|
mlmp08 posted:I was in a unit that gave NCOs Union Cavalry sabers and a stand as their going away gift. Had exactly one NCO ask for the confederate equivalent. Of course the answer was “hell no.” Should have given that one a negative counseling statement as a going away gift.
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I was in a unit that gave NCOs Union Cavalry sabers and a stand as their going away gift. Had exactly one NCO ask for the confederate equivalent. Of course the answer was “hell no.” Kind of a missed opportunity there. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 23:32
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I was in a unit that gave NCOs Union Cavalry sabers and a stand as their going away gift. Had exactly one NCO ask for the confederate equivalent. Of course the answer was “hell no.” If we get you a confederate sword, you're only going to try and give it away.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 01:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/usmc4ever/status/1270823173316100099
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 05:03
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Kind of a missed opportunity there. I'll never get tired of this joke.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 06:06
|
|
|
Big part of the history class in rangers and sf(i think) draws lineage to confederate john mosby, mainly because they were the only ones calling themselves rangers and doing lightning raids on supply lines back then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 07:34
|
|
|
That's pretty lovely, since Rangers go back to well before the American Revolution.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
Yeah, I was always told Rogers Rangers was the historical ancestor of the 75th
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 17:25
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
UP THE BUM NO BABY posted:Yeah, I was always told Rogers Rangers was the historical ancestor of the 75th Same here. I think it was in the first few pages of the Ranger Handbook along with the original creed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2020 14:45
|
|
|
blursed content https://twitter.com/bobo_circus/status/1271568669320130560
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 01:18
|
|
|
UP THE BUM NO BABY posted:Yeah, I was always told Rogers Rangers was the historical ancestor of the 75th Yeah same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 01:53
|
|
|
Godholio posted:That's pretty lovely, since Rangers go back to well before the American Revolution. Yeah, they trace it back to frontiersmen patrolling between trading posts and the French and Indian war with Roger's Rangers, but bring up any raiding group as ancestors to the modern regiment (francis marion "the swamp fox" in the revolutionary war etc), and of course all the modern patches and DUI are related to the Rangers in europe and merrill's marauders in SE Asia. There were some rangers on the union side, but they barely get any mention in the Ranger history they teach in RIP/RASP. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...PS7LhiBjMB37Wr6
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 03:13
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZfcc21c6Uo
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 12:10
|
|
|
Slim Pickens posted:Yeah, they trace it back to frontiersmen patrolling between trading posts and the French and Indian war with Roger's Rangers, but bring up any raiding group as ancestors to the modern regiment (francis marion "the swamp fox" in the revolutionary war etc), and of course all the modern patches and DUI are related to the Rangers in europe and merrill's marauders in SE Asia. There were some rangers on the union side, but they barely get any mention in the Ranger history they teach in RIP/RASP. Fort Benning is in the middle of hick territory, checks out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 18:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
That's a wonderful book
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 19:44
|
|
|
VVG hates it lmao
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 22:47
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:VVG hates it lmao Cause the Civil War chapter is practically Confederate apologism claiming the real cause of the war was conspiracy by Northern industrialists or some poo poo. Can't speak for the rest of the book but when it comes to the Civil War it's really bad analysis. Like you wouldn't think someone writing a left-wing history of the United States would find a way to deny slavery being the cause of the Civil War but somehow he managed it. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Jun 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 23:08
|
|
|
Yeah, read Battle Cry of Freedom instead if you want a good Civil War history. McPherson doesn't hold back in saying why the South seceded and why they were so loving stupid for doing so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 23:38
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Cause the Civil War chapter is practically Confederate apologism claiming the real cause of the war was conspiracy by Northern industrialists or some poo poo. Can't speak for the rest of the book but when it comes to the Civil War it's really bad analysis. The bad rap the book gets comes from the above and also from the traditional historian/academic crowd based in no small part to how Zinn frames a lot of his "proof" around second hand sources and selectively ignoring the portions of documents and studies he cites that contradict his claims. It's in the same category as Gun Germs and Steel, an engaging and interesting non-fiction novel that can be the gateway to people educating themselves but usually just becomes "oh well you need to read People's History, it'll open your eyes" and never discussed beyond that. In a better world people would read it, accept it for what it is flaws and all, and go on to read more in depth from better sources. There must be phenomenally good leftist/socialist historians who do a better job of keeping their personal feelings out of the historical narratives they construct. pentyne fucked around with this message at 23:59 on Jun 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 23:56
|
|
|
Is there a better recommended US history from the standpoint of the people?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 00:06
|
|
|
stealie72 posted:Is there a better recommended US history from the standpoint of the people? Seconding this. I'd love to read it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 00:22
|
|
|
I've not read it yet but I've had Jill Lepore's These Truths recommended to me by a few historians that I trust to not recommend me poo poo. Like Pentyne said, Zinn is a good gateway for many people and I'm not gonna tell people not to read his book. I'm just going to heavily recommend that you keep reading beyond it and realize that it was published 40 years ago and has it's fair share of flaws.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 01:06
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Cause the Civil War chapter is practically Confederate apologism claiming the real cause of the war was conspiracy by Northern industrialists or some poo poo. Can't speak for the rest of the book but when it comes to the Civil War it's really bad analysis. That's because he's intentionally trying to be class reductionist. If all the evils and problems of history and contemporary life can be reduced to class and economics devoid of other social and political identity, it makes for a cleaner narrative and more efficient means of galvanizing people behind a single ideology and political project. People who subscribe to this and other opposition to so-called identity politics view any problems or grievances not grounded in class as at best a distraction from real politics and issues, if not an intentional distraction or attempt to destroy solidarity. They're worried that any emphasis on racism, homophobia, transphobia, or other forms of bigotry will alienate the white working class and thereby prevent any progress on economic justice, even if those issues are intrinsically linked.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 01:10
|
|
|
Toshokan posted:That's because he's intentionally trying to be class reductionist. And in the case of the Civil War, that's going to lead to create an utterly false narrative which, if you're trying to write a "people's history" (or any kind of history) is something you should avoid at all costs if you want to be taken seriously or at least not shouted at. I know what he was trying to do. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Jun 14, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 02:45
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:And in the case of the Civil War, that's going to lead to create an utterly false narrative which, if you're trying to write a "people's history" (or any kind of history) is something you should avoid at all costs if you want to be taken seriously or at least not shouted at. The saga of the state of American History in terms of academic and publishing, commonly accepted "truths" was a largely dominate Southern apologia from the moment war ended until the 1970s when you finally had a wave of non-southern scholars rise up and call out the bullshit. Blassingame was a major step forward in finally forcing white academia to admit the horrors of slavery after someone finally (shockingly, it was a black man) just went ahead and collected actual authenticated testimonies of slaves and slave descendants that working plantations weren't some kind and generous system with a few "bad apples" but a brutal and oppressive regime of wanton abuse, rape, murder against what was legally deemed "property" at the time. Zinn being a product of his time, coming up in the 50s/60s when all the serious discourse on the South was apologia would be understandable but framing it as the results of rich Northerners meddling is pretty egregious when Zinn was a massive Civil rights activist and somehow didn't make the mental connection that rich vs. poor was not what made the Civil War happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 03:05
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/sarayasin/status/1271908825466011656?s=20
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 04:43
|
|
|
What's this in reference to?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 05:05
|
|
|
The iranian parliament
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 05:16
|
|
|
Bored As gently caress posted:What's this in reference to? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGdGFtwCNBE 'Bout 25 seconds in
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 05:41
|
|
|
Beepity Boop posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGdGFtwCNBE Lmao that's amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 06:05
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:I've not read it yet but I've had Jill Lepore's These Truths recommended to me by a few historians that I trust to not recommend me poo poo. The first 20 pages or so of her placing american history in a global context were done really well so I have hope for the rest of it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 18:56
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 20:13
|
|
|
Toshokan posted:That's because he's intentionally trying to be class reductionist. If all the evils and problems of history and contemporary life can be reduced to class and economics devoid of other social and political identity, it makes for a cleaner narrative and more efficient means of galvanizing people behind a single ideology and political project. Haven't read the book, but I don't really understand the link between this rebuttal and the assertion that the Civil War wasn't about slavery ? Like, you can absolutely make the case that the Civil War was about economics and class : namely, the economic privileges of a handful of rich landed fucks enforcing permanent underclasses to maintain their deathgrip on society - over blacks through slavery, over poor whites by distracting them with the many evils of The Negro which only said rich landed fucks could preserve shitkickers from (and/or reassuring them that, shitkickers though they may be, at least they weren't Negroes or slaves, so shut the gently caress up or they'll horsewhip you). Preserving slavery at all costs was (also) about economics, both in the sense of trying to preserve the economic system of the South as is for as long as possible ; and fear of having to share some of the economy with heretofore underlings. The reason the Old South was so adamant that new States be allowed in two-by-two exclusively was all about preserving their own status quo. They didn't give a poo poo about the black people of Texas or North Dakota or wherever not being slaves ; but didn't want to be forced to free their own and have to, like, pay for labour or providing semi-decent work conditions and poo poo in their own states. My point is : you don't have to invent a Northern conspiracy to make a Marxist case against the South. I mean poo poo, Marx & Lenin both used *slavery itself* to make a case for proletarian revolt. Surely it can be worked backwards  .
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
W. E. B. Du Bois did a wonderful job of explaining the class differences of the South in Black Reconstruction in America, and I had gone from that to Zinn.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 01:04
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 15:42
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 17:10
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/tomkludt/status/1273051003881996288?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 01:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
I hope tim pool breaks his neck trying to suck his own dick for his poscast audience.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 01:52
|
|
