It's About Coalitions, Not Purity, Part Forty-Nine

On election day 2008, financially battered Americans, fearful that the nation, and the world, might be entering into a new era of economic depression, sent a very clear message, as Barack Obama won the presidency and Democrats made gains in both the US Senate and the House of Representatives. Barack Obama won about 53% of the popular vote to John McCain's 45 3/4%, but in the Electoral College, Obama won 365 votes to McCain's 173. Various exit polls showed Obama did well among many demographic groups, with Senator McCain, in major categories, only winning voters 65 and over by a single digit margin, and in the broader category of white voters, he won by about 10 points.*   

In the U.S. Senate, a strong Democratic tide prevailed as the Democrats gained eight seats, although one of those seats, in Minnesota, was not a definite gain until several months later, as the race was so close.** In the House of Representatives, twelve Republican members of the House retired prior to the election and all twelve seats were won by Democrats, as Democrats gained 21 seats overall and increased their majority. 

When Barack Obama took office in January 2009, the racist and bigoted segment among white voters, many of whom seemingly shifted over to the Republicans from the Democrats,*** helped to form a floor of support under the GOP and to offer a resistance to Obama, and often to Democrats, in general. Certainly not all opponents of Obama were (or are) racists or bigots, but a certain element "joined" the Tea Party, where they could "hide out," in my opinion, criticize the "black Muslim guy" in the White House, as some viewed Obama, but still claim, "I'm not a racist, I just care about deficits, freedom, the price of tea and can't we go back to 1773?" The Tea Party was not truly a political party, but rather a conservative-libertarian political movement that became an activist wing, and thus, an important part of the Republican Party coalition. The Tea Party members waved teabags and some wore colonial and early American garb, which gives you some idea of the century they likely preferred to modern times. Of course, they also just as likely forgot about the drawbacks of the 1700s, like no Internet... well, that might not be a good example. Now in 2017, you barely hear the name "Tea Party" anymore, as the racist elements have now come out more into the open by marching with the Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups, as we now have a president who sees some "good people" in these groups. For about 4 or 5 years, beginning in 2009, the Tea Party was highly visible and it proved to be troublesome for both Democrats and for the more traditional Republicans. If there was much "organization" to the Tea Party, it was represented by the financial support of the Koch political organization and former member of Congress, Dick Armey. Traditional Republicans need to look at the Kochs and Armey for their support and courting of the disruptive forces to oppose Obama, but which then helped to bring Donald Trump and company to take over the Republican Party, a force which now threatens the very nation; however, this was not done without the inadvertent help of Democrats. Next... Economic stimulus, Wall Street bankers and Obama administers health care to the GOP and helps it back to its feet...  

* The demographic exit polls I looked over were all similar, with minor differences in some categories, but in no case did I see major discrepancies that showed, for example, McCain winning by a few points in a particular category in most polls, but with another poll or two showing Obama as winning that category. One of the close categories was for "men," where "essentially" Obama and McCain split the vote, although some polls showed a slight tilt to one candidate or the other.

** Senator Arlen Spector of Pennsylvania, a Republican, switched to the Democratic Party in the spring of 2009 (the new Senate was first seated in January of 2009). In the late summer of 2009, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, a Democrat, died. A temporary Democratic replacement was named, until a special election produced a Republican election victory in early 2010.

*** I told a little about one of these "converts" in Part 48 of this series. Here is the link: http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2017/11/its-about-coalitions-not-purity-part.html     

WORD HISTORY:
Garb-The ultimate origin of this word is uncertain. It is related to "gear," a word from Germanic. "Garb" goes back to the Old Germanic verb, "garwijanan," which meant, "to prepare, to make ready;" thus also the more specific, "to equip (make ready) for battle." This produced Germanic "garwa," meaning, "ready, finished." The verb also produced Germanic "garwi," a noun for, "clothing, military wear (gear, equipment)." This was borrowed by Italian from one of the Old High German dialects of the Alps region, which had, "garawe," meaning, "mode of dress, adorned attire." The Italian form, "garbo," meaning, "stylishness, elegance," seemingly from the notion of "well adorned (well prepared) form of attire." This was borrowed by French as "garbe" ("graceful appearance/bearing"), and this was borrowed by English in the second half of the 1500s, and the shift in meaning to, "type or mode of dress/attire," came in the 1600s. It is related to German "gerben" (to prepare hides for wear or use by tanning), Low German "garven" (same meaning as German). Other related forms in the Germanic languages came to mean "to make;" thus also, "to do," from the original notion of "to make ready, to prepare." Its relationship to "gear" goes back to the same Old Germanic form and the forms that generally meant "equipment, military arms, clothing," which later broadened a good deal in the English meaning to, "saddles, harnesses for horses and pack animals," then also, "parts for ships," and "mechanical parts for machinery," as well as, "equipment to do various activities, like fishing and physical sports."   

It's About Coalitions, Not Purity, Part Forty-Eight

The Chickens Come Home To Roost, But It's Too Hot In The Hen House ... The Financial Meltdown, Part 5

While the nominations and political party conventions took place, Americans continued to endure record high oil and gasoline prices, along with the news of mounting numbers of foreclosures in the housing market. Believe it or not (offered sarcastically), some people better versed in economics actually began to ask questions in print and on television, as to "who" was absorbing the losses on what was becoming a staggering number of foreclosures. Put simply, if I loaned you the money to buy your house, and then you can't meet the payments, "it ain't Aunt Mary in Tuscaloosa" who is losing the money, it's me! So those in the know about the financial system began focusing on the banks, and then on the whole system in the mortgage industry, which was very complex, and thus beyond the scope of this article. It turned out, the system was rotten with bad mortgages, as many individuals, government entities and businesses had invested in mortgages. DAMN! Aunt Mary in Tuscaloosa did lose money! She held investments in a bank and an insurance company.

In mid September 2008, Lehman Brothers, a large Wall Street investment bank in business for more than 150 years, was next to suffer the consequences of irresponsible capitalism. After serious declines in its stock price and announced layoffs of personnel, clients abandoned the bank in droves, withdrawing their money and assets almost instantly. The bank announced it would file for bankruptcy, and the DOW dropped 500 points in one day, with further staggering losses to follow. The Fed did not intervene, thus giving the "free marketers" their wish. With Lehman's collapse, the situation became so serious, the Bush administration, that bulwark of "free market capitalism," having oft essentially said to American economic problems, "we can't do anything about anything, because its a free market economy," announced, along with the support of the Fed, that they needed a special fund of $700 billion (with a "b") to shore up the financial system or that the country faced a new DEPRESSION. Fear spread, as the extent of the mortgage crapola became more obvious, and that it was not just limited to a couple of financial institutions. Further, the greed and corruption had many accomplices throughout the "free market" system. You can't regulate 'em, or it ain't freedom (excuse me, third grade English teachers). The thing was, getting anywhere near accurate information of the financial condition of many institutions was difficult, because they were fearful of releasing how bad their individual situations truly were, or of seeking help from the Federal Reserve,* as that could bring about what had happened to Lehman Brothers, a fast collapse, as customers withdrew their money in just hours.

On the political front, the McCain campaign, struggling with its ties to the unpopularity of President George W. Bush, and with increasing discontent over the war in Iraq and high gasoline prices, now faced an even bigger challenge, as some Democrats, independents, and probably even some Republicans, even though at least some, likely harboring some bigotry toward Barack Obama over his racial background and/or his atypical name, overcame those feelings out of fear for their own well being and decided to support Obama. There were, however, opposite reactions, as some longtime Democrats, unable to overcome their bigotry, or outright racism, chose to support McCain. At the time, a guy I knew, a life long Democrat, so full of hatred toward black Americans, backed McCain. He turned against Democrats with a vengeance. I'm not certain of this, but I believe since that time, he became a Republican. So the coalitions were jumbled a bit, but with Obama and Democrats benefiting more than McCain and Republicans; at least, in the overall political situation, although not in specific states or certain local communities. The 2008 election showed our good side and our bad side, simultaneously, as many Americans rose above race and bigotry, but the election, and Obama's background, aroused some of the basest fears and hatreds in other Americans. 

John McCain has long had a "maverick streak," and an admiration for former progressive (for his times) Republican, President Teddy Roosevelt. In a country increasingly divided over politics, often driven, in my opinion, by radio and television personalities promoting division over unity, candidate John McCain in October 2008 told supporters at a rally, one of whom had commented that he was "scared" of an Obama presidency, and another who had claimed Obama was "an Arab," with all the racism and bigotry that was meant to convey to Americans about terrorists, that Obama "is a decent man," and that, "you don't have to be scared of him being president," and further, "he's not (an Arab.") ** I guess I'm showing my own cynicism, but I was PLEASANTLY stunned to see McCain rise above the nastiness of politics and choose to stand up for his opponent.

The stock markets plunged and so did the price of oil, even after we had been told what an oil "shortage" there was; thus, justifying the surge in price to $140 to $150 a barrel. Within weeks the price had plummeted to about $30 a barrel. Ah, see Sir Walter Scott quote in note *, below.

Next, the results of Election 2008 ...

* The reason financial institutions feared going to the Federal Reserve, was that it would then be an admission of financial trouble, and while in "normal times," logic by investors and customers might not have sparked a stock selloff and customer withdrawals, as the institution was getting help to stabilize, with the tense situation in late 2008, logic was something not in supply, as lack of transparency over financial matters had made EVERYONE distrustful, including distrust between banks and other financial institutions. "O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive." (quoted from Sir Walter Scott, and technically it was/is "practise" in British English) 

** McCain was not acting as if being an Arab were something to be ashamed of, but rather, he was simply pointing out the error stated by the lady. There were rumors circulating about Obama not being an American and about him being a secret Muslim (again, stoking fears by Americans of terrorism) and that he was associating with terrorists.  

WORD HISTORY:
Plunge-Like its relative "plumb" (also, "plumber"), the origins of this word are uncertain, although some believe it is from a non Indo European language in the Mediterranean area, as both Latin and Greek have forms of the word. It traces back to Latin "plumbum," which meant "lead" (the metal). This produced the Latin verb, "plumbicare," which meant, "to throw/toss lead," "seemingly" in reference to "tossing lead weighted fishing nets or lines into the water." Old French, a Latin-based language, took the word as "plongier," meaning, "to dive or sink into water." English borrowed the word, as "plungen," in the second half of the 1300s, almost certainly under the influence of the Norman spelling, or what came to be the Norman spelling, "plungier." ^ Also by that time, the meaning had broadened beyond "diving or sinking into water," to more figurative senses, like, "diving into work or into a particular task;" also, "to commit to some idea or cause." The noun was derived from the verb, with the meaning, "a dive into water," or, "an unexpected forceful fall downward" ("I tripped and plunged down the hillside").    

^ It is unclear to me whether "plungier" was the spelling brought to England by the Normans. It's important to remember, the Norman dialect differed somewhat from the French of Paris or other parts of France, so spelling and pronunciation variations were common. 

It's About Coalitions, Not Purity, Part Forty-Seven

The Chickens Come Home To Roost, But It's Too Hot In The Hen House ... The Financial Meltdown, Part 4

Before getting into further information on the financial crisis that was then developing, the political situation was not at a standstill. 

The 2008 Democratic Party nominating process: the two main Democrats involved were Hillary Clinton, a U.S. Senator from New York, and Barack Obama, a U.S. Senator from Illinois. Clinton, the wife of former President Bill Clinton, started the race with a decided advantage, as she was well known, and both she and her husband remained popular among traditional Democratic constituencies, like many labor unions, non-union working class voters, older white voters and moderate Democrats. Bill Clinton had been very popular among black Americans, but the draw of a highly viable man of black heritage, Barack Obama, was a difficult challenge for the Clintons, and it cut into what would have likely been a staunch Clinton group of supporters, and Clinton's likely nomination, had Barack Obama not run for president at that time. On the other hand, many Democratic women voters were immensely excited about Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Besides black voters, Obama had a good deal of support from highly educated voters, younger voters and many liberals. Supporters of both candidates were encouraged by the rough political landscape for their Republican opponents, so that if they could get their candidate nominated, they felt there was a good chance that candidate would win the presidency in November, given the unpopularity of George W. Bush, the then Republican president. Further the 2006 election had given Democrats control of both houses of Congress, leaving Republicans reeling. It would get worse for Republicans.

The early results gave Obama a surprising win in the Iowa Caucus, which temporarily gave him a major boost in the nation's first actual primary election, New Hampshire. In the end, Clinton won a close race in New Hampshire, and the tough quest for the Democratic nomination between Clinton and Obama accelerated. A big endorsement for Obama came from Senator Ted Kennedy and his niece, Caroline, who was the daughter of John F. Kennedy, the president assassinated in November 1963 (Ted Kennedy was the brother of the former president). As the primary and caucus season drew to a close, Barack Obama had a lead of less than a hundred delegates over Hillary Clinton, but Obama then got pledges of support from further delegates, giving him sufficient delegates to win the nomination at the Democratic National Convention in Denver in late August.

On the Republican side, the major candidates were: former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani (a former Democrat, and then independent), Mitt Romney, who was just leaving the governorship of Massachusetts, John McCain, a U.S. Senator from Arizona and Mike Huckabee, who was just leaving the governorship of Arkansas. When the Republican nomination process actually started, Giuliani melted down, then Romney faltered, while McCain and Huckabee became the main remaining candidates. Huckabee won the Iowa Caucus, and McCain won the primary in New Hampshire. After a mixed showing by both Romney and McCain in the following states, McCain pulled out a narrow, but big win in Florida, bringing Giuliani to withdraw from the race. McCain gained major momentum, and Romney soon quit the race, leaving only Mike Huckabee to contest McCain, but the Arizona senator won enough delegates by early March, and the nomination was his.

McCain had been able to draw from various parts of the Republican Party, but more traditional type Republicans increasingly favored him. Giuliani's "major" candidacy never materialized, and Romney's loss to McCain in New Hampshire (neighbor to Massachusetts) hurt him and gave McCain a big boost. Mike Huckabee was supported by many evangelical Christians and very conservative elements, including many Southerners, who fit into both of those categories.

Barack Obama chose Senator Joe Biden of Delaware for his vice presidential running mate, and John McCain chose Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska. Biden, long a member of the U.S. Senate (elected in 1972!), helped Obama with long time Democrats, especially white working class Democrats and independents, and his long experience in government and foreign policy in the Senate, helped to balance Obama's short time in government and on the national stage. Palin proved to be controversial, although she helped McCain with more conservative elements of the GOP, including evangelicals, and she likely also helped with women voters. Palin, however, was not well known nationally, and her introduction to the country made a negative impression on some, and a majority of Americans either felt she was not qualified to assume the presidency if need be, or they felt uncertain as to her qualification to do so. Two significant things happened when Palin did interviews. First, when interviewed extensively on television by Katie Couric, then with CBS, Couric asked Palin what newspapers and magazines she read. Her general response, that she appreciated the media and that she read all of them, brought Couric to ask her to name some, but she couldn't do it. That scene and her seeming lack of knowledge even about John McCain during the interviews, including about his views on the economy, which was reeling at that time, left a negative image of Palin. Secondly, while comics took this out of context, Palin was asked by Charles Gibson (ABC) about what she had learned by living so close to Russia,* and she mentioned that Alaska and Russia were neighbors and that you could actually see Russia from one of Alaska's islands. Comedians, to the delight of Democrats, quickly turned this into Palin claiming that the fact that she could see Russia from Alaska gave her foreign policy experience, something she did not claim, although her answer did seem to say that being able to see Russia was important, but without further explanation.           

So the stage was set for the election of 2008.  

* Alaska and Russia are very close in places, something many people may not know. 

WORD HISTORY:
Parable-"Parable" is related to "parlor" ("room for sitting and talking") and to "parley" (to speak, to converse"). The first part of the word, "para," goes back to Indo European "per/pr," with the notion of "forward, off, away from, beyond, beside." "Para-" is distantly related (through Indo European) to English "for," "for-" and "fore-," all from native English forms from Old Germanic. The main part of the word, distantly related to "ball" (the form meaning, "a dance"), goes back to Indo European "gwele/gwela," with the notion of, "bubble up, rise up, overflow, throw outward or upward." This gave Ancient Greek "ballein," ("to throw"), which produced, "bole," meaning, "a throw, a toss," and the two parts gave transliterated Greek "paraballo," meaning, "a toss beside;" thus, "side by side;" thus, "a comparison." This was borrowed by Latin as "parabola," also meaning "comparison," which then passed into Old French, a Latin-based language. English borrowed the word during the 1200s, initially as "parabol," which became "parable" about one hundred years later, with the meaning, "a story used to compare to another story in meaning." The word has often carried a religious component to it from translated Biblical usage.   

It's About Coalitions, Not Purity, Part Forty-Six

The Chickens Come Home To Roost, But It's Too Hot In The Hen House ... The Financial Meltdown, Part 3

As the nation continued to struggle with record oil and gasoline prices, the best we could get from the Bush administration and many Republicans was how this was all part of the free market at work. On top of this, reports of escalating foreclosures began to scare the hell out of many people, including people who worked on Wall Street, or who were in some way connected to Wall Street, as they began to wonder when the financial consequences of large numbers of foreclosures would become more evident. The consequences began to show up.

In March 2008, large investment bank "Bear-Stearns" teetered on the brink of insolvency, largely as a result of the then developing mortgage and foreclosure crisis. Bear-Stearns could not get loans from other banks, as confidence in the old bank (the bank dated from the early 1920s) went out the window, and financial markets were shaky over the whole situation. The Federal Reserve (aka, "the Fed") stepped in and through a complex deal, including bailout money, orchestrated a deal whereby Bear-Stearns was acquired by J.P. Morgan Chase. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said the Fed's decision to intervene was made in order to prevent a spill over into the rest of the economy if Bear-Stearns went down. The "free marketers" nearly had a collective stroke, as this whole process went against their vaunted principles of "free market capitalism;" known to some of us as "dog-eat-dog capitalism." I also explain the concept as, "We can do ANYTHING to the public, and we mean ANYTHING, and they can't do a damn thing to us. We don't a give a good damn about people, only about money!" I actually think the public should return the "favor," and not a give a good damn about these miserable, insatiable merchants of greed.*

The Fed intervention didn't come close to righting the miserable shape of the American financial system, but it calmed things briefly. A few months later, it became more and more evident the American banking system, and, therefore, the entire American economy (and the world's, for that matter), was on the ropes, and that the predicament with Bear-Stearns had not been an isolated incident. We waited for the other shoe to drop. Lehman Brothers, another large investment bank, dating to the mid 1800s (yes, 1800s!), was next to suffer the consequences of irresponsible capitalism. After serious declines in its stock price and announced layoffs of personnel, clients abandoned the bank in droves, withdrawing their money and assets almost instantly. The bank announced it would file for bankruptcy, and the DOW dropped 500 points in one day, with further staggering losses to follow. The Fed did not intervene, thus giving the "free marketers" their wish. With Lehman's collapse, the situation became so serious, the Bush administration, that bulwark of "free market capitalism," having oft essentially said about American economic problems, "we can't do anything about anything, because its a free market economy," announced, along with the support of the Fed, that they needed a special fund of $700 billion (with a "b") to shore up the financial system or that the country faced a new DEPRESSION, perhaps worse than the one dubbed "the Great Depression." With that name taken, what the hell would we call it?

Folks, having principles is one thing, but carrying principles to an extreme is lunacy. Driving off a cliff doesn't make you pure, it makes you NUTS, and then DEAD!

With the economy unraveling before our very eyes, the nominating process for candidates to succeed George W. Bush was taking place. On the Republican side, John McCain, who had made a run for the nomination in 2000, faced a number of candidates, most of whom dropped out of the race early on, with only Mike Huckabee of Arkansas posing any real challenge to McCain until March 2008. On the Democratic side, New York Senator and former First Lady Hillary Clinton made a strong bid to become the first woman to secure a major party nomination for president, but she was challenged by Illinois Senator Barack Obama, a powerful speaker and a man of mixed black and white racial background. So Democrats had two choices, one of which would be for the history books: the first female presidential candidate or the first African-American candidate. 

Next, the economy plunges and the political coalitions of the election of 2008 ...    

* The basic argument by the "free marketers" is, capitalists take risks hoping to make a profit on something. If that risk blows up on them, they should suffer the consequences, and government should do nothing to help them out. I would dare say, most of us probably agree with that whole concept "on paper." The problem is, these banks had become so big (remember "too big to fail?"), the failure of any one of them posed a threat to the entire economy and people's livelihoods. Further, suspicions were then rising that Bear-Stearns was not the only big bank in serious trouble.

WORD HISTORY: 
Melt-This word, closely related to "smelt,"^ and related to "malt" and "mild" (all from Germanic), goes back to Indo European "meld," with the meaning, "to soften, to make soft." This gave Old Germanic "meltanan," which meant "to melt, to dissolve." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "meltan," meaning, "to melt, to turn solid to liquid with fire, to dissolve;" thus also, "to digest." This then became "melten," before the modern form. By the way, the adjective "molten" is simply the adjectival use of the archaic past participle of "melt." The relatives of "melt" in the other Germanic languages tend to be directly connected to the closely related "smelt," and, as far as I can find, only English has both forms, "melt" and "smelt," with the latter being borrowed from Low German or Dutch, and more typically applied to the process of melting metal; whereas, in the other Germanic languages, it means the more general "melt." Icelandic has "melta," which means "digest;" that is, "the dissolving of food in the digestive system."  

^ This is the word meaning "to melt metal." English also has used the same spelling for a form of the past tense and participle of "smell," more common in England and other parts of Britain, although not uncommon in "spoken" American English. 

Give Them Self Interest

My dad was a staunch Republican much of his life. He was a Republican by tradition, not self interest. For decades, Republicans fumed over Social Security, I'd say, early on at least, maybe because they didn't enact the legislation themselves, although the administration of Herbert Hoover had developed a basic plan for what became Social Security during that beleaguered president's term in office. Due to the severity of the economic situation, the plan was never pushed to the forefront. Other Republicans were just plain against the very idea of Social Security. In my opinion, it just kind of gnawed at the Republicans that they had failed to grasp how this important program slipped through their fingers, giving Democrats a major advantage with Social Security recipients for decades. Republicans correctly criticized the funding for Social Security, as it has always been based upon "pay-as-you-go" financing; a problem to this very day. On the other hand, some real hard line conservatives just seemed to want to turn the clock back to a time when older folks were left to fate, or to their families to provide them with life's basics of food, clothing and shelter.

Toward the end of his life, my dad made some pretty startling statements to me. He gave praise to Eleanor Roosevelt for helping my great grandmother (his maternal grandmother) with some issue about Social Security, I believe it was. He got the attention of Mrs. Roosevelt for his grandmother's cause by writing a letter to her when he was in the Army during World War Two in the Pacific. By the time he told me all of this, circa 1996, the Republicans were preaching about investing Social Security money in the stock market. His comment was something like, "The Republicans should just leave this stock market stuff alone. These business people can't wait to get their hands on that Social Security money. That's what this is about! The Republicans are getting too close to big business." Now, this was a BIG statement to be coming from my dad.

That statement shows one thing, blasting a government program for older folks when you're 30 or 40 or 50, or even 60 is one thing, but hearing about risky proposals on such a program when you're 65, 75, or 80 (he was about 80 when he made his remark about Social Security), when you're in need of that program, is another matter entirely! Self interest and necessity trumps any ideological nonsense.

I hope all of you will vote. I also hope that when you go to the polls, you will think about your own self interest. The big money people have told us over and over that self interest drives the capitalist system. We've now seen how their self interest has driven that system to the edge of the cliff (and maybe over the cliff). Now it is OUR turn. Whichever presidential candidate wins, they may well be constrained by ( and maybe destroyed by) the economic situation that confronts, not only the country, but the world. But think for a moment about which candidate will think about YOUR interest the most. Which candidate wants more tax reductions for the bastions of greed and the wealthy,*** and which candidate wants tax reductions for more average people. Give the big money folks what they love to proclaim (when things are going their way) and think about self interest, YOUR self interest!


*** To me, with the one side, it is more like, "Capitalism and the free markets really DO work, we just didn't give them enough tax cuts!" Folks, these people can't spend all that they've got now!!! If truth be told, I'll bet we'd find out that many of them took any and all extra money and invested it in various commodities, like oil, gasoline, natural gas, wheat, corn, etc; thus driving up the prices of those things and picking our pockets even more.

Word History:
World-This word only seems to exist in the Germanic languages. In Old Germanic, it was "werald," a compound of "wer," which meant "man/human" in Germanic, and is still with us in "werewolf," that is, "man wolf," and "ald," which meant "old, or age." So the basic concept was, "age of man," or "the present time." Later, it developed the more extensive meaning of the existing actual physical surroundings or "world," as opposed to "the hereafter." In Old English it was "woruld/worold," and Old Saxon (while Saxon was one of the dialects that became English, "Old" Saxon refers to the Saxon dialect that remained on the Continent) had "werold," and Old Frisian, another very close dialect to English had "warld." Modern German has "Welt," as the "r" sound died out in that variation, Dutch has "wereld," and Danish and Norgegian have "verden." By the way, in Old English, "worldly," was "woruldlic," with the "c" being a harder sound similar to "k." That sound eventually morphed into English "ly," but is still alive in modern German, which has "weltlich," although when you here some German speakers pronounce it, it is very similar to English "ly."