Exoskeleton & Endoskeleton

Exoskeleton (pronounced ek-soh-skel-i-tn)

(1) In zoology, an external covering or integument, any hardened external structure, as the shells of crustaceans or the scales and plates of fishes and reptiles, especially when it is of the nature of bone.

(2) All hard parts, such as hair, teeth, and nails which develop from the ectoderm or mesoderm in vertebrates (generally used only in technical literature).

(3) A wearable robotic machine used for aided or augmented mobility.

1841: The construct was exo- + skeleton.  The prefix endo- was used as a word-forming element meaning "inside, within, internal.  It was from the Ancient Greek ἔνδον (éndon) (within; inner; internal) from the primitive Indo-European en-do- (an extended form of the root en (in)).  Skeleton was from the New Latin skeleton (bones, bony framework of the body), from the Ancient Greek skeleton soma (dried-up body, mummy, skeleton), from the neuter of σκελετός (skeletós) (dried up, withered, dried body (and as a noun: parched; mummy), from σκέλλω (skéllō & skellein) (dry, dry up, make dry, parch), from the primitive Indo-European (s)kelha- (to parch, wither); related was the Ancient Greek σκληρός (sklirós) (hard).  Exoskeleton is a noun; the noun plural is exoskeletons or exoskeleta.

Skelton was an early variant form.  The noun use of Greek skeletos passed into Late Latin as (sceletus), hence the French squelette and the rare English skelet (1560s), the Spanish esqueleto & the Italian scheletro.  The meaning "bare outline" was first recorded circa 1600; hence the term "skeleton crew" from 1778 used to describe minimal staffing, the skeleton key a similar allusion to some of a structure being removed.  The phrase "skeleton in the closet" (source of secret shame to a person, family or institution) is from 1812 and thought an adoption from the imagery in the fable Bluebeard (1697) by Charles Perrault (1628-1703). Exoskeleton was in 1841 coined by by English paleontologist Sir Richard Owen (1804–1892).  Exoskeleton has become more widely used in recent years because of the interest in fields such as engineering, robotics and medicine in using external structures, often to augment or replace human functions.  As early as the 1960s, the "exoskeleton look" became fashionable among architects who would no longer conceal features like plumbing pipes

Trilobites

Trilobite variants.

Trilobite (pronounced try-low-byte) translates literally as “three lobes".  Often casually referred to as bugs or sea-bugs, in taxonomy, all trilobites actually belong in the class of trilobite in the phylum arthropod and within the class are ten orders.  It’s not known how many species of trilobites existed but almost 21,000 have thus far been identified in the fossil record, their numbers and variety leading them to be regarded as one of history’s more successful animals.  They inhabited all the seas and oceans and endured some three-hundred million years, surviving several mass-extinction events.  Their long duration, their structure and living habits meant they became a common and frequently discovered fossil, noted since antiquity although the first attempt scientifically to classify one seems to have been by Wan Shizen of China who, in 1689 described trylobite pygidia (tails) as "batstones".  The first known scientific drawing was by Welsh botanist, the Reverend Edward Lhuyd (1660-1709) whose sketch of a trilobite was published in "The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society.  The drawing, now classified as being a Ogygiocarella debuchii, was then (not unreasonably), called the "flatfish".

Truly ancient, trilobites pre-date the Cambrian explosion (some 540 million years ago) and went extinct only towards the end of the Permian extinction event (some 250 million years ago) which ended the Paleozoic age which had lasted some 290 million years.  However, the earlier events took their toll, a few orders vanishing after the Ordovician event (some 445 million years ago) while the Devonian event (some 370 million years ago) removed all but one order, that last survivor dying out in the Permian event.  Why such a successful and prolific creature could not endure these extinctions remains a debate, the more popular theories including (1) environmental change happening with such rapidity there was no time for evolutionary adaptation and (2) the needed sources of nutrition vanishing because organisms lower in the food-chain went extinct.  All shared the same basic structure, having three lobes: a left pleural, a middle axial and a right pleural lobe, their bodies divided into a cephalon (dead), thorax (middle), and pygydium (tail).  Trilobites had a thick, protective exoskeleton which formed a hard calcite shell, something like that of the modern crab and is the reason for their frequency in the fossil record, the exoskeletons usually the only part to survive although, in the rare cases where certain surrounding conditions exist, traces of soft tissue such as antennae can survive fossilization.  As a trilobite grew, it molted its exoskeleton, and many of the fossils which exist are molted frames rather than dead creatures.

Before & after avian intrusion: 1952 Mercedes-Benz 300 SL (W194), Carrera Panamericana, Mexico, November 1952.

In nature, exoskeletons evolved over thousands of generations through the interplay of natural selection and adaptation to prevailing environmental conditions but with man-made objects such things, in cases of immediate need, can within hours be fashioned.  Returning to the circuits for the first time since the end of World War II (1939-1945), Mercedes-Benz had enjoyed immediate success with the new 300 SL (W194) race car which, despite being underpowered, proved its mettle with a combination of robustness, reliability and outstanding aerodynamics which both increased performance and improved fuel economy.  The W194, ten of which were built, is often referred to as “the first gullwing” (although the configuration had in 1939 been seen on a one-off Bugatti and was not uncommon in aviation and nautical use) but the distinctive doors were introduced only after those enforcing the regulations of sports car at Le Mans ruled the 300 SL’s original “doors” were no such things and were merely “elaborately framed windows”.  With re-designed doors fitted, the W194 promptly delivered the factory a 1-2 result in the 1952 24 hour endurance classic.

1952 Carrera Panamericana: The winning 300 SL in the factory museum.

Concluding things that year was the third Carrera Panamericana, a gruelling endurance event of eight stages over some 3,100 km (1,925 miles) between 19-23 November.  With typical thoroughness, the factory shipped three W194s along with a large support staff and all was going well until the lead car collided with a large bird (contemporary articles variously reporting the unfortunate creature as a vulture or buzzard) which smashed through the windscreen at an impact speed in excess of 215 km/h (135 mph), stunning the co-driver and leaving him bloodied.  Shook awake, he recovered and when the car reached the service point a new windscreen was fitted and, as a precaution against other vultures (or whatever) seeking vengeance, eight metal bars were fitted, the ad-hoc birdcage designed to keep them out, not in.  Without further avian “events”, the W194 repeated the result from Le Mans by finishing 1-2 and, fully restored, the winning car is part of the collection of the Mercedes-Benz Museum in Stuttgart.

1968 London-Sydney Marathon: The 1968 Porsche 911S which finished fourth (left) and after a full restoration (right).  A zoologist would insist this is only a "semiexoskeleton" on the basis of the partial coverage. 

As all in the Northern Hemisphere understand, in Australia, on land, sea & air, all the wildlife will try to kill you.  Noting this, when Porsche’s competition department prepared its three entries for the 1968 London-Sydney they limited their concern about sharks and crocodiles to a single paragraph in the drivers’ instruction sheets and decided the main threat to the cars were wandering “giant” kangaroos and low-flying wedge-tailed eagles (a bird with a wingspan wider even than Mexico’s vultures).  The first event of its type in the modern era, the 1968 London-Sydney Marathon spanned half the globe over a distance of 12,237 miles (16,934) and the route shows how times have changed, stages in Iran & Pakistan included; neither country now places many organizers of events would include in their itineraries but in 1968, kangaroos were still deemed more a threat than terrorism.  Accordingly, the factory designed a kind of exoskeleton, a robust external roll cage which essentially was the W194’s “birdcage” but “on steroids”.  As originally conceived, the structure had been of more modest proportions and while the final result may look like “overkill”, things were “beefed up” following one of the drivers writing off a rented VW Beetle after colliding with a kangaroo during pre-event testing in Australia.  Impressed by the extent of the damage, the engineers produced an impressively strong protective cage, content that whatever else might go wrong, it wouldn’t be a kangaroo which ended the venture.  Porsche 911S #58 finished fourth, victory going to a Hillman Hunter #75, one of the more improbable machines to win an international endurance event.

1968 London-Sydney Marathon: The winning 1968 Hillman Hunter (left) and restored 1967 Pakyan 1725 (right), the Iranian variants often noted for their additional bling.  Unlike the cautious Germans, most teams fitted only rudimentary additional protection against kangaroos and such; some ruefully later casting envious glances at Porsche's exoskeleton. 

In fairness, though an unlikely competition car, the Hillman Hunter (the “mainstream” model in the “Arrow” range which would sold also as “badge-engineered” Sunbeam, Singer & Humber variants) was a success in many countries, lasting in Europe from 1966 until 1979 although its most extraordinary longevity was achieved in the Islamic Republic of Iran.  In 1966, during the reign of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (1919–1980; last Shah of Iran 1941-1979) assembly from CKD (completely knocked down) packs had begun with the car sold as the Paykan (پیکان, Romanized as Peykān and literally “Arrow”) and unlike many things, it survived the 1979 revolution to continue to flourish under the rule of Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1900-1989; Supreme Leader, Islamic Republic of Iran, 1979-1989), full local manufacture starting in 1985.  Although theologically uncompromising, there’s no record of the Imam having complained of the presence on his assembly lines of a product from شیطان کوچک (Sheytān-e Koochak) (the UK & Israel being “Little Satan” and the US شیطان بزرگ (Sheytān-e Bozorg) “Great Satan” although in the West the terms are often misunderstood because in flavour of Shia Islam practiced in Iran, Satan is a pathetic rather than fearsome figure).  When in 1979 Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (1939-2026; Supreme Leader, Islamic Republic of Iran 1989-2026) became supreme leader, the Pakyan carried on and although production of the salon finally ended in 2005, the pick-up variant continued to be sold for another decade, the last not leaving the line until almost 50 years after the first Hunter was sold in the UK.  From the modest Hunter, the ayatollah's got their money's worth.

Exoskeleton cars

MVE Exocet (left) & Exomotive’s Exocet Sport V8 (right).

Exoskeleton vehicles are numerous on farms, mine-sites and such but rarely seen on public roads.  They do though have a niche for those who want something which sacrifices just about everything (aerodynamics, weather protection, doors etc) for the nimbleness only extreme light-weight can deliver.  An example is the MVE Exocet, released for public sale in 2010.  It’s an inventive approach to the kit-car concept and takes the classic front-engined, rear-wheel drive approach, based on Mazda’s Miata (the MX-5, introduced in 1989 and a kind of clone of the Lotus Elan of the 1960s but without the problems), the advantage with the Japanese platform being its unusual sub-frame which permits the removal of the body, leaving the engine, drive-train and suspension as a rolling assembly to be transplanted to the Exocet chassis.

Because of the light weight, even when using sensible four-cylinder engines the Exocet delivers high-performance but the Americans in particular can’t resist the idea that just about any car can be improved by the installation of a V8 and quite outlandish power to weight ratios are possible.  An indicative example of Exomotive’s Exocet Sport used a 525 horsepower (LS3) version of one of the later evolutions of the small-block Chevrolet V8 which, fully fueled, weighed in at 1690 lb (767 kg, the 2026 Formula 1 regulations set a minimum dry-weight (ie excluding fuel) of 768 kg).  Because it possible to buy, off the shelf (as a “crate” engine), V8 engines with about the same power as a F1 power-plant generates, although there was be something a weight penalty, the potential does exist to build a two-seater roadster with a similar power-to-weight ratio and there are jurisdictions which even allow such a thing to be registered for use on public roads.  Opinions would differ on whether such a build is a good idea but the little machines, if the V8 was tuned more for low and mid-range torque rather than ultimate power, would seem to have great potential in competitions such as short-course events and hill-climbs although the dubious aerodynamics would render it less suited to high-speed tracks.

Art and money: Porsche 934 (left) by Benedict Radcliffe (b 1976) sold for US$249,002 while Comedian (a banana duct-taped to the wall, right) by Maurizio Cattelan (b 1960) realized US$6.2 million.

The exoskeleton concept inspired English artist and sculptor Benedict Radcliffe to create a number of small scale tubular steel sculptures in the shape of cars including the Lancia Stratos (1973-1978), Lamborghini Countach (1974-1990) and Ferrari F40 (1987-1992), mostly powdered-coated in lurid colors.  Usually, they sell for several thousand US dollars but in early 2025, one in 1:1 scale in the shape of a Porsche 934 sold for US$249,002; in a nod to history, it was painted in the same fluro-orange used for the Jägermeister livery used for the race cars in 1979-1977 and rolled on period-correct centre-locking BBS wheels shod with Avon slick tires.  At that price, it was little different from what one would pay for a new Porsche 911 GT3, straight from the showroom floor.  Still, it’s less than the US$1.5 million which is typical of what’s been paid in recent years on the rare occasions a 934 is offered for sale.  Produced between 1976-1977, Porsche built 31 934s, simply for the purpose of creating a version of the 930 (the 911 Turbo, 1975-1978) which would comply with the FIA Group 4 (GT Cars) rules (the 935 was the companion Group 5 (Special Production Cars) project).  The art market cannot be assessed with any form of conventional metrics but in paying a quarter-million odd for a tubular structure, one gets quite a lot compared with the Italian visual artist Maurizio Cattelan’s Comedian, (a banana duct-taped to the wall); a couple of months earlier, at auction, it had gone under the hammer for US$6.2 million.

Endoskeleton (pronounced en-doh-skel-i-tn)

(1) In zoology, the internal skeleton or framework of the body of an animal (generally the bony or cartilaginous skeleton of vertebrates).  Certain invertebrates, such as sponges and echinoderms, also have endoskeletons.

(2) For most (non-technical) purposes, a synonym for skeleton.

1838: The construct was endo- + skeleton  The prefix exo- was used as a word forming element in words of Greek origin meaning "outer, outside, outer part" and was used from the mid-nineteenth century.  It was from the Ancient Greek ἔξω (éxō) (outer; external) and was related to ex (out of).  Endoskeleton is used almost exclusively in the biological sciences.  For most general purposes, it’s synonymous with skeleton which is the default assumption of use because it’s familiar from humans and most familiar animals.  Endoskeleton is a noun; the noun plural is endoskeletons or endoskeleta.

The nicely defined shoulder blade and ribcage definition of Lindsay Lohan's endoskeleton.

The word endoskeleton may not have been needed had all creatures on earth had “conventional” skeletons like humans, cats, dogs, fish and such; there would have been just “skeletons”.  Of course, architects and engineers likely would have been unable to resist coining “exoskeleton” there seems no better word to describe an externally-located superstructure.  Both an endoskeleton and exoskeleton are structural frameworks to some degree (sometimes wholly) supporting and shaping an organism’s body and which form an animal evolved to adopt was a product of history and environment.  That’s best illustrated by those with hard outer shell (really the ultimate exoskeleton) which functions as a kind of armor-plate.  Among man-made objects, both models are used and easily identified although exoskeletons (such as the futtocks in nautical design) probably are more common in anything with a “skin” including buildings, aircraft and ships.

Endoskeleton cars

The Birdcage: The Maserati Tipo 60/61 (chassis #2549).

Endoskeleton cars are far from uncommon but some make the concept more obvious than others.  The Maserati Tipo 60/61 (1959-1961) gained the nickname “Birdcage” (by which it’s almost always known) because observers were much taken with the delicacy of the construction.  By the late 1950s, space-frames had become familiar to race-car builders but they were usually robust-looking arrangements whereas Maserati had rendered an intricate latticework of some 200 chromoly steel tubes welded often in triangulated form in the points of highest stress, the design delivering both lightness and rigidity.

Mercedes-Benz 300 SLR (W196S, upper) & 300 SL (W198, lower).

One of the reasons the Maserati’s skeleton looked so delicate was that the space-frame had become associated with Teutonic-flavored construction like that used by Mercedes-Benz for its 300 SL & 300 SLR.  Both shared the same method of construction but despite the names and the the visual similarity between the two, there were few common components beyond the nuts, bolts & screws.  The 300 SL (W198; 1954-1963) was a road car while the SLR (W196S; 1955) was a lengthened version of the W196R Formula One Grand Prix car with a sexy body and an enlarged (though somewhat detuned) straight-eight engine.  Despite appearing much more substantial than the Maserati's birdcage, the German space-frame was remarkably light.

Dixiecrat

Dixiecrat (pronounced dik-see-krat)

(1) In US political history, a member of a faction of southern Democrats stressing states' rights and opposed to the civil rights programs of the Democratic Party, especially a southern Democrat who left the party in 1948 to support candidates of the States' Rights Democratic Party.

(2) In historic US use, a member of the US Democratic Party from the southern states (especially one of the former territories of the Confederacy), holding socially conservative views, supporting racial segregation and the continued entrenchment of a white hegemony.

1948: A portmanteau word of US origin, the construct being Dixie + (Demo)crat.  Wholly unrelated to other meanings, Dixie (also as Dixieland) in this context is a reference to the southern states of the United States, especially those formerly part of the Confederacy.  The origin is contested, the most supported theory being it’s derived from the Mason-Dixon Line, a historic (if not entirely accurate) delineation between the "free" North and "slave-owning" South.  Another idea is it was picked up from any of several songs with this name, especially the minstrel song Dixie (1859) by (northerner) Daniel Decatur Emmett (1815-1904), popular as a Confederate war song although most etymologists hold this confuses cause and effect, the word long pre-dating any of the known compositions.  There’s also a suggested link to the nineteenth-century nickname of New Orleans, from the dixie, a Confederate-era ten-dollar bill on which was printed the French dix (ten) but again, it came later.  The –crat suffix was from the Ancient Greek κράτος (krátos) (power, might), as used in words of Ancient Greek origin such as democrat and aristocrat; the ultimate root was the primitive Indo-European kret (hard).  Dixiecrat is a noun and Dixiecratic is an adjective; the noun plural is Dixiecrats.  The noun Dixiecratocracy (also as dixieocracy) was a humorous coining speculating about the nature of a Dixiecrat-run government; it was built on the model of kleptocracy, plutocracy, meritocracy, gerontocracy etc.

The night old Dixie died.

Former Dixiecrat, Senator Strom Thurmond (1902-2003; senator (Republican) for South Carolina 1954-2003) lies in state, Columbia, South Carolina, June 2003.

Universally called Dixiecrats, the States' Rights Democratic Party was formed in 1948 as a dissident breakaway from the Democratic Party.  Its core platform was permanently to secure the rights of states to legislate and enforce racial segregation and exclude the federal government from intervening in these matters.  Politically and culturally, it was a continuation of the disputes and compromises which emerged in the aftermath of the US Civil War almost a century earlier.  The Dixiecrats took control of the party machine in several southern states and contested the elections of 1948 with South Carolina governor Strom Thurmond as their presidential nominee but enjoyed little support outside the deep South and by 1952 most had returned to the Democratic Party.  However, in the following decades, they achieved a much greater influence as a southern faction than ever was achieved as a separatist party.  The shift in the south towards support for the Republican Party dates from this time and by the 1980s, the Democratic Party's control of presidential elections in the South had faded and many of the Dixiecrats had joined the Republicans.

US Electoral College map, 1948.

In the 1948 presidential election, the Dixiecrats didn’t enjoy the success polls had predicted (although that was the year of the infamous “Dewey Defeats Truman” headline and the polls got much wrong), carrying only four states, all south of the Mason-Dixon line and not even the antics of one “faithless elector” (one selected as an elector for the Democratic ticket who instead cast his vote for Dixiecrats) was sufficient to add Tennessee to the four (South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana) won.  Nor did they in other states gain sufficient support to act as “spoilers” as Ross Perot (1930–2019) in 1992 & 1996 and Ralph Nadar (b 1934) in 2000 achieved, the “narrowing of margins” in specific instances being of no immediate electoral consequence in the US system.  With that, the Dixiecrats (in the sense of the structure of the States' Rights Democratic Party) in a sense vanished but as an idea they remained for decades a potent force within the Democratic Party and their history is an illustration of why the often-quoted dictum by historian Professor Richard Hofstadter (1916–1970): “The role of third parties is to sting like a bee, then die” needs a little nuance.  What the Dixiecrats did after 1948 was not die but instead undergo a kind of “resurrection without crucifixion”, emerging to “march through the institutions” of the Democratic Party, existing as its southern faction.

That role was for generations politically significant and example of why the “third party” experience in the US historically wasn’t directly comparable with political behaviour elsewhere in the English-speaking world where “party discipline” tended to be “tight” with votes on the floors of parliaments almost always following party lines.  Until recent years (and this is something the “Trump phenomenon” radically has at least temporarily almost institutionalized), there was often only loose party discipline applied within the duopoly, Democrats and Republicans sometimes voting together on certain issues because the politicians were practical people who wished to be re-elected and understood what Tip O'Neill (1912–1994; (Democrat) speaker of the US Representatives 1977-1987) meant when he said “All politics is local”.  Structurally, that meant “third parties” can operate in the US and achieve stuff (for good or evil) as the Dixiecrats and later the Republican’s Tea Party Movement proved; it just that they do it as factions within the duopoly and that’s not unique, the Australian National Party (a re-branding of the old Country Party) really a regional pressure group of political horse traders disguised as a political party.

US Electoral College map, 1924.

The 1924 Electoral College results were a harbinger of the later Dixiecrat movement and a graphical representation of terms such as "solid South" or "south of the Mason-Dixon Line".  At the time of the 1924 election, slavery in the South was still in living memory.  Although there was fracturing at the edges, the "solid south" did remain a Democratic Party stronghold until the civil rights legislation of the 1960s and it was was the well-tuned political antennae of Texan Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; US president 1963-1969) which picked up the implications and consequences of the reforms his skills had ushered through the Congress:  "I think I've just lost us the South" he was heard to remark when the Senate passed a landmark voting rights bill into law.

In recent years, what has changed in the US is the Republicans and Democrats have become the captive organizations of a tiny number of dedicated political operatives pursuing either their own ideological agendas or (more typically), those providing the funding.  The practical implication of that is the elections which now most matter are the primaries (where candidates for the election proper are selected) and because primary contests are voted on by a relative handful, outcomes are easier to influence and control that in general elections where there are millions to nudge.  Party discipline has thus become tighter than can often be seen on the floor of the House of Commons in the UK, not because the ideological commitments of politicians within parties have coalesced but because they’re now terrified of being “primaried” if they vote against the party line.  Re-election is a powerful inducement because the money politicians make during their careers is many, many times what might be expected given their notional earnings from their salary and entitlements.  There are few easier ways to get rich, thus the incentive to “toe the party line”.  This behavioural change, mapped onto something which structurally remains unchanged, is one of the many factors which have produced a country now apparently as polarized as ever it has been.  The nature of that polarization is sometimes misunderstood because of the proliferation of “red state, blue state” maps of the US which make the contrast between the “corrupting coastlines” and “flyover states” seem so stark but each state is of course a shade of purple (some darker, some lighter) but because of the way the two parties now operate, politics as it is practiced tends to represent the extreme, radical elements which now control the machines.  So while in the last twenty-odd years there’s been much spoken about “the 1%” in the sense of the tiny number of people who own or control so much, it’s political scientists and historians who much fret over the less conspicuous “1%” able to maintain effective control of the two parties, something of even greater significance because the state has put in place some structural impediments to challenging the two-party political duopoly.

In the US, the state does not (in a strict legal or constitutional sense of the word) “own” the Republican or Democratic Parties because they are “private” organizations protected by the constitution’s First Amendment (freedom of association).  However, over the years, something biologists would recognize as “symbiosis” has evolved as the state and the parties (willingly and sometimes enthusiastically) have become entangled to the extent a structural analysis would recognize the parties as quasi-public although not quite at the status familiar elsewhere as quangos (quasi autonomous non-government organizations).  Despite being “private concerns”, the parties routinely conduct state-regulated primaries to select candidates and in many cases these are funded by tax revenue and administered by state electoral instrumentalities.  Beyond that, it needs to be remembered that to speak of a “US national election” (as one might of a “UK general election”) is misleading because as a legal construct such events are really 50 elections run by each state with electoral laws not wholly aligned (thus the famous (or dreaded, depending on one’s position) Iowa caucuses) and in many states, it’s state law which regulates who can voted in party primaries, some permitting “open” primaries in which any lawfully enrolled voter is allowed to cast a ballot while others run “closed” events, restricting participation to registered members of the relevant party.  What that means is in some places a citizen can vote in each party’s primary.  That done, those who prevail in a primary further are advantaged because many states have laws setting parameters governing who may appear on a ballot paper and most of them provide an easier path for the Republican and Democratic Party candidates by virtue of having granted both “major party” status.  As objects, the two parties, uniquely, are embedded in the electoral apparatus and the interaction of ballot access laws, debate rules and campaign finance rules mean the two function as state-sponsored actors; while not quite structurally duopolistic, they operate in a protected environment with the electoral equivalent of “high tariff barriers”.

Elon Musk (left) and Donald Trump (right), with Tesla Cybertruck (AWD Foundation Series), the White House, March, 2025.  It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Given all that, Elon Musk’s (b 1971) recent announcement he was planning to launch a “third party” (actually the US has many political parties, the “third party” tag used as a synecdoche for “not one of the majors”) might seem “courageous” and surprised many who thought the experience of his recent foray into political life might have persuaded him pursuits like EVs (electric vehicles), digging tunnels (he deserves praise for naming that SpaceX spin-off: “The Boring Company”) and travelling to Mars were more fulfilling.  However, Mr Musk believes the core of the country’s problems lie in the way its public finances are now run on the basis of the “Dick Cheney (born 1941; US vice president 2001-2009) doctrine: “Deficits don’t matter” and having concluded neither of the major parties are prepared to change the paradigm which he believes is leading the US to a fiscal implosion, a third party is the only obvious vehicle.  In Western politics, ever since shades of “socialism” and “capitalism” defined the democratic narrative, the idea of a “third way” has been a lure for theorists and practitioners with many interpretations of what is meant but all have in common what Mr Musk seems to be suggesting: finding the middle ground and offering it to those currently voting for one or other of the majors only because “your extremists are worse than our extremists”.  Between extremes there’s much scope for positioning (which will be variable between “social” & “economic” issues) and, given his libertarian instincts, it seems predicable Mr Musk’s economic vision will be “centre-right” rather than “centre-left” but presumably he’ll flesh out the details as his venture evolves.

Mr Musk can’t be accused of creating a “third party” because he wants to become POTUS (president of the US).  As a naturalized US citizen, Mr Musk is ineligible because Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the constitution restricts the office to those who are a “natural born Citizen” (Article II, Section 1, Clause 5).  Because the US Supreme Court (USSC) has never handed down a definitive ruling on the matter it’s not absolutely certain what that phrase means but the consensus among legal scholars is it refers to someone who was at birth a US citizen.  That need not necessitate being born on the soil of the US or its territories because US citizens often are born in other countries (especially to those on military or diplomatic duty) and even in international waters; indeed, there would appear no constitutional impediment to someone born in outer space (or, under current constitutional interpretation, on Mars) becoming POTUS provided they were at the time of birth a US citizen.  Nor does it seem an interpretation of the word “natural” could be used to exclude a US citizen conceived through the use of some sort of “technology” such as IVF (In Vitro Fertilization).

Lindsay Lohan, potential third party POTUS.

As a naturalized US citizen, Elon Musk can’t become POTUS so his new party (tentatively called the “America” Party) will have to nominate someone else and the constitution stipulates (Article II, Section 1, Clause 5): “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States”.  The age requirement is unambiguous and in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1833), Justice Joseph Story (1779–1845; associate justice of the Supreme Court of the USSC 1812-1845) explained the residence requirement was “…not an absolute inhabitancy within the United States during the whole period; but such an inhabitancy as includes a permanent domicil in the United States.”  That means Mr Musk can consider nominating Lindsay Lohan for president.  She’d apparently flirted with the idea of running in 2020 but at that point would have been a few months too young; on all grounds she’ll be eligible for selection in 2028 and many would be attracted to the idea of Lindsay Lohan having her own nuclear weapons.

Whether or not it’s “courageous” (or even “heroic”), to build a new third party in the US time will tell but certainly it’s ambitious but Mr Musk is also a realist and may not be planning to have a presidential candidate on the ballot in all 50 states or even contest every seat both houses of Congress.  As he’ll have observed in a number of countries, “third parties” need neither parliamentary majorities nor executive office to achieve decisive influence over policy, some with comparatively little electoral support able to achieve “balance of power” status in legislatures provided those votes are clustered in the right places.  Additionally, because the polarized electorate has delivered such close results in the House & Senate, the math suggests a balance of power may be attainable with fewer seats than historically would have been demanded and under the US system of fixed terms, an administration cannot simply declare such a congress “unworkable” and all another election (a common tactic in the Westminster system); it must, for at least two years, work with what the people have elected, even if that includes an obstreperous third party. Still, the challenges will be onerous, even before the “dirty tricks” departments of the major parties start searching for skeletons in the closets of third party candidates (in a rare example of bipartisanship the Republicans and Democrats will probably do a bit of intelligence-sharing on that project) and the history is not encouraging.

It was the Republican party which in the 1850s was the last “third party” to make the transition to become a “major” and not since 1996 has such a candidate in a presidential contest secured more than 5% of the national vote.  In the Electoral College, not since 1968 has a third-party candidate carried any states and 1912 was the last time a third-party nominee finished second (and 1912 was a bit of a “special case” in which the circumstances were unusually propitious for challenges to the majors).  Still, with (1) the polls recording a general disillusionment with the major parties and institutions of state and (2) Mr Musk’s wealth able to buy much advertising and “other forms” of influence, prospects for a third party may be untypically bright in 2028 elections and 2030 mid-terms.  There are no more elections for Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021 and since 2025) and it seems underestimated even now just what an aberration he is in the political cycle.  While his use of techniques and tactics from other fields truly has since 2016 been disruptive, what he has done is unlikely to be revolutionary because it is all so dependent on his presence and hands on the levers of power.  When he leaves office, without the “dread and awe” the implied threat of his displeasure evokes, business may return to something closer what we still imagine “normal” to be.

Lollipop

Lollipop (pronounced lol-ee-pop)

(1) A (usually spherical or disc-shaped) piece of hard candy attached to the end of a small stick, held in the hand while the candy is sucked or licked (It was essentially a toffee-apple without the apple; a stick dipped in toffee and the older spelling used in the UK was lollypop (which exists still in modern commerce)).

(2) Something in a shape resembling the candy on a stick.

(3) In the UK, Ireland and the Commonwealth, as lollipop lady (and lollipop man), a school crossing attendant (based on the shape of the "stop/go" signs traditionally used and in the slang of children they're also "lollipoppers".

(4) In computer networking, a routing protocol using sequence numbering starting at a negative value, increasing until zero, at which point it switches indefinitely to cycle through a finite set of positive numbers.

(5) In the labeling of the Android operating system, v5.0 to 5.1.1.

(6) In motorsport, a circular sign on a long stick, used by a pit crew to covey messages to drivers (system still used despite advances in radio communication because (1) it's retained as a backup in case of system failure and (2) the messages can't electronically be monitored and done, with care, can be secret.

(7) In the slang of fashion and related photography, a term for very thin models whose heads thus appear disproportionately large.

(8) Figuratively, something sweet but unsubstantial (originally of literature).

(9) In the slang of musical criticism, a short, entertaining but undemanding piece of classical music, the idea being the pieces were of limited duration, immediately gratifying but really not good for one.  They've always been popular.

1784: A creation of Modern English of uncertain origin but the construct may be the obvious lolly + pop. Lolly was from the Northern English dialect loll (dangle the tongue) and pop was an alternative name for “slap”.  The alternative theory is it was borrowed from the Angloromani (literally "English Romani" and the language combining aspects of English and Romani), which was spoken by the Romani (gypsy, traveller, Roma etc) people in England, Ireland & Wales.  It was in the twentieth century displaced by English but traces remain in the variant English used by modern Roma.  The suggestion is of links with the Angloromani loli phabai (or lollipobbul (red or candy apple)), which was a blend from the Middle Indic lohita (from Sanskrit) and loha (red), drawn from reudh which had Indo-European roots. Among etymologists, the Angloromani connection has most support.  Originally, lollipop seems to have referred just to the boiled sweet (ie "stickless) with the meaning "hard candy on a stick" not noted until the 1920s while the figurative sense (something sweet but unsubstantial) was in use by at least 1849.  Used in the slang of catwalk photographers, the verb lollipopping (a stick-thin model walking down catwalk) and adjective lollipopish (a model close to thin enough to be a true "lollipop") are both non-standard.  Among the pill-poppers, there seems to be a consensus that post-rave, the best lollipops are lemon-flavored.  In commerce, the spelling varies including lollipop, lollypop, loli-pop, lollypopp and lolly-pop.  Lollipop & lollipopper are nouns and lollipoplike is an adjective; the noun plural is lollipops.

Lindsay Lohan (b 1986) enjoying a giant lollipop.

In classical music criticism, the term “lollipop” refers to short, appealing and often melodically charming pieces which were nevertheless judged as “lightweight in musical substance”.  Deployed often as “palate-cleansers” or encores, despite the opinions of many critics, composers, conductors and musicians, the bulk of the audience tended to enjoy them because in character they were often jaunty and playful, not something which endeared them to the earnest types who decided what deserved to be the canon of the “serious” repertoire in which complexity was valued above accessibility.  A well-known exponent the genre was Johann Strauss II (1825–1899) and his An der schönen blauen Donau, Op. 314 (On the Beautiful Blue Danube (better known in English as The Blue Danube (1866)) and Tritsch-Tratsch-Polka, Op. 214 (Chit-chat (1858)) are exemplars of his technique.  The reason the lollipops were and remain popular with general audiences (typically not trained in any aspect of music) is that they paid their money to be entertained by listening to something they could enjoy, not always the experience delivered by the composers who preferred “the experimental”, valuing originality over beauty; these were the “formalists” (as comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) once labeled comrade Dmitri Shostakovich (1906-1975) and they may be compared with the modern generation of architects churning out ugly buildings because prizes in their profession are awarded on the basis of work being “new” rather than “attractive”.  Neither art deco nor mid-century modern buildings are in any way “lollipops” but the committees which award prizes in architecture probably think of them that way.

A bronzed Britney Spears (b 1981) with lollipop, emerging from a session in a West Hollywood tanning salon, Los Angeles, October, 2002.

Many composers at least dabbled in lollipop production and some were memorable, French composer Claude Debussy’s (1862–1918) Clair de Lune (1890) hauntingly beautiful and demanding nothing more from a listener than to sit and let it wash over them; even comrade Stalin (who liked tunes he could hum) would have enjoyed it despite Debussy being French.  Others were specialists in the genre including: (1) the Austrian-American Friedrich "Fritz" Kreisler (1875–1962) who published a few of his compositions under wholly fictitious “old” names to lend them some “classic” respectability, (2) the English conductor Sir Thomas Beecham (1879–1961) who had a reputation among his peers for treating his music with about the same seriousness as he handled his many relationships with women and it was his encores and brief “concert fillers” which more than anything popularized use of “lollipop” in this context; he was also a practical impresario who noted what pleased the crowd and sometime constructed entire concerts with them, (3) Leopold Stokowski (1882–1977), a British conductor of Polish extraction noted for his arrangements of the works of Johann Sebastian Bach (1685–1750), pieces for which the appellation “lush” would have had to been coined had it not existed and (4) the Australian Percy Grainger (1882–1961) a man of not always conventional tastes & predilections who enjoyed an unusually close relationship with his mother although whether any of that in any way influenced his folk-inspired miniatures (quintessential lollipops) is a matter for debate.  What can’t be denied is that for the untrained, a hour or two of lollipop music will probably be enjoyed more than listening to the strains of stuff by Béla Bartók (1881-1945) or Arnold Schoenberg (1874–1951), the composers the critics think would be good for us.

A pandemic-era Paris Hilton (b 1981) in face mask with Whirly Pop lollipop.  Always remove facemask before attempting to lick or suck lollipop.

How to make lemon lollipops

Among the pill-poppers (and there are a lot of them about), there seems, at least impressionistically, to be a consensus that post-rave, the best lollipops are lemon-flavored.  It’s thought lemon lollipops work best in this niche because the acidic content interacts with taste receptors enjoying a heightened sensitivity induced by the pills’ chemistry.  Ideally, pill-poppers should pre-purchase lemon lollipops and at all times carry a few (on the basis of the (Boy) Scout motto: “Be prepared”) but that’s not always possible because, there being so many pill-poppers, shops often are out of stock of the lemon flavor.

Lemon Lollipops.

This recipe is therefore provided as a courtesy to pill poppers and, having shelf-life of weeks, lollipops can be prepared in advance; except for those popping at a heroic level, a batch should last a week so users should add the task to their routine, scheduling it perhaps after church every Sunday.  Lollipop sticks and one or more (depending on production target) lollipop molds will be required and the volume of ingredients quoted here should yield 24 small or 10-12 large lollipops.  Sticks and molds are available at supermarkets and speciality stores as are the small cellophane bags (needed only if some or all are being stored).  The taste can be varied by (slightly) adjusting the volumes of sugar, citric acid & lemon oil and preferences will vary between pill-poppers who are encouraged to experiment.  As a footnote, the small hole in the stick is there so a little bit of the melted candy sets inside, creating a "hook" to keep lollipop attached; without a hook, the candy could slide from the stick while subject to vigorous licking or sucking.  A more recent innovation as been the hollow stick, a safety feature (a la the removable caps on many ballpoint pens) which permits air-flow to the lungs if stick is swallowed and becomes lodged in the throat.

Ingredients (lollipops)

1 cup (200 g) sugar
½ cup (120 ml) water
¼ cup (60 ml) light corn syrup
1¼ teaspoons citric acid
¾ teaspoon lemon oil
2-4 (according to preference) drops liquid yellow food coloring

Ingredients (sour powder)

½ cup (50 g) confectioners' sugar
2 teaspoons citric acid

Directions (lollipops)

(1) Coat lollipop molds with non-stick cooking spray.

(2) Place lollipop sticks in the molds.

(3) Combine the sugar, water, and corn syrup in a large, heavy saucepan and then bring mix to a boil over medium-high heat.

(4) Continue cooking until mixture reaches 300°F (150°C) which is the “hard-crack” stage.  Immediately remove saucepan from the heat.  The timing is critical so watch pot during cooking.

(5) Add citric acid, lemon oil and food coloring and stir to combine.  (Because of the acidic nature of the mix, don’t allow face to come too close to pot because fumes can irritate the eyes).

(6) Pour the mixture into a heatproof measuring container with spout (or a candy funnel (which every pill-popper should own)).

(7) Divide the mixture among prepared molds and leave lollipops to cool and harden.  After about 15 minutes, they should be ready to remove from mold (may take longer if temperature or humidity are high).

Directions (sour powder)

(1) Mix confectioners’ sugar and citric acid in bowl.

(2) Holding by stick, dip lollipops in mixture, coating entire surface.

(3) Lollipops may immediately be consumed but if being stored, wrap in cellophane bags and twist-tie.  Store lollipops in cool, dark, dry place (they'll remain in a “best by” state for about a month).