historical discussion

Read any good books lately?
seymore
Poster
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:02 pm

historical discussion

Post by seymore » Sat Dec 12, 2009 3:40 pm

For those who seek a differing slant on the basic American History ( being a Yank I grew up with it) I found the book:Lies My Teacher Told Me, by James W. Loewen. to be worth the time to read. It sort of shed light on some of the more confusing parts of growing up as a "crazy Yank"
If there is a God how could he/she/it be created out of nothing?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23835
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: historical discussion

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Dec 12, 2009 3:44 pm

seymore wrote:For those who seek a differing slant on the basic American History ( being a Yank I grew up with it) I found the book:Lies My Teacher Told Me, by James W. Loewen. to be worth the time to read. It sort of shed light on some of the more confusing parts of growing up as a "crazy Yank"
I like to ask a question when someone recommends a book.

What do you NOT like about it?
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

seymore
Poster
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:02 pm

Re: historical discussion

Post by seymore » Sat Dec 12, 2009 9:35 pm

The author comes on a a bit dogmatic and I don't have the resources ( or inclination perhaps) to check out his sources. On the other hand, the things that he asserts as true do clarify later events.
If there is a God how could he/she/it be created out of nothing?

User avatar
Hotair101
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 1:34 pm
Custom Title: Newton got it wrong.
Location: Essex, England.

Re: historical discussion

Post by Hotair101 » Sun Dec 13, 2009 1:47 pm

seymore wrote:For those who seek a differing slant on the basic American History ( being a Yank I grew up with it) I found the book:Lies My Teacher Told Me, by James W. Loewen. to be worth the time to read. It sort of shed light on some of the more confusing parts of growing up as a "crazy Yank"
Can you give any examples of some of the confusing parts it cleared up?
Be an Independent Thinker, not a Critical Stinker
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."........Aristotle.

seymore
Poster
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:02 pm

Re: historical discussion

Post by seymore » Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:32 pm

A quick one just off of the top of my head was our involvement in Viet Nam and why the US which supposedly had been anti colonial in the past was the great enabler to the French in 1945 to restablish their regime there . This lead in time to our own involvement there as well. ( Can anyone say "domino theory" and maintain credibility?) The upshot of the issue was that Ho Chi Minh was a communist because they were the only political party in France that was against colonialism. He approached Wilson at the end of WW1 for help getting the French to leave his homeland. His being a communist put him on the bad side of Woodrow Wilson who was anti-communist, pro-colonialism ( how else to teach the world how to have democratic traditions) and very racist.
If there is a God how could he/she/it be created out of nothing?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11251
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: historical discussion

Post by landrew » Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:58 pm

Side notes here, but Vietnam is one of those pockets on the planet who's people have never truly been conquered. I believe they have resisted many invaders over the centuries, using the type of jungle guerrilla warfare seen in the American experience. I believe the Chinese Empire tried to raid Vietnam in the 13th century for it's forests for wood with which to build it's navy, but never succeeded.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Hotair101
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 1:34 pm
Custom Title: Newton got it wrong.
Location: Essex, England.

Re: historical discussion

Post by Hotair101 » Mon Dec 14, 2009 10:50 pm

seymore wrote:A quick one just off of the top of my head was our involvement in Viet Nam and why the US which supposedly had been anti colonial in the past was the great enabler to the French in 1945 to restablish their regime there . This lead in time to our own involvement there as well. ( Can anyone say "domino theory" and maintain credibility?) The upshot of the issue was that Ho Chi Minh was a communist because they were the only political party in France that was against colonialism. He approached Wilson at the end of WW1 for help getting the French to leave his homeland. His being a communist put him on the bad side of Woodrow Wilson who was anti-communist, pro-colonialism ( how else to teach the world how to have democratic traditions) and very racist.
Did they give any examples of Wilson's racism? (Didn't call a black man black by any chance?......Forget that, wrong thread.) I'm not too up on the Viet Nam war other than the average age of the American soldiers was nineteen, they lost the war and got a bad reception when they got home.
Be an Independent Thinker, not a Critical Stinker
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."........Aristotle.

User avatar
Hotair101
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1159
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 1:34 pm
Custom Title: Newton got it wrong.
Location: Essex, England.

Re: historical discussion

Post by Hotair101 » Mon Dec 14, 2009 10:51 pm

landrew wrote:Side notes here, but Vietnam is one of those pockets on the planet who's people have never truly been conquered. I believe they have resisted many invaders over the centuries, using the type of jungle guerrilla warfare seen in the American experience. I believe the Chinese Empire tried to raid Vietnam in the 13th century for it's forests for wood with which to build it's navy, but never succeeded.
Resilient people, huh. I feel I need all my resilience sometimes, lol.
Be an Independent Thinker, not a Critical Stinker
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."........Aristotle.

User avatar
bigtim
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4088
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:04 pm
Custom Title: Skeptical Berserker
Location: Miðgarðr

Re: historical discussion

Post by bigtim » Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:15 am

landrew wrote:Side notes here, but Vietnam is one of those pockets on the planet who's people have never truly been conquered. I believe they have resisted many invaders over the centuries, using the type of jungle guerrilla warfare seen in the American experience. I believe the Chinese Empire tried to raid Vietnam in the 13th century for it's forests for wood with which to build it's navy, but never succeeded.
Umm... yeah, they have.
During 200BC to nearly 1000AD China ruled them. And if you look in detailed history of the region you'll see pockets of it occuring over time.

Vietnam has a very rich history and some of the oldest (if memory serves) archaeological findings we have.
~
BigTim
"I'm not entirely convinced that ValHalla isn't real."

Tom Palven
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6251
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: historical discussion

Post by Tom Palven » Tue Dec 15, 2009 10:58 am

Seymore wrote: " A quick one just off of the top of my head was our involvement in Viet Nam and why the US which supposedly had been anti colonial in the past was the great enabler to the French in 1945 to restablish their regime there."

Contrary to what we were taught in school, I would question whether the US was ever anti-colonial or anti-imperialist. As early as 1812 it played the European imperialist game and invaded Canda while the British were tied up fighting France, and was defeated at Crysler Farm, "the battle that saved Canada". Later there was the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War, and so on. The CIA helped the Belgians murder the elected president Patrice Lamumba in Congo, and has cosistently sided with colonial powers. Today it is the enabler of royal caste systems in the kingdoms of Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Kuwait, and Jordan.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire
I may not agree with the what you say, but I will defend your right to say it. --Voltaire
Mankind will not be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. --Denis Diderot
I haven't abandoned my vices. My vices have abandoned me. --Denis Diderot

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23835
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: historical discussion

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:48 am

Tom-Palven wrote:Seymore wrote: " A quick one just off of the top of my head was our involvement in Viet Nam and why the US which supposedly had been anti colonial in the past was the great enabler to the French in 1945 to restablish their regime there."

Contrary to what we were taught in school, I would question whether the US was ever anti-colonial or anti-imperialist. As early as 1812 it played the European imperialist game and invaded Canda while the British were tied up fighting France, and was defeated at Crysler Farm, "the battle that saved Canada". Later there was the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War, and so on. The CIA helped the Belgians murder the elected president Patrice Lamumba in Congo, and has cosistently sided with colonial powers. Today it is the enabler of royal caste systems in the kingdoms of Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Kuwait, and Jordan.
We would have to assume a black-or-white situation in saying the US was either pro- or anti-colonial. After studying the US "imperial" policies when T.R. was in public office I came to the estimation of "somewhat, but not very by European scales." The total US colonial holdings in 1900 were somewhat smaller than the personal property the crown family of Belgium could claim before WWII.

You can't talk about any historical process in isolation, because events are driven by more than one cause in nearly every case you can bring up.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

Tom Palven
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6251
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: historical discussion

Post by Tom Palven » Wed Dec 16, 2009 9:05 am

Talk about driving forces. These sentences, which seem to describe the Limbaugh-Hannity crowd pretty well, are from Lawrence Vance in today's LewRockewell forum:

"The very heart and soul of conservatism is war. Patriotism, Americanism, and being a real conservative are now equated with support for war, torture, and militarism.
It doesn’t seem to matter where U.S. troops go, why they go, how long they stay, how much it costs to keep them there, how many foreigners die at their hands, and what they do when they are there – stanch support for the military is inherent in any conservative platform, secular or religious."
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire
I may not agree with the what you say, but I will defend your right to say it. --Voltaire
Mankind will not be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. --Denis Diderot
I haven't abandoned my vices. My vices have abandoned me. --Denis Diderot

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23835
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: historical discussion

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Wed Dec 16, 2009 10:43 am

Tom-Palven wrote:Talk about driving forces. These sentences, which seem to describe the Limbaugh-Hannity crowd pretty well, are from Lawrence Vance in today's LewRockewell forum:

"The very heart and soul of conservatism is war. Patriotism, Americanism, and being a real conservative are now equated with support for war, torture, and militarism.
It doesn’t seem to matter where U.S. troops go, why they go, how long they stay, how much it costs to keep them there, how many foreigners die at their hands, and what they do when they are there – stanch support for the military is inherent in any conservative platform, secular or religious."
I notice that they are acknowledging that they can't continue to go with the straight religious line any more. Just a few years ago that might have been " stanch support for the military is inherent in any conservative, with God on our side." :twisted:
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

Tom Palven
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6251
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: historical discussion

Post by Tom Palven » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:34 am

I think that he was referring to a belief that Christians are peace-loving, The Prince of Peace, and all that baloney, because he went on with:

Support for the military among conservative Christians is just as bad – and perhaps even worse. Many Christians have a military fetish. Support for the military has been elevated to an article of faith by many evangelicals.

And, of course he's right, as was Mark Twain with his War Prayer. Down here there are lots of Baptist churches that have war memorials in front of them, and military cemeteries associated with them, and the Christians love to celebrate glorious military funerals which are reported in the news as "supporting those who sacrificed so much for us."
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire
I may not agree with the what you say, but I will defend your right to say it. --Voltaire
Mankind will not be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. --Denis Diderot
I haven't abandoned my vices. My vices have abandoned me. --Denis Diderot

seymore
Poster
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:02 pm

Re: historical discussion

Post by seymore » Thu Dec 17, 2009 11:40 pm

As a casual observer of the American scene , it would seem that the right wing favors more military as it keeps us "safe" from those who would take our stuff. Never mind that much of the world has their own stuff that is about the same as ours. We must fear them, the internationalists, communists , the yellow peril or what ever.
By extention we also must be in thick with the man upstairs or we lose it all( try reading the 28 chapter of Dueteronomy). Give it a shot, it is all black and white. no shades of grey, this also allows them to reduce much of life to the same level, This is wether it is homosexuality, sex out of marriage, killing or being an athiest or any other hot button issue. We must live in fear, and so we need the police/military/ God to tuck us in at night ( but never the UN).
If there is a God how could he/she/it be created out of nothing?