Podcast Summary: "Kate Epstein on How Twentieth-Century Technology Theft Built the National-Security State" (New Books Network, October 27, 2025)

Main Theme

This episode features historian Kate Epstein in an interview with Lee Vinsel, discussing her new book Analog Superpowers: How Twentieth-Century Technology Theft Built the National-Security State. The conversation explores how the theft and legal contestation of obscure but pivotal military technologies in the early 20th century by Britain and the U.S. shaped the emergence of the modern national-security state, linking technology, law, intellectual property (IP), secrecy, and international power transitions.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Overview of "Analog Superpowers"

• Book Premise: Epstein investigates the legal and technological history of early analog computing systems used for naval gunnery, invented by Arthur Pollan and Harold Isherwood. These systems were pirated by both the British and US governments, who invoked national security secrecy to evade patent claims and compensation.
• Big Themes: The story serves as a microcosm for broader tensions in liberal capitalist societies between free markets, national security, and state power, particularly in the context of Anglo-American power shifts (Pax Britannica to Pax Americana).
• Epstein’s Approach: Emphasizes rigorous archival research, multidisciplinary analysis, and engagement with both legal and military/diplomatic history (04:45–09:16).

"I was trying to write a sort of legal and technological biography...These were systems for aiming the big guns of battleships… the most sophisticated analog computers of their day." — Kate Epstein (04:45)

2. Intellectual Property vs. National Security Secrecy

• The "Chasm": Epstein explains a gap between legal histories of IP and histories of national security;
  • Legal historians often ignore war and secrecy,
  • Military/diplomatic historians often gloss over law and IP (19:43).
• Secret Patents: The British system allowed for secret patents (withheld from publication on national security grounds), whereas the U.S. did not, creating friction in Anglo-American technology transfer (20:05–23:57).
• Dual Use Technologies: Technologies like radio and analog computers had both military and civil uses, but IP management was complicated by secrecy (23:57).

"Patent literally means open, so like, how can you keep one secret?...Just the questions that it raises..." — Kate Epstein (20:05)

3. Liberal Militarism & The National Security State

• Concept Origin: Drawing on David Edgerton, Epstein describes 'liberal militarism': the symbiosis of liberal norms and militarized, tech-intensive state power (24:08–25:30).
• Tension with Property Rights: Use of state secrecy privilege subverted property rights, often against domestic defense contractors, not just foreign adversaries (27:14–28:43).
• Defense Contractors as Victims: While often unsympathetic figures (think modern Raytheon/Lockheed), in the early 1900s, small and mid-size contractors could be deeply harmed by state actions (28:46).

"In this book, the targets of the secretive national security state were defense contractors, and the civil liberty under threat was property rights." — Lee Vinsel (27:14)

4. Technical Story: Fire Control and Analog Computing

• Why Battleships Mattered: Battleships were crucial for projecting power and national pride in the early 20th century; their main weapons were large-caliber guns, requiring sophisticated fire control (29:50–31:55).
• The Invention: Pollan and Isherwood developed an analog computer to solve the complex calculus problem of aiming naval guns on moving ships — not “gearheads” but persistent, mathematically driven civilians (34:15–39:19).
• Mechanical Innovation: Their device (mechanical integrator) solved differential equations in real time, a mechanical “black box”—a proto-artificial intelligence (40:31–44:06).

"It was a computer that solved calculus problems...At its heart was something called...a mechanical integrator...These were well known in the art..." — Kate Epstein (40:31)

5. Technology Theft and State Piracy

• British Side: Navy officer Frederick Dreyer, leveraging insider status and the Royal Navy’s tinkering tradition, appropriated the Pollan/Isherwood system, rewriting institutional memory in his favor (48:54–52:03).
• Institutional Injustice: Epstein used rigorous sleuthing to show the unfairness in this historical narrative and its deeply personal impacts (52:03–57:24).
• US Side: The U.S. Navy, facing technical need and inspired by British developments, pirated Pollan/Isherwood’s system more competently via Hannibal Ford, abetted by the lack of secret patents in U.S. law; legal disputes ensued, with the state secrets privilege invoked to limit compensation (57:53–61:31).

"The US Navy did a much more competent job of pirating Pollan and Isherwood than Dreier had done." — Kate Epstein (57:55)

6. Legal and Institutional Architecture

• UK vs US Law: The lack of a secret patent system in the U.S. (compared to the U.K.) was a persistent obstacle for technology transfer and legal protection (61:41–67:08).
• Development of National Security State: Precedents set in these naval cases paved the way for modern state secrecy doctrine (proto-state secrets privilege), influencing the atomic/nuclear age (68:42–72:21).

7. Historical Reframing and the "Catch Up State"

• US as Catch-Up Developer: Epstein challenges the notion of the US as always technologically preeminent, arguing it was a developmental catch-up state vis-à-vis the UK, especially pre-WWII (73:07–75:15).
• Special Relationship: The supposed US-UK “special relationship” is overemphasized compared to ongoing rivalry and competitive imitation (75:41).

8. Intellectual Scrutiny & Institutional Critique

• The Value of Rigor: Epstein extols rigorous, critical historical research as a practice of moral integrity, drawing a contrast with both legalistic stonewalling (state secrecy) and the disciplinary failings she’s observed in military history (76:55–83:51).
• Mic Drop Conclusion: "Institutions and nations that decline to engage in rigorous scrutiny of themselves and the world are preparing for failure." — Kate Epstein (76:55)
• Epistemic Standards: Discussion on the dangers of both uncritical historicism and unchecked relativism; the historian's job is to maintain and defend standards while recognizing self-interest (82:10–84:34).

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "What really drew me into the story was...the intellectual property issues that developed between...the British Navy and the American Navy...and defense contractors...as well as the questions of...national security secrecy." — Kate Epstein (04:45)
• "We so often imagine liberalism and militarism as...in tension...and [Edgerton’s] saying, no, actually these can complement and strengthen each other." — Kate Epstein (24:28)
• "I think the research in this book is orders of magnitude larger than a lot of previous writing, not all previous writing." — Kate Epstein (80:34)
• "I reject the notion at the same time that...we can't...distinguish between things that are closer or farther from being supported by evidence. Call it truth, if you will." — Kate Epstein (55:32)
• "The British government had actually asserted the British equivalent to the state secrets privilege...very similar issue arising...and both governments say so sorry, you can't have the evidence you want to try to prove your case." — Kate Epstein (09:19)
• “Institutions and nations that decline to engage in rigorous scrutiny of themselves and the world are preparing for failure.” — Kate Epstein (76:55)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 04:35–09:16: Introduction to the book and origins of the research project
• 19:33–23:57: The "chasm" between IP and security history; secret patents; legal doctrine
• 24:08–28:43: Explaining liberal militarism; property rights as civil liberty; impact on defense contractors
• 29:50–36:05: Importance of battleships; introduction to Pollan and Isherwood and their motivation
• 40:31–44:06: Analog computers for fire control; technical explanation
• 48:54–52:03: Dreyer’s piracy, institutional dynamics, and necessity for rigorous archival work
• 57:53–61:31: US piracy, legal context and implications
• 61:41–67:08: Comparative legal frameworks and their consequences for technology transfer
• 68:42–72:21: Early state secrecy, continuity from the naval to the nuclear age
• 73:07–75:41: US as a “catch up” developmental state; critique of exceptionalist narratives
• 76:55–84:34: The necessity of intellectual rigor and critical self-scrutiny in both nation-states and academic fields

Additional Insights

• Archival Rigor: Epstein shares her multi-country, multi-institutional archival work, leveraging not just published sources but also legal files, technical specs, and patent filings (15:09–18:01).
• Methodological Self-Reflection: Both host and guest reflect on the challenges and value of being “outsiders” to technical or militaristic histories, with an emphasis on breaking down complex technical material for broader historical questions (86:45–88:22).

Final Thoughts

This episode provides a multidimensional look at how military technology, law, and state secrecy intersected to shape both the architecture of the modern US national security state and corresponding legal doctrines. Epstein’s research unearths the forgotten stories of inventors victimized by their own governments, highlights the tensions inherent in liberal capitalist states waging tech-intensive warfare, and calls for renewed rigor in both historical practice and institutional self-examination.

Recommended For:
Scholars and students of technology, legal history, military/diplomatic history, and anyone interested in the deep interconnections of innovation, secrecy, and state power in the twentieth century.