruple Alliance a means by which the framework created by the Congress of Vienna might best be maintained as a stabilizing device so the state of European affairs might indefinitely be maintained, it’s last resort being the military apparatus which could be deployed to ensure something like the French Revolution couldn’t again happen.  Events seemed to move in the direction of the Holy Alliance when, in 1818, the Bourbon monarchy was restored to France under Louis XVIII (1755–1824; king of France 1814-1824 (but for the unfortunate hundred days in 1815 when he fled the advance of Napoleon)) and the Quadruple Alliance became the Quintuple.  However, the British, even then among the most constitutional of monarchies, never had much enthusiasm for the alliance's more illiberal actions but the four continental powers did impose their will, the Austrians in Italy in 1821 and the French two years later in Spain.  Despite those encouraging successes however, although not fully appreciated at the time, both the arrangement and the Holy Alliance became effectively defunct with the death of Alexander in 1825, the events in France in 1830 the final nail in the coffin.

Nevertheless, the Holy Alliance remains an interesting cul-de-sac in European history and one noted for (by diplomatic standards) the brevity of its three articles: (1) That all members are brethren, beholden when necessary to assist one another to protect religion, peace, and justice, (2) That the members are Christian nations who owe the treasure of their existence to God, and recommend to their subjects to enjoy God’s gifts, and exercise his principles and (3) That members agree this alliance shall utilize the principles of God and Christianity to shape the destinies of mankind over which they have influence.  One suspects Metternich (Prince Klemens von Metternich, 1773–1859, Austrian foreign minister 1809-1848, chancellor 1821-1848) and others might have shared Castlereagh’s opinion of the spiritual flavor of the Tsar’s wording but it was recognized by even the most cynical of pragmatists as at least potentially useful and was eventually signed by all European rulers except (1) the Prince Regent of the UK because of the cabinet’s opposition, (2) the Ottoman sultan who could hardly countenance such a Christian document and (3), the Pope in Rome, the papal councilors and bishops approving not at all of something which, for the sake of unanimity, embraced schism, heresy, and orthodoxy alike.  To the Holy See, these were the papers of politicians and thus the work of the Devil.

Whatever it wasn’t, the Holy Alliance was a symbol of the old social order and liberals viewed it with disdain, revolutionaries with hatred.  Although effectively it was in 1825 buried in the tomb of the dead Tsar, its spirit endured until the revolutions of 1848 and in a sense it continued to influence the actions of statesmen until the Crimean War (1853-1856).  That crafter of alliances, Prince Otto von Bismarck (1815–1898; Chancellor of the German Empire, 1871-1890), attracted to something so over-arching yet meaning so little, sort of resurrected it after the unification of Germany in 1871 but the withered idea of a unifying Christendom proved by the 1880s not strong enough to prevail over Austrian and Russian self-interest in the squabbles in the Balkans as the edges of the Ottoman Empire began to fray.

Of unholy alliances

As a footnote, the Holy Alliance left a linguistic legacy: the phrase “unholy alliance”.  Unholy alliance is used to describe a coalition formed between improbable and usually antagonistic parties, such arrangements often ad hoc and the product of circumstance rather than choice.  There need not be any religious or anti-religious element for it to be applied and it’s a companion term to “strange bedfellows” or “uneasy bedfellows”. 

There have been many instances of use and it appeared in the platform of the Progressive Party, formed by Theodore Roosevelt (TR, 1858–1919; US president 1901-1909) to contest the 1912 US presidential election: “To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.”  A classic statement of the rationale came from Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) in 1941 when, after Germany invaded the Soviet Union (a unilateral repudiation of an earlier unholy alliance (the Nazi-Soviet pact of 1939) which was one of history’s more cynical arrangements between adversaries, both parties knowing it was being pursued for mutual advantage as a prelude to an eventual conflict between them), the UK suddenly had gained a wartime ally albeit one with which relations had been hardly friendly and often strained since the revolutions of 1917.  In a radio broadcast that evening Churchill announced: “No one has been a more consistent opponent of communism for the last twenty-five years. I will unsay no word I have spoken about it. But all this fades away before the spectacle which is now unfolding. The past, with its crimes, its follies, its tragedies, flashes away.… The Russian danger is therefore our danger, and the danger of the United States, just as the cause of any Russian fighting for hearth and house is the cause of free men and free peoples in every quarter of the globe.”  When one of his colleagues noted the queerness of him being the one to announce such an alliance, he remarked: “If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.”

Portrait of Clare Sheridan (then Ms Frewen) (1907), oil on canvas by Emil Fuchs (1866-1929) (left) and a sepia print of the younger Leon Trotsky (circa 1908) (right).  

Churchill didn’t approve of communism, his attitude hardened by the new regime in Moscow having murdered the last Tsar and his family.  Very much a monarchist (his wife once described him as “the last man in Europe who believes in the divine right of kings”), Churchill thus took a dim view of the Bolsheviks and while serving as Secretary of State for War and Air (1919–1921) was involved in the allied intervention supporting anti-Communist White forces in the Russian Civil War (1917-1922), his mood not improved when he learned his favorite cousin, the sculptor Clare Sheridan (1885–1970), had enjoyed a brief affair with comrade Leon Trotsky (1879-1940; founder of the Fourth International).  Whether he ever called Trotsky “the hairiest Bolshevik baboon of all” remains uncertain but it’s at least plausible and he would later tell his cousin “we shall never speak of this unpleasantness again”.  Her memories of the tryst remained fonder, recalling the time her lover had whispered: “a woman like you should be the whole world to a man.”  At least one “Bolshevik baboon” could be poetic.

By 1941, however bad he thought were the communists in Moscow, the Nazis in Berlin were worse so an alliance with the Soviet Union, unholy though it would have felt, Churchill welcomed with barely a qualm.  He was also more perceptive in his assessment of Russian resistance to the invasion than most military & political figures in London, Washington DC or Berlin, the consensus in those circles being the Red Army would be defeated within a few months.  Given the bloody purges comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) had committed against his military leadership and the poor performance of the Russian army against the Finns in 1940, the grim expectations weren’t unreasonable but Churchill offered good odds to anyone willing to take his bet: “I will bet you a Monkey to a Mousetrap that the Russians are still fighting, and fighting victoriously, two years from now.”  That was slang from the turf, a “Monkey” being a £500 wager and a “Mousetrap” a gold sovereign with a nominal value of £1 (ie odds of 500-1).  Unholy the alliance may have been and there were tensions throughout between Moscow, Washington & London but the need to defeat Nazism meant it survived long enough to fulfil its purpose before the Cold War became the world’s new primary political dynamic.