I've always wondered if the confederate flag lovers ever notice that African Americans in the South never fly the confederate flag, even though they've lived in the area just as long, if not longer.
Related: a house near work has recently started to fly a "Don't tread on me" flag. Which is odd, because this is in Canada. Naturally, the homeowners are white.
I've always wondered if the confederate flag lovers ever notice that African Americans in the South never fly the confederate flag, even though they've lived in the area just as long, if not longer.
They do. Serious traitor flag wavers make no pretense over why they love that flag.
+6
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
Like, you could claim there were others causes to the Civil War, but the root of those causes was, you guessed it, slavery.
Slavery was the cause of the Civil War, and I'm tired of hearing other wise.
basically the most charitable you can be to that argument is "the south left the union to preserve slavery, and Lincoln went to war to preserve the union and didn't go into it with the intent of ending slavery"
which, yes, it's worth remembering that the north as a whole didn't have the interests of black folk at heart, but it's disingenuous to say, "...and therefore, STATES' RIGHTS" because of that
Shorty on
+3
JedocIn the scupperswith the staggers and jagsRegistered Userregular
i just finished watching the 1990s ken burns series on the civil war, but im really interested in what happened in the south in the following decades. Is there any documentaries or books on that period people would recommend? Even stuff that doesnt cover solely that period is fine.
The Wars of Reconstruction by Douglas R. Egerton is a good one. It focuses on the extremely rapid strides African American politicians made at every level of government in the years immediately following the Civil War, and the powerful backlash that led to the end of Reconstruction and the origins of what would become Jim Crow America.
After Lincoln by A.J. Langguth covers the same period, but focuses more on the Presidents and the top levels of government in explaining how and why Reconstruction failed. Basically reads like an unauthorized sequel to Team of Rivals.
Like, you could claim there were others causes to the Civil War, but the root of those causes was, you guessed it, slavery.
Slavery was the cause of the Civil War, and I'm tired of hearing other wise.
basically the most charitable you can be to that argument is "the south left the union to preserve slavery, and Lincoln went to war to preserve the union and didn't go into it with the intent of ending slavery"
which, yes, it's worth remembering that the north as a whole didn't have the interest of black folk at heart, but it's disingenuous to say, "...and therefore, STATES' RIGHTS" because of that
So, does anyone have any suggestions for history podcasts? So far I have:
Mike Duncan's History of Rome and Revolutions series.
History of England (finally at King Henry VIII, at this rate Queen Elizabeth might be dead when he gets to Victoria)
History of China (Just finished Tang Era)
History of Japan
History of the Papacy
Queens of England.
Dan Carlin.
History of the Bible
I highly recommend all of these series, but I need more... MORE.
Amusingly, it was PA that introduced me to Mike Duncan a few years back, before he did revolutions, and Mike Duncan mentioned he was part of an American President podcast which mentioned the History of England podcast , which had an episode by the guy who did the history of the Papacy which.....
Needless to say, I might be a bit..... addicted.
History of Byzantium is good if you want to pick up the rest of the Roman story. You've already got all of my other ones :P
Speaking of Mike Duncan, I liked his answer to the question "What did the rest of France, and the Wider European community, think of Charles X being replaced with Louis-Phillipe?"
A shrug and an "Eh, he brought this on himself", mostly.
0
Metzger MeisterIt Gets Worsebefore it gets any better.Registered Userregular
BILLY STRIKES BACK: THE BILLYING
So my boy Kaleb was sitting behind me in my history class. Directly behind him is FUCKIN BILLY. We're on to the 1960's now, and began talking about Vietnam and that whole shitty situation. Teacher shows us that real famous picture of the Buddhist monk self-immolating, and says "What does it take to make someone make that decision?" as a rhetorical device.
FUCKIN' BILLY mumbles "Bad genetics." under his breath.
AND I AM OVER HERE LIKE "WOW HOLY SHIT THAT IS WAAAAY LESS SUBTLE THAN YOU'VE BEEN IN THE PAST, JFC."
0
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
wow what a sack of shit
+34
Metzger MeisterIt Gets Worsebefore it gets any better.Registered Userregular
yeah, he's an absolute shit-heel.
0
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
So on more mundane levels of history from the Grand Events Of The Past, if any of you want to gain an increased appreciation for the infinite fractal headache that is primary source research I highly recommend digging through genealogical records from before, oh, the mid-twentieth century.
Couple highlights from my current search:
On a birth registration: "Date of Birth: Nova Scotia" ... good job, buddy!
Someone showing up in three separate censuses with three separate ages and three separate birth years, none of which line up at all (e.g., showing up as 33 in the 1911 census with an 1880s birthdate). The possible birth dates span twelve years. How can I tell it's the person I'm looking at? Why, her daughter shows up in the same household on those records, also with dates wildly at odds with each other on any level - but the given ages do at least sync with her mother. Mostly.
There are many census takers out there who have mastered the terrifying art of making "yes" and "no" look basically identical in the forms they're filling out. One of these people seems to be handling about a quarter of the documents I've been sifting so far.
Contemplate these, and the fact that most of the well-produced, well-researched big works of history tend to be built on several poor, headachey bastards doing years and years of that with far less standardized material...
I tried tracking down the first time my grandfather appeared on a census to confirm certain facts about him. He was born in 1911, the year the census took place, but after it (November, I think). So I look for the 1921 Census.
Oops, some idiot junked the 1921 Census records. And there wasn't a 1931 Census. And the 1941 Census isn't public domain yet.
Ouch - British censuses? I heard the 1931 one suffered from a dose of Some Dumbass Smoking On Site, kind of like what happened to US Army records from the Second World War.
I've got a bunch of small gaps in mine that access to Canada's 1931 census would be wonderful for, but I'm trapped by that 92-year restriction. Blargh!
King Leopold's Ghost is a fantastic book about the horrific atrocities of the Belgian Congo.
Yo, so this is a bit late, but if you liked this book, then you should absolutely check out Dancing in the Glory of Monsters by Jason Stearns. It's an incredibly detailed history of the region since the DRC got its independence. It's incredibly well written, and is largely based around interviews and the human personalities that drove and were affected by all the various different regimes and conflicts. It's utterly fantastic.
facetiousa wit so dryit shits sandRegistered Userregular
edited May 2017
As frustrating as researching primary sources with an actual end goal in mind can be, looking through primary sources is so fucking interesting and fun.
18th century letters are the bomb, yo.
... when you can read their writing ...
(I knew I had reached a certain point in my career as a historian when I didn't have to pause for even a nanosecond with the long 's'. It feels like forever ago that would trip me up.)
facetious on
"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde
The historical practice of writing over the writing in the letter you received and sending it back was true madness, I was looking at correspondence between Mary Shelly and her sister and it's like they were daring future persons to decipher the intricate chaos
The historical practice of writing over the writing in the letter you received and sending it back was true madness, I was looking at correspondence between Mary Shelly and her sister and it's like they were daring future persons to decipher the intricate chaos
Also I know a lot of people I generally agree with think requiring cursive in school is classist, and I think it certainly can be, but I do think it's very important for people to continue to learn it for historical research.
And here's where my dilemma is. On the one hand, I don't think it should be required, but should certainly be offered. But... okay so, a friend of mine who also works in history and I normally respect his historical opinions recently said that "almost everything is already transcribed anyway", but like, that's not even remotely true. I myself have, even outside of work, transcribed a fair bit of stuff that people have never bothered to before. And furthermore, most of the stuff that has been transcribed is.. well, related to the most privileged people. A lot of common people, minorities, etc., haven't been given the same historical research as the "important" (read: white, usually male) historical figures.
So I think it's extra important that the communities that are already underserved by historical research have the tools to find things that are unfortunately far too often ignored by the history establishment.
facetious on
"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde
DepressperadoI just wanted to see you laughingin the pizza rainRegistered Userregular
I was a pretty dab hand at cursive when I was a kid
but then I broke my hand and apparently also gave it amnesia because it barely remembers how to scrawl out regular letters now
0
JedocIn the scupperswith the staggers and jagsRegistered Userregular
I was super bad at cursive. I used to get a B- on pretty much all of my handwriting sheets, which in 2nd grade is the equivalent of an F with detention.
I'm pretty sure I was supposed to be left-handed, though, so that might have something to do with it. I used to just switch hands when I was coloring when one hand got tired, but my kindergarten teacher would take the crayon out of my left hand and put it in my right every time I did.
I can still shoot pool and rifles equally well with either hand, so I definitely suspect there's some dominance v. practice shenanigans going on here.
My handwriting is horrible but I am ambidextrous as in the corps during advanced weapon training when they were showing us different rifles and other things the instructor was my previous DI so it was interesting to see him not as in your face about everything but he remarked that it's odd to see people that can switch hands like it's nothing
I'm thinking of using a $25 itunes gift card I got plus some extra scratch to get Ken Burn's Civil War documentary. Good idea? Y/N?
it's on netflix
but yes buy it, it is possibly the most well done documentary series there is
+3
JedocIn the scupperswith the staggers and jagsRegistered Userregular
I really need to get a new second monitor. Before my last one burned out, that was one of the things I had running on a near-constant loop while playing Civilization or other games without much dialog.
you don't live near me, do you? I'm trying to get rid of a perfectly decent monitor that I just don't need. The donation store won't take computer equipment.
JedocIn the scupperswith the staggers and jagsRegistered Userregular
Saskatchewan...Oklahoma? You must be on the lee side of the prevailing winds, because I've never paid attention to that town during a tornado warning, which is the only way Oklahomans learn geography.
+1
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
Posts
Related: a house near work has recently started to fly a "Don't tread on me" flag. Which is odd, because this is in Canada. Naturally, the homeowners are white.
WoW
Dear Satan.....
They do. Serious traitor flag wavers make no pretense over why they love that flag.
basically the most charitable you can be to that argument is "the south left the union to preserve slavery, and Lincoln went to war to preserve the union and didn't go into it with the intent of ending slavery"
which, yes, it's worth remembering that the north as a whole didn't have the interests of black folk at heart, but it's disingenuous to say, "...and therefore, STATES' RIGHTS" because of that
The Wars of Reconstruction by Douglas R. Egerton is a good one. It focuses on the extremely rapid strides African American politicians made at every level of government in the years immediately following the Civil War, and the powerful backlash that led to the end of Reconstruction and the origins of what would become Jim Crow America.
After Lincoln by A.J. Langguth covers the same period, but focuses more on the Presidents and the top levels of government in explaining how and why Reconstruction failed. Basically reads like an unauthorized sequel to Team of Rivals.
History of Byzantium is good if you want to pick up the rest of the Roman story. You've already got all of my other ones :P
So my boy Kaleb was sitting behind me in my history class. Directly behind him is FUCKIN BILLY. We're on to the 1960's now, and began talking about Vietnam and that whole shitty situation. Teacher shows us that real famous picture of the Buddhist monk self-immolating, and says "What does it take to make someone make that decision?" as a rhetorical device.
FUCKIN' BILLY mumbles "Bad genetics." under his breath.
AND I AM OVER HERE LIKE "WOW HOLY SHIT THAT IS WAAAAY LESS SUBTLE THAN YOU'VE BEEN IN THE PAST, JFC."
American Lion by Jon Meachum
Couple highlights from my current search:
Contemplate these, and the fact that most of the well-produced, well-researched big works of history tend to be built on several poor, headachey bastards doing years and years of that with far less standardized material...
Oops, some idiot junked the 1921 Census records. And there wasn't a 1931 Census. And the 1941 Census isn't public domain yet.
Ffffffffffff
I've got a bunch of small gaps in mine that access to Canada's 1931 census would be wonderful for, but I'm trapped by that 92-year restriction. Blargh!
Yo, so this is a bit late, but if you liked this book, then you should absolutely check out Dancing in the Glory of Monsters by Jason Stearns. It's an incredibly detailed history of the region since the DRC got its independence. It's incredibly well written, and is largely based around interviews and the human personalities that drove and were affected by all the various different regimes and conflicts. It's utterly fantastic.
Steam // Secret Satan
18th century letters are the bomb, yo.
(I knew I had reached a certain point in my career as a historian when I didn't have to pause for even a nanosecond with the long 's'. It feels like forever ago that would trip me up.)
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
I cant read handwritten script like at all.
Being able to read period handwriting is an acquired skill
It's something you have to train
No see I mean, I can't even read contemporary handwritten script.
I'm sorry what?
Also I know a lot of people I generally agree with think requiring cursive in school is classist, and I think it certainly can be, but I do think it's very important for people to continue to learn it for historical research.
And here's where my dilemma is. On the one hand, I don't think it should be required, but should certainly be offered. But... okay so, a friend of mine who also works in history and I normally respect his historical opinions recently said that "almost everything is already transcribed anyway", but like, that's not even remotely true. I myself have, even outside of work, transcribed a fair bit of stuff that people have never bothered to before. And furthermore, most of the stuff that has been transcribed is.. well, related to the most privileged people. A lot of common people, minorities, etc., haven't been given the same historical research as the "important" (read: white, usually male) historical figures.
So I think it's extra important that the communities that are already underserved by historical research have the tools to find things that are unfortunately far too often ignored by the history establishment.
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
I feel that there are far more valuable things to teach in the already overloaded curriculums of k-12 education though.
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
but then I broke my hand and apparently also gave it amnesia because it barely remembers how to scrawl out regular letters now
I'm pretty sure I was supposed to be left-handed, though, so that might have something to do with it. I used to just switch hands when I was coloring when one hand got tired, but my kindergarten teacher would take the crayon out of my left hand and put it in my right every time I did.
I can still shoot pool and rifles equally well with either hand, so I definitely suspect there's some dominance v. practice shenanigans going on here.
I'm just too used to typing.
it's on netflix
but yes buy it, it is possibly the most well done documentary series there is
Saskatchewan.
my condolences
I should get Netflix at some point. But thanks! I'll be grabbing it and watch an episode tonight.
Edit: I can apparently get a free month of Netflix!!!
Screwing Up Censuses, Hard Mode: Record three different birth countries for the same person in three successive censuses.
(argh)