I'm interested in the second British empire and all of it's wars that it had in the middle east and Afghanistan. but i don't really feel like reading it's Wikipedia article, so if you some good documentaries about it please recommend them to me (if it doesn't exist in youtube just tell me it's name).
History enthusiasts
-
-
@Monkey:
-The Art of War was boring to me though. Like it had good points…but like it was mostly kinda common sense stuff that was written about in yeah cool form I guess. But not really much to think about overall.
As I recall, Sun Tzu's work had a massive flaw in that he solely associated spying with finding out troop positions and leadership with no thought given to acquiring information about what was going on behind the scenes. Such as Chu sending an envoy to beg Qin for help.
-
Sun Tzu's even bigger flaw was (as far as I can recall) was that diplomacy didn't even occur to be a solution to him - there's a reason why it's called the Art of War.
Adding on to that there was also the stuff like staging false peace talks and attacking your enemy with their guards down which would make adherents of the Geneva Convention (majority of people living nowadays?) scream bloody murder and pull their hair out.
-
Art of War was still a huge influence over the world.
As I recall, Sun Tzu's work had a massive flaw in that he solely associated spying with finding out troop positions and leadership with no thought given to acquiring information about what was going on behind the scenes. Such as Chu sending an envoy to beg Qin for help.
Although the Qin Dynasty were the first dynasty to unify China and end the Warring State Period, it's dynasty is also short lived and collapsed within two decades. A big shame, Chu took over and started the Han Dynasty which would later be usurped by Dong Zhuo/Cao Cao - three Kingdom era.
-
Art of War was still a huge influence over the world.
Is it though?
Most of it felt like stuff that all societies figured out as regards fighting and competition. Just written down in admittingly kinda clever form.
Like I can enjoy it in the sense of it organizing lots of those things. But ultimately like…there's nothing really to think about from it. Which is what makes it dull for me.
Like I read it and go "Yeah, it is good to keep an enemy in the dark on stuff. Yep."Although the Qin Dynasty were the first dynasty to unify China and end the Warring State Period, it's dynasty is also short lived and collapsed within two decades. A big shame, Chu took over and started the Han Dynasty which would later be usurped by Dong Zhuo/Cao Cao - three Kingdom era.
Qin uniting China is what would happened if Russia united Europe. It was not a good thing that it was them, and a good thing they barely lasted.
Legalism is a fuck of a thing. It's like if Stalin wrote a self-help guide. -
Going to recommend you guys the best historical drama series I've ever seen, called the '3 kingdom', which looks at the late Eastern-Han dynasty - Three kingdom era.
Here's all 95 episodes in a Youtube Playlist;
Enjoy.@Monkey:
Romance of the Three Kingdoms is a famous bit of Chinese literature, so this is based off that.
Romance of the Three Kingdoms 三国演义 is one of the Four Great Classical Novels in Chinese literature (四大名著). Yep, that is one of the many adaptions this novel has spawned. Its an interesting read itself. Think Song of Ice and Fire set in ancient China without the fantasy element and sex. Something along those lines. But its a historical fiction novel, so its not advisable to use it as a history reference book. The other 3 books are:
- Water Margin 水浒传 : 108 manly men doing manly and patriotic stuff with a mountain as their base. Can be classified as wuxia?
- Journey to the West 西游记 : A monkey, a pig and a random monster escorting a monk to get some scrolls from India.
- Dream of the Red Chamber 红楼梦 : The depressing tale of a wealthy family's slow decline into bankruptcy with quite a lot of romance.
Having read them all, I would say that they are all quite worth reading (they provide some insight towards the history, culture and mythology of ancient China). My favourite one is Water Margin, probably because I like Wuxia novels.
-
Water Margin was also adapted to a series called 'All men are brothers', still waiting for the fan subs to finish/ Series is set in the Song Dynasty/ It is Wuxia.
You can see my favourite historical series via this thread.
Legalism did destroy the Qin Dynasty. Legalism as a philosophy obviously had some bad reputation during the next Dynasty, Han.
Have you looked at Neo; Confucianism Zephos?
-
Some out of the many Ancient sites have been discovered within the last 15 years in Northern Somalia (Somaliland).Neolithic treasures.
One being Dhambalin. >Sheeps
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14592866
Dhaymoole Rock art > Camels instead of Cows/Horsemen (Somalis are believed to be the first humans to domesticated Camels (Majority of Camel Population reside in Somalia), Camel Meat/Milk is also great
!
Early examples of Writing in Horn of Africa (Somalia)
Dhagax Nabi Galay
!
!!
!
!
!
Dhagah Kureh; "Dhagah Kureh translates to “the stone with the head” in the Somali language. The site is located in a beautiful and naturally green landscape with fertile farming lands nearby.
! Location:
Dhagah Kureh is located 43km from Hargeisa, 28km on the Boorama road then 15km on a track road to the north. Mohamed Abdi Ali of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism first took the French team to visit this site in December of 2004. The rock shelters are made of stony outcrops with rocks resting on each other above an approximately 4km-long granite range.
! Resources:
The rock art site of Dhagah Kureh is comprised of large slabs piled on top of each other. Paintings are located on the smooth surfaces of the interiors and exteriors of the shelters. Paintings appear to have been completed directly on the untreated rock surface.
! Representations of Cows:
The greatest number of rock art panels depicting large cows in Somaliland is found in Shelter 1 of Dhagah Kureh. Although Laas Geel does not contain as many as Dhagah Kureh, a still significant number exists in Shelters 1 and 10.
Laas Geel contains animal depictions of greater dimensions and variations, size and composition. At Dhagah Kureh, horns are located in the back of the head as common in Somaliland and at Laas Geel. Here, the position of the udders is either realistic or low or very low on the back leg of the animal. However, the necks can be either thin or large, with claws or large horns on the front of the head, with or without a plastron, and having a straight back. Depictions of zebus (Bos indicus), a more recent species, also appear at Dhagah Kureh, which also indicates superimposition.
! Humans:
The human anthropomorphic figures are of different styles, with different shaped heads and hairstyles, with some wearing masks and ornaments in their hair or on their heads. Their arms are engaged in one way or another–either stretched on the sides or upwards in a symbolic ritualistic manner, or holding a stick or other unidentifiable objects and wearing “trousers.” These figures are often behind the cow while most in Laas Geel are under the animals.
! Other Animals:
Giraffes are the second-most depicted animals at Dhagah Kureh.
! Other Markings:
At Dhagah Kureh, there are other markings, including recent graffiti, recent Arabic writings, and what appear to be tribal markings.Site Degradation and Conservation Problems:
There is recent graffiti and intentional vandalism at Dhagah Kureh. The graffiti continues, people utilizing black (charcoal) or white (chalk) which leave permanent marks. Wind and rains also have an eroding effect on most paintings." http://archive.cyark.org/photograph-of-detailed-paintings-at-dhagah-kureh-depicting-various-animals-media!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
There are still hundreds of ancient rock painting yet to be discovered.
Somali needs to ratify the UNESCO treaty some time soon to preserve these pieces of art. Sada Mire is one of the few Somali archaeologist who are is working in Somaliland.
Mira ted talk. -
Thanks very much for sharing those, LegendarySSJ4! They do need to start protecting artifacts like this asap! This is invaluable stuff here… I'm glad this thread has seen some activity in recent times :happy:
Btw, I think this hasn't been shared here yet:
A medieval Khmer capital that rivals today's capital of Cambodja in size!
-
Don;t know if it has been posted before… though sometime last year, Birmingham found a Quranic manuscript dating back around the 640's, just a decade after the death of Prophet Muhammed (P.B.U.H). It shows no sign of alteration or it verses being different, eve after 1400 years unlike the other books which have been corrupted and tainted. Look at the new testament and old testament for example, Paul the Apostle...... I believe that Jesus Christ (A.S) was a prophet of God, who had miraculous powers, not the son of God (if you meant spiritually connected then we're all 'sons of god') and not God himself (why would God himself come to earth to preach his words, when he had sent messengers throughout time before Jesus A.S?). If a Muslim does not love Jesus then you can see that he isn't practicing his faith properly. Translation Why the Qi'ran is inimitable.http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/the-inimitable-quran/
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Don;t know if it has been posted before... though sometime last year, Birmingham found a Quranic manuscript dating back around the 640's, just a decade after the death of Prophet Muhammed (P.B.U.H). It shows no sign of alteration or it verses being different, eve after 1400 years unlike the other books which have been corrupted and tainted. Look at the new testament and old testament for example, Paul the Apostle...... I believe that Jesus Christ (A.S) was a prophet of God, who had miraculous powers, not the son of God (if you meant spiritually connected then we're all 'sons of god') and not God himself (why would God himself come to earth to preach his words, when he had sent messengers throughout time before Jesus A.S?). If a Muslim does not love Jesus then you can see that he isn't practicing his faith properly. Translation Why the Qu'ran is inimitable.http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/the-inimitable-quran/
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/latest/2015/07/quran-manuscript-22-07-15.aspx
-
Gonna try to bring some discussion from the AmPol thread to here:
I don't think there has ever been any actually. But some streets were wearing his name (last one has been renamed something else in 2013, and it was in a random village).
But it seems there are 12 streets and avenues in the US still wearing his name, 1 in Singapour[sic] and 2 in Canada + A MOUNTAIN !!!
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rue_du_Mar%C3%A9chal-P%C3%A9tainI was surprised and went to do some quick research (https://lionraw.com/2014/06/26/petain-road-beauty-vice-and-controversy/), and indeed turns out it was named way back in the 1920's when he hadn't yet had the notorious reputation. Of course, there's now calls to rename it , even as late as 2012 (thank you Prof Tommy Koh). Then again, given that us Asians were quite removed (culturally and geographically) from the whole European shenanigans, it's prolly not gonna change anytime soon. (I assume the equivalent would be say some Estonian street named after one of the Asian generals who co-operated with the Japanese? Dunno any that come to mind tho :?)
oh and turns out the street is mainly known for prostitution lol gotta keep the theme real
@Monkey:You laugh, but my big paper on Balkan Quislings had extensive citations, all of them statues.
@Monkey:
Robo I'm serious, I covered kind of the equivalent of Confederates in studying Nazi collaborators/puppets from Southeast Europe.
People who got super wiped out of public by the Commies (in some cases literally lol).Oooh, more info if you don't mind?
-
Gonna try to bring some discussion from the AmPol thread to here:
I was surprised and went to do some quick research (https://lionraw.com/2014/06/26/petain-road-beauty-vice-and-controversy/), and indeed turns out it was named way back in the 1920's when he hadn't yet had the notorious reputation. Of course, there's now calls to rename it , even as late as 2012 (thank you Prof Tommy Koh). Then again, given that us Asians were quite removed (culturally and geographically) from the whole European shenanigans, it's prolly not gonna change anytime soon. (I assume the equivalent would be say some Estonian street named after one of the Asian generals who co-operated with the Japanese? Dunno any that come to mind tho :?)
That's the case with everywhere that has his name, he was military hero for France in WWI, but by the time WWII rolled around he was both out of service and also had increasingly shown far-right wing sympathies. So the Nazis saw him as the best man to associate with once France capitulated, and he became the dictator of (the non militarily occupied) parts of France for the rest of the war. And he and his toadies were pretty handy collaborators in matters such as fighting the allies abroad in French colonies (against Free French forces under DeGaulle in many case) and of course the obligatory help with the holocaust.
Oooh, more info if you don't mind?
I researched any place in Eastern Europe that in some form or another remained a country during the outright Nazi troop movements. Which meant no Poland, no Czechia, no Austria, and no pieces of the USSR. Since those were annexed by the Nazis or governed very directly by the Nazi army, rather than occupied/independent.
So this meant I covered:
-Slovakia
-Hungary
-Romania
-Croatia
-Serbia
-Bulgaria
-GreeceAlbania kinda had a brief period of Nazi occupation with local puppets, but it was very brief, and I could barely find any sources on it so I ended up leaving that aside.
So anyway, the thesis of the paper was basically a two parter. Two questions I asked before researching.
1. How much actual independence did X country have?
2. And how much did they participate in the Holocaust?And I should mention also I was focusing on the governments of these countries, not the degree of civilian collaboration or anti-semitism.
So my findings were basically the following:SLOVAKIA: 1. Independent entity, but barely. The Nazis allowed them to run their own shit, but there was a heavy shadow of "you better play ball" over them at all times. Their government was made up not so much of hard-right wingers as it was generic right wing nationalists who were thrilled when the Nazis gifted them their own country separate from Czechoslovakia (the Nazis had gobbled up the Czech part into Germany). So in a way these guys made a deal with the devil to have their nation-state they wanted, but by the nature of that deal their entire existence was living only half independent. An independence at the pleasure of Hitler.
2. I didn't get the impression that the Slovak leaders were particularly anti-semitic, beyond the average that is. Like, they were, but not in the obsessive genocidal Hitler way. So they seemed always a little skeaved out by things being asked of them in terms of gradually robbing Jews of their rights, ghettoizing them, and then shipping them off to Nazi territory for you know what. Of course, while they didn't seem thrilled about it, they totally did it too. So meh to them. One common pattern I noticed btw in all this is how everyone fucking knew exactly what was going on with the Jews, they all knew the Nazis were killing them in camps. It was an open secret. Just one of those things that makes a body laugh even more at Holocaust deniers.
HUNGARY:
1. Hungary began the war totally independent, ruled by a dictator named Miklos Horthy, who was technically a regent for a monarchy that had run off after WWI. They were right wing friendly to begin with (there had actually been a super short communist takeover of Hungary right after WWI so they were extra on edge about commies), so when Hitler was rising up Horthy was pretty friendly and chill about him. You got the feeling that Horthy thought of himself as a peer to Hitler he could make deals with like equal countries. Hungary was (groan) hungry for taking back lands it considered its own that they lost after WWI, kinda like Germany really. And Horthy and his dudes saw Hitler as a guy who could help this happened. And at first yeah, it was like that. But Hungary over the course of the war lost more and more independence. They increasingly were treated just like Slovakia, having the Nazis glare and make fists at them when they didn't walk the right line. And Horthy increasingly realized this, and he made a few acts of rebellion (firing more Nazi friendly Prime Ministers and stuff). But eventually the Nazis were making very vivid real threats, and Hungary was pretty cowed by the later parts of the war. Eventually when the Russians were approaching the Nazis decided they couldn't trust Horthy anymore and forced him to resign, then the Nazis installed a straight up fascist party into power (the Arrow Cross party) which made them pretty much a straight up puppet state. That didn't last long though because in came the Russians.2. Very interesting. Horthy was definitely an Anti-Semite. But in the style of not liking how the local Jews "controlled" so much, rather than wanting to murder them all. An asshole rather than an axe murderer. He was on board with the first types of repressions that Hitler wanted for Jews, but he was uncomfortable with the ghettoization. And then when the "ship them to us wink wink" stage came, Horthy refused to do it. Made lots of excuses and stuff. Again, open secret about the death camps. From some of the primary sources you can tell he was genuinely feeling guilty about the issue. But then he got kicked out, and the Arrow Cross fascists started shipping off the Jews. The Hungarian Jews survived a long time but in the end they were devastated all the same.
ROMANIA:
1. Independent, just straight up independent. No ifs ands or buts. They had lots of chaotic politics at the start of the war, but in the end control ended up in the hands of a military guy named Ion Antonescu. There had been a point where the government was coming down to fascists vs the traditional right wing in Romania, and Hitler actually gave his approval to the traditionals who Antonescu represented. But Romania was a bit farther afield, and the Nazis never had the freedom geographically or troop wise to bully it as much. Hell later in the war Antonescu was openly getting mad at Hitler for this and that and asserting his independence.2. You'd think a very independent country wouldn't join in on the Holocaust! And you'd be wrong! Romania had the most confusing relationship to the Holocaust of all these countries though so uh bear with me. Apparently the place was DAMN anti-semitic, and even in the less crazy right wing hands of Antonescu they did lots of Jew killing. Especially in the northeastern parts of Romania that they took back from the USSR, they were straight brutal up there. Genocide and ethnic cleansing galore. But they were less brutal to Jews in the other parts of the country…and then abruptly stopped ramping up ghettoization when Antonescu got angry with Hitler, and the Holocaust just kind of remained on pause for the rest of the war there. But still, every bit that the engaged upon was 100% homegrown effort.
CROATIA:
1. Like Slovakia this was a country created by the Nazis (after tearing up Yugoslavia), and they ended up giving power there to the Ustase fascist party, who were complete and total monsters. Worse than the Nazis in some ways, aside from not being able to take their horror show on the same scope and stage that Hitler did. Partly this was because unlike the Germans they were more sloppy and savage about their violence, but some of this was due to governmental incompetence too. Kind of like a fascist version of the Khmer Rouge in that regard. Croatia existed similar to Slovakia in that for all intents and purposes it existed at the whim of the Nazis, but unlike the Slovaks the Croatian government didn't seem to mind this state of affairs. And were given a lot of free reign. The German (and Italian) generals hated them mostly because their sloppy nightmare state was creating a huge backlash of resistance fighters that the Italian and German soldiers then had to deal with. But Hitler personally had a soft spot for the Ustase, so yeah, they stayed in power all the way until Communist rebels sent them packing Germany ward.2. So very very guilty. When you read up on the Holocaust you learn how technically Concentration Camps and Death Camps were different things. And that the true Death Camps were few in number. But even so, of that amount one whole camp was run by the Croatians, no Germans. This is Jasenovac. Which is described sometimes as the worst of these camps. So yeah, their very own friggin' death camp. That counts for a lot. In terms of genocide, they did kill Jews, but there was less direct hate for them in the Ustase ranks. Naw, their favorite target was Serbs, Serbs, Serbs. Basically they tried wiping out the Serbian population in their borders. By either terrorizing them into fleeing the country, forcing them to convert to Catholicism from Orthodoxy, or of course mass murder. It's not like the Nazis told them to do this, no this was their very own baby genocide in operation alongside the Holocaust. These guys were fuckin' awful!
SERBIA:
1. When the Nazis invaded Yugoslavia they tore it to pieces. "Serbia" here was the rump remainder of the old Yugoslavia, with the "Croatia" entity torn off, and other areas being divvied up as war spoils to other Nazi allies. One of two of the countries I looked into that I basically declared not-independent. Meaning what exactly? Meaning that there was some sort of state apparatus, complete with a local dictator in the Serbian case. But the amount of actual control they had was damned minimal, the country was pretty much a Nazi military occupation zone. And that dictator guy had to talk with and deal with the local German commanders kind of like a kid dealing with babysitters. The guy was a puppet that didn't fully realize it.2. Because they didn't really have control they can't be held responsible right? Well yes and no. No because the vast majority of Holocaust related activity was handled by the Germans, but in the small space where they did have control, the Serbian government fully collaborated on this account and didn't seem unhappy to do it either.
GREECE: 1. The other not-independent country. Heck Greece got complicated because it got split up among three different Axis powers. Italy occupied most of the west, Germany got most of the center, and Bulgaria straight up annexed the eastern areas. The joint really got served up like a feast. The Nazi area was run similar to Serbia, but it seemed even more out of the control of the local Greek leaders that the Nazis allowed. Almost to the extent that the Greek dudes were pretty much just mayors of Athens. Otherwise the Nazi territory was bog standard military occupation zone, ruled by Nazi commanders.
2. The Greeks didn't have almost any control, but in the tiny space they did have there were government efforts made to try and have the Nazis lay off the Jews, pretty pretty please. It didn't work, and the Greek Jewish population was brutalized. Which is extra culturally brutal given the fairly unique supply of not Ashkenazi but Sephardi Jews who made up the majority of the Jews there. Overall the Greeks look pretty empty on blame here, not that they had much room to earn blame in the first place.
BULGARIA:
1.
So I dunno if in Singapore you guys have trickster type folk tales, like where a clever rabbit or something sweet talks its way out of being eaten by a wolf, and somehow ends up getting the wolf to give him its gold, and then gets the wolf off chasing its tail while the rabbit snickers and sneaks away.
But um, Tsar Boris III was that irl with regards to dealing with Hitler. Bulgaria effectively stayed totally independent of Nazi control during the whole course of the war, and then some. Like sure they had to play nice or probably face invasion like Yugoslavia did, but hey man, independence is like, all in the moves right? Right.
Bulgaria agreed to join the Axis, they helped invade Greece (and got a piece of Greece AND part of Yugoslavia in the deal), but then they did fuck all else. Why? Because for whatever reason, Boris III managed to charm the heck out of Hitler. This was very strongly the impression I got. Like in the sort of way Putin charms Trump, where one half is an oblivious easy mark, and the other side is man with moves and style who knows how to flatter a lady. So what kind of things did Boris get away with?
Well two biggies mostly.
One: Resisting Holocaust implementation like crazy, nevermind shipping the Jews off, this player managed to bullshit Hitler into believing that he was being creative in moving them around and so the Jews never even got properly ghettoized in the first place. And yes also the whole shipping them off thing never occurred, just plain never. Well…with a major exception I'll get to in a moment.
Two: These motherfuckers were a literal card carrying Axis member and somehow Boris sweet talked Hitler into accepting that Bulgaria didn't have to declare war on the USSR. Like, the whole huge overriding military purpose of the Axis and Nazidom. Goddamn.Now of course Bulgaria had major advantages to holding off Nazi pressure, mainly that they were the most geographically remote from Germany of all these places. As long as they talked the talk, and seemed loyal (and Boris kept talking with a husky but soothing voice over the phone to Hitler), then the basic German strategic comfort level was enough.
Even so! I recall reading excerpts of letters where the nearby German commanders complained to Hitler about the Bulgarians dragging their feet on shit, and Hitler just giggled and blushed thinking about that fine ass specimen of man down Balkan way.2. Uh so here's the thing. I already mentioned that in terms of the Holocaust the Bulgarians were damn near boy scouts. Yes they enacted the first stage of Nazi expectations, attacking and destroying all sorts of Jewish civil rights. But the second stage they comically fucked around on, and the third never happened..... within Bulgaria's original borders.
That's the catch. I mentioned how the Bulgarians received territory from Yugoslavia and Greece right? In those territories they seemed to deem these new Jews expendable sacrifices to appease the Hitler god, and they went the full awful way in deporting those Jews off to death. Additionally though I didn't get to look into it much, the treatment of Greeks in the Greek territory was apparently pretty brutal, bordering on genocidal, evidently the Bulgarians were wondering how long they might actually have Nazi backing in claiming that land and wanted to cleanse it of Greeks to make it more firmly Bulgarian. It didn't work out and that area went back to Greece, but still. Nasty behavior there. -
My brief survey of 30s-40s fascist movements around the world has lead me to conclude that you just simply couldn't be a far-right piece of shit without giving your followers a special color to wear.
Germany: The brownshirts, of course.
Italy: The classic blackshirts.
UK: Also blackshirts! Hurrah for them!
USA: Silvershirts. Also Ranger Smith cosplay.
Ireland: Blueshirts. Later greenshirts, of course.
Portugal: Blueshirts.
Canada: Blueshirts.
China: Also blueshirts! They were a more hard-right faction of the Kuomintang. Both the People's Republic and Taiwan pretend they never happened.
Mexico: Goldshirts, if you would believe it.
Brazil: Greenshirts. Quite a few of them joined up with the military junta.
South Africa: Greyshirts. Surprise surprise, they were Afrikaner nationalists.Trump's shirt thugs are of course the whiteshirts.
-
@Cyan:
Mexico: Goldshirts, if you would believe it.
wait… what?? that was just the Acapulco's outfit.
-
@Monkey:
HUNGARY:
1. Hungary began the war totally independent, ruled by a dictator named Miklos Horthy, who was technically a regent for a monarchy that had run off after WWI. They were right wing friendly to begin with (there had actually been a super short communist takeover of Hungary right after WWI so they were extra on edge about commies), so when Hitler was rising up Horthy was pretty friendly and chill about him. You got the feeling that Horthy thought of himself as a peer to Hitler he could make deals with like equal countries. Hungary was (groan) hungry for taking back lands it considered its own that they lost after WWI, kinda like Germany really. And Horthy and his dudes saw Hitler as a guy who could help this happened. And at first yeah, it was like that. But Hungary over the course of the war lost more and more independence. They increasingly were treated just like Slovakia, having the Nazis glare and make fists at them when they didn't walk the right line. And Horthy increasingly realized this, and he made a few acts of rebellion (firing more Nazi friendly Prime Ministers and stuff). But eventually the Nazis were making very vivid real threats, and Hungary was pretty cowed by the later parts of the war. Eventually when the Russians were approaching the Nazis decided they couldn't trust Horthy anymore and forced him to resign, then the Nazis installed a straight up fascist party into power (the Arrow Cross party) which made them pretty much a straight up puppet state. That didn't last long though because in came the Russians.2. Very interesting. Horthy was definitely an Anti-Semite. But in the style of not liking how the local Jews "controlled" so much, rather than wanting to murder them all. An asshole rather than an axe murderer. He was on board with the first types of repressions that Hitler wanted for Jews, but he was uncomfortable with the ghettoization. And then when the "ship them to us wink wink" stage came, Horthy refused to do it. Made lots of excuses and stuff. Again, open secret about the death camps. From some of the primary sources you can tell he was genuinely feeling guilty about the issue. But then he got kicked out, and the Arrow Cross fascists started shipping off the Jews. The Hungarian Jews survived a long time but in the end they were devastated all the same.
Something I've been meaning to ask you for a long time: have you read/found anything about the story of how the nazis managed to deal with Horthy? There's a commong story told in classrooms about them kidnapping his son and holding him hostage effectively forcing Horthy to do as he's told. I can't really say if it's true or not, it was just a random "fun-fact" during history class, and we didn't really give it a closer inspection.
Another thing you might know better than me (I'm kind of embarrassed, but whatever, at least I learn something) is if the friendship between Hungary and Poland stems from this era? We learnt in school that during the independent period, a lot of Polish Jews and other people fled to Hungary which refused to let the trains take them further away to death camps. Had anything happened before this that would make Hungary and Poland bff-s?
-
Something I've been meaning to ask you for a long time: have you read/found anything about the story of how the nazis managed to deal with Horthy? There's a commong story told in classrooms about them kidnapping his son and holding him hostage effectively forcing Horthy to do as he's told. I can't really say if it's true or not, it was just a random "fun-fact" during history class, and we didn't really give it a closer inspection.
Yes that did show up in my research, through good sources. Except that the thing the Nazis were trying to get out of him in that action was his stepping down from power, and making the handover to the fascist Arrow Cross look more "official".
Some real mafia shit on Hitler's part.Another thing you might know better than me (I'm kind of embarrassed, but whatever, at least I learn something) is if the friendship between Hungary and Poland stems from this era?
I think that's an earlier thing, much earlier. But I don't know much about it.
We learnt in school that during the independent period, a lot of Polish Jews and other people fled to Hungary which refused to let the trains take them further away to death camps.
Yes, lots of Jews were fleeing to Hungary because of the refusals. It was regarded as a relative safe haven compared to all the directly Nazi controlled territory around it, which makes it extra tragic how that safe haven suddenly completely collapsed later.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@Cyan:
My brief survey of 30s-40s fascist movements around the world has lead me to conclude that you just simply couldn't be a far-right piece of shit without giving your followers a special color to wear.
Germany: The brownshirts, of course.
Italy: The classic blackshirts.
UK: Also blackshirts! Hurrah for them!
USA: Silvershirts. Also Ranger Smith cosplay.
Ireland: Blueshirts. Later greenshirts, of course.
Portugal: Blueshirts.
Canada: Blueshirts.
China: Also blueshirts! They were a more hard-right faction of the Kuomintang. Both the People's Republic and Taiwan pretend they never happened.
Mexico: Goldshirts, if you would believe it.
Brazil: Greenshirts. Quite a few of them joined up with the military junta.
South Africa: Greyshirts. Surprise surprise, they were Afrikaner nationalists.Trump's shirt thugs are of course the whiteshirts.
I think the Romanian fascists (who were savage savage bastards, thank god they never truly got to control the country) wore greenshirts too.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
wait… what?? that was just the Acapulco's outfit.
What is an "Acapulco's outfit"?
-
@Monkey:
I think the Romanian fascists (who were savage savage bastards, thank god they never truly got to control the country) wore greenshirts too.
Codreanu was a crazy motherfucker, says a lot when Antonescu and Carol II both agree that you need to fucking die.
-
Is it moral to celebrate the Russian revolution (November) ?
-
Is it moral to celebrate the Russian revolution (November) ?
What is being celebrated about it?
-
If one means to remember it for what it brought upon the world and how it helped lead to the current state of affairs in some ways, then it's cool. Learning from history and all. But unless you're a die hard communist or a die hard anti-Tzarist Russia (there are so many people alive that some should be, for some reason), I don't really know what's the point of the celebration.
-
@Monkey:
What is being celebrated about it?
There is nothing left and it turned into a mess but is it moral to celebrate it even as a symbol ?
That's kind of the polemic historians and journalists have been discussing about the last months I think. I guess it's a historico-philosophical question…If one means to remember it for what it brought upon the world and how it helped lead to the current state of affairs in some ways, then it's cool. Learning from history and all. But unless you're a die hard communist or a die hard anti-Tzarist Russia (there are so many people alive that some should be, for some reason), I don't really know what's the point of the celebration.
But there are different kind of ways to read history. Some would say, "it only degenerated with Staline and Lenine was pure so we can celebrate the revolution". I don't think Lenine was pure, this is actually what the USSR tried to make people believe "now that Staline is dead we will denounce his crimes, but don't worry Lenine was great which makes the fondation of our system legit in the end".
And I don't know if learning from history is something to be celebrated. I'm more talking about actually celebrating the revolution anyhow. As a symbol ?? But can we celebrate it even as a symbol ? Because it never turned into anything good, unlike the French revolution for instance, we're the celbrating the 14th July as a symbol but pretty much nothing happened in 1789, it has only become better after.
"Is it moral to celebrate the bolschevick revolution ?" Pretty much means "can we isolate what happened this night only (or including the near future after the putsch) from the following decades?"
-
So, curiously enough, the recent One Piece chapter led me onto find something rather odd. The form Napoleon took as "Cognac", the curved sword with a notch in the back? Well, according to some sources, it is a Seax, like the kind found on the flag and coat of arms of Essex, for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essex#/media/File:Flag_of_Essex.svg
There's reports of Kings of Essex going into battle with a flag of three swords. But what is odd is that the Seax was usually more like a straight-edged knife. And doubly so considering the time of Essex as a kingdom, curved swords like the one on the flag was almost never seen. The closest thing you would find is a Falchion, but even then that is more of a cleaver then the almost scimitar-like sword we see on the flag.
So how was it that Essex, quite far from the Middle East and the Steppes, adopted a sword that I don't think was ever used, onto their flag? This is something that is pretty interesting to think about.
-
That's the flag for the county of Essex, which I'll guess was designed not too many centuries back based on older traditions ideas. And was not at all a flag flown by the Kingdom of Essex.
-
Not sure if this is the sort of thing this thread is normally used for, but I found this dude on the AskHistorians subreddit who has a lot of seemingly well-sourced (I say "seemingly" not to cast aspersions, just to qualify that I'm not really qualified to say with any certainty whether they are or aren't well-sourced) answers to a load of questions on the history of piracy. Since this is a forum based on a pirate manga I figured people here might find it interesting.
-
Know anyone charismatic ?
-
Maybe JFK. He was a charming guy, and if he hadn't been assassinated we would have seen just how good he was at using his charisma. But I know his memory is like worshipped.
-
Is there a map that shows the height of the Roman Empire on modern borders and/or all countries that were a part of it? Like, wiki has a map of it at it's zenith, but I'm not sure where it fully is, if that makes any sense.
-
Thoughts about this? And your own theories on what would have happened if JFK wasn't murdered?
-
@Johnny:
Is there a map that shows the height of the Roman Empire on modern borders and/or all countries that were a part of it? Like, wiki has a map of it at it's zenith, but I'm not sure where it fully is, if that makes any sense.
Late response, but if you ask specifics I could give answers.
-
Thoughts about this? And your own theories on what would have happened if JFK wasn't murdered?
Pretty much nothing that important. Kennedy was arguably less charismatic than Obama is. Ans he was more preoccupied about banging Hollywood celebrities than actually doing politics.
-
@Johnny:
Is there a map that shows the height of the Roman Empire on modern borders and/or all countries that were a part of it? Like, wiki has a map of it at it's zenith, but I'm not sure where it fully is, if that makes any sense.
Does this help
[hide] [/hide] -
Yes, it does, actually. :) Thank you.
-
Pretty much nothing that important. Kennedy was arguably less charismatic than Obama is. Ans he was more preoccupied about banging Hollywood celebrities than actually doing politics.
Oh, oki. So, it's actually true that he was banging Hollywood celebrities? Makes me wonder what his wife and the nation thought of that at the time.
Does this help
[hide] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EPtK7-jX4AA1U53.jpg[/hide]That's actually pretty cool. I enjoy maps and stuff, so it's just to see things like this.
-
Oh, oki. So, it's actually true that he was banging Hollywood celebrities? Makes me wonder what his wife and the nation thought of that at the time.
Well, let's see he's a white man in the 60's before the no justification divorce law came in the 80s so we, he could bang anyone he wanted and Jackie gotta stay quiet and the american men you go "Nice!" to any hetero sexual scandal of his.
On the Kennedy video, as an person that liked deeply of alt history as a young but hasn't dwelled into it's deep waters of it,the things I think you be different:
1)Civil rights movement, Kennedy don't appear to be the crude bully type Johnson was so the Civil Rights Law might be delayed as he said;
2)'Nam might have occurred in a different fashion.
3)A Kennedy endoserd Johnson would fit into America ideology by '68 (all innuendo is due) or Nixon grassroots movement since Goldwater would prevail? Would Bob Kennedy be a candidate, a start of a dynasty?
4)Would he have spent more funds int he Space Race if 'Nam was different? He was the man to say they would put a man on the moon by the end of the decade.
5)Stones Sympathy for the Devil would have different lyrics, which I don't like. -
Thoughts about this? And your own theories on what would have happened if JFK wasn't murdered?
I think most of it is pretty on point. I'm not a huge fan of what-if scenarios, because it's kind of pointless exercise, but I believe his death was ultimately beneficial for the US (at least short-term) when it comes to domestic policies, such as the civil rights movement. As has been mentioned, JFK would've been very unlikely to succeed the way LBJ did, and who knows if further delay wouldn't have greatly increased violence. I can't say much about JFK's foreign policies, so I don't really think I'd have much of an idea on how Vietnam would've panned out with him. I also think the US has lost its optimism with his death, and became a bit disillusioned with itself. It was quite a smack back to reality. I remember reading an article for a class claiming that reaility check is what ultimately led to conservatives rising again after, and then the absolute disaster that was the Reagan administration. Not sure I'd give the impact of his death that much credit, but it certainly did have a huge impact on US history.
-
Sorry for the late responses!
Well, let's see he's a white man in the 60's before the no justification divorce law came in the 80s so we, he could bang anyone he wanted and Jackie gotta stay quiet and the american men you go "Nice!" to any hetero sexual scandal of his.
Damn. I would think religious people during that time would care. Interesting.
On the Kennedy video, as an person that liked deeply of alt history as a young but hasn't dwelled into it's deep waters of it,the things I think you be different:
1)Civil rights movement, Kennedy don't appear to be the crude bully type Johnson was so the Civil Rights Law might be delayed as he said;Yeah, I see. I didn't know Johnson was really tough on it. It's pretty interesting how two people can do stuff differently.
2)'Nam might have occurred in a different fashion.
How so?
3)A Kennedy endoserd Johnson would fit into America ideology by '68 (all innuendo is due) or Nixon grassroots movement since Goldwater would prevail? Would Bob Kennedy be a candidate, a start of a dynasty?
Hmmm, interesting. Maybe. What do you mean that Goldwater would prevail?
4)Would he have spent more funds int he Space Race if 'Nam was different? He was the man to say they would put a man on the moon by the end of the decade.
I wonder. Maybe. Is Vietnam connected with the space race?
5)Stones Sympathy for the Devil would have different lyrics, which I don't like.
Ah, lool xD
@H.I.M.:
I think most of it is pretty on point. I'm not a huge fan of what-if scenarios, because it's kind of pointless exercise, but I believe his death was ultimately beneficial for the US (at least short-term) when it comes to domestic policies, such as the civil rights movement.
Yeah, that makes sense. I never knew his death could have had such an impact on policy changes in America. Wasn't his death to, as increases to the Secret Service?
As has been mentioned, JFK would've been very unlikely to succeed the way LBJ did, and who knows if further delay wouldn't have greatly increased violence.
Yeah, it probably would have, as compared to now with the Black Lives movement, a lot of people are pissed, and had enough bullshit. So, it probably would have happened, I think.
I can't say much about JFK's foreign policies, so I don't really think I'd have much of an idea on how Vietnam would've panned out with him. I also think the US has lost its optimism with his death, and became a bit disillusioned with itself. It was quite a smack back to reality.
Interesting way of putting it. I don't know much about Vietnam besides people protesting the draft heavily.
I remember reading an article for a class claiming that reaility check is what ultimately led to conservatives rising again after, and then the absolute disaster that was the Reagan administration. Not sure I'd give the impact of his death that much credit, but it certainly did have a huge impact on US history.
Yeah, it did. I wish I knew more what people liked about him during his presidency. I feel like his death made him more famous than compared to whatever he done when he was alive.
-
Johnson was also a southern democrat that could deal better with the southern democrats in the way of the Civil Rights Act.
Kennedy was a diplomatic type, he did wonders on the Cuban Missile crisis, he was pro deescalation of conflicts all the while Che was screaming at Fidel to nuke the capitalist pigs, so 4 more years of Kennedy might have changed how the 'Nam intervention took shape.
Without 'Nam maybe Nasa's budget could be higher, because US lost all the propaganda points to the Soviets in the space race, the only win was the moon landing. We can't say how a different scenario might've changed things.
On the Goldwater, no he would lose badly '64, the thing is Nixon picked the grassroots type of campaign and started his own election race in '64, that's 4 years preparing for the election. Kennedy's endorsement on Johnson would be enough? -
I just came across this documentary about the Marshall Islands and it definitely impressed me. It mainly focuses on its upcoming demise due to climate change while covering some history I had no idea of, definitely worth sharing.
-
Johnson was also a southern democrat that could deal better with the southern democrats in the way of the Civil Rights Act.
Yeah, that helped quite a lot it seems.
Kennedy was a diplomatic type, he did wonders on the Cuban Missile crisis, he was pro deescalation of conflicts all the while Che was screaming at Fidel to nuke the capitalist pigs, so 4 more years of Kennedy might have changed how the 'Nam intervention took shape.
Oh, I see. What was the Cuban Missile crisis about?
Without 'Nam maybe Nasa's budget could be higher, because US lost all the propaganda points to the Soviets in the space race, the only win was the moon landing. We can't say how a different scenario might've changed things.
Oooo, I didn't think about that. All the military budget from that war could have been put into NASA. It probably would be more space exploration from what you saying.
On the Goldwater, no he would lose badly '64, the thing is Nixon picked the grassroots type of campaign and started his own election race in '64, that's 4 years preparing for the election. Kennedy's endorsement on Johnson would be enough?
Oooo, I see I see. I think his endorsement would have been enough depending how well a job he had done if he had not died.
I just came across this documentary about the Marshall Islands and it definitely impressed me. It mainly focuses on its upcoming demise due to climate change while covering some history I had no idea of, definitely worth sharing.
Once I get a chance to watch this, I let you know my opinion about it. I don't anything about the Marshall Islands, so it be nice to learn about something new.
-
-
I wanna lock French and north-American historians in a room and see what we get.
-
Yeah, I never knew about the Tulsa Massacre or that June 19 was the end of slavery. I'm lucky I went to a northern school in IL where I was taught that the Civil War was about slavery compared to the south saying "states' rights". Though they never explained anything else like the Tulsa thing, etc. At least I didn't have that slave/slave owner assignment in school ><
Anyways, if anyone can link me resources where I can learn more about African American history and everything connected with slavery, well a starting point I can work from would be nice and very helpful! Thanks in advance! :happy:
-
@old_h:
well i did not know this very clearly either ! thanks for sharing . this made me realize that there are much about the country I have lived in for more than 30 years that I dont know !
Yeah! One channel I like that talks about history is called Origin of Everything on YouTube. She explains things well, and I learned a lot from the channel!
-
A small question: What would you have called someone from the Ottoman Empire? Like, someone from Austria would be Austrian, someone from France is French, etc. Ottomani? Ottomanish?
-
@Johnny:
A small question: What would you have called someone from the Ottoman Empire? Like, someone from Austria would be Austrian, someone from France is French, etc. Ottomani? Ottomanish?
Ottoman, as the denonym comes from Osman I that established the dynasty.
Although besides those of turkish ascendancy, they would probably add their ethnicity as in ottoman greek, ottoman jew, ottoman armenian, etc. -
Yeah, it was an empire, not a nation-state
-
Video showing footage on the early morning of 9/11. It is very interesting, for me it happened when I was in school and it was announced on the speaker. I was in 8th grade at the time. It was interesting to watch how a regular morning turned to disaster.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Man, this video made me cry... I never heard the actual recordings, but hearing people leave their last messages to their loved one is heartbreaking. I was in 8th grade when it happened, so I never knew how bad it actually. I just knew it happened.
-
https://understandingsociety.blogspot.com/2021/10/striving-for-consensus-in-nazi-germany.html
Interesting insight on Nazi Germany's consensus politics."Soft dictatorship" at home, with a willingness to compromise when public opinion appears to demand it, along with consistent planning and action in support of the underlying racist ideology – that is a very different understanding from the traditional view of Nazi dictatorship. And yet it is a worrisome illustration of the power that charismatic, malevolent leaders can exercise over a mass society.
-
So I saw an interesting video the other week about Queen Elizabeth and her bloodline, and it sent me down the rabbit hole.
Of course you'd imagine that if you scroll far back in time you'd see a few famous names tied to her. And while the history looks a little bit patchy in place, its clear that she has a really interesting degree of ancestry. Such as possible (can't stress this enough) links to Odin, The prophet Mohammed, Vlad the Impaler, William the Conqueror, King David and Genghis Khan.
That's such a flex.
-
I don't know with if of the interest of you northerners, but Raoul Peck's Exterminate All the Brutes is a FANTASTIC documentary of the crimes of colonialism.