|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 13, 2014 4:43:29 GMT
Not when your economy runs off of continuous war... Basically.  |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 13, 2014 4:53:48 GMT
lot of our idiosyncrasies can be laid at the feet of the Puritans. Economially, politically, domestically, sexually - it's pretty much going to take an Inception-style raid on the American collective unconscious to get rid of the Puritan inheritance. O.o |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 13, 2014 5:02:42 GMT
God that was depressing. But I think the main thing that explains it is that the people who most need to vote are being discouraged/inconvenienced at the local level. Those that were rallied either voted in referendum against the president or were disgusted by all party politics. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 13, 2014 5:17:42 GMT
A lot o f what I've been reading about women's suffrage in 1902 sheds weird light on current politics.The equal rights argument was thrown under the bus for a white supremacy argument just to win. Also Charlotte Perkins Gilman had some rad theories of Unnatural Selection that were the "Bible" at Vassar! |
|
|
|
Post by mrsbrisby on Nov 13, 2014 6:38:25 GMT
You have to remember that Britain and France were enemies for a LONG time. Dating back CENTURIES. The Revolutionary Wars, the American War of Independence. The Napoleonic Wars...the lists are almost endless. Yep. I've always thought that even modern Britain and France still had a frenemy style relationship-they're allies, but they still kinda mistrust one another-with history being a good reason. Also, there's no doubt that the Americans can thank this rivalry as a key contributor for their independence. No way France was helping the Americans out of pure kindness. And it's not just 100 Years War Stuff-it's actually more recent than that even-WWII-when the two were supposed to be allies. This doc is available on Netflix US, but don't know about availability otherwise-although this link works fine for me from Japan on PBS' website. It's about Operation Catapult, or the British attack on the French fleet before it fell under Nazi control. Most people don't know about this attack. www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/churchills-deadly-decision-watch-the-full-episode/620/Just watched this and it was very enlightening. I had never thought about the French navy and the threat it could have been to the British. Sherman was right, war is hell. |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Nov 13, 2014 7:19:56 GMT
Yep. I've always thought that even modern Britain and France still had a frenemy style relationship-they're allies, but they still kinda mistrust one another-with history being a good reason. Also, there's no doubt that the Americans can thank this rivalry as a key contributor for their independence. No way France was helping the Americans out of pure kindness. And it's not just 100 Years War Stuff-it's actually more recent than that even-WWII-when the two were supposed to be allies. This doc is available on Netflix US, but don't know about availability otherwise-although this link works fine for me from Japan on PBS' website. It's about Operation Catapult, or the British attack on the French fleet before it fell under Nazi control. Most people don't know about this attack. www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/churchills-deadly-decision-watch-the-full-episode/620/Just watched this and it was very enlightening. I had never thought about the French navy and the threat it could have been to the British. Sherman was right, war is hell. War is indeed hell, and the more I study history a question you must constantly ask yourself-when do you pursue peace at all costs (Chamberlain), and when do you refuse to stand idly by no more and act (Churchill). It's not an easy question, and there is no pat one-size-fits-all answer. I didn't know about this event above for years, and the Churchill Foundation was extremely defensive about the above video, but I didn't think it portrayed him negatively at all-if anything, it made me respect him more for how he handled having to decide between two horrible choices-it was a lose/lose. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 13, 2014 7:27:23 GMT
Just watched this and it was very enlightening. I had never thought about the French navy and the threat it could have been to the British. Sherman was right, war is hell. Now that I'm home I wanted to expand on what I've been saying about the suffragettes, because I *really* hope MM somehow touches on this. In the US there was a lot of racial tension over black men getting the franchise after the Civil War: now black MEN had the vote, and women still didn't have the vote at all! Furthermore, as the US acquired island possessions after the Spanish-American war, this raised the spectre of "savage" men getting the vote before any women. The 14th amendment enfranchising the "negro" specified "men" only whereas women had previously pinned their hopes on Constitutional language that had been very vague and generous in its description of equality and rights for all "citizens". Meanwhile the South was grumbling because they considered most newly enfranchised black voters illiterate and too under-educated to vote, and so they were being manipulated by the corrupt Reconstruction con-men. Meanwhile the North was buckling under a new wave of immigration (particularly Catholic Italians and Irish) who would also use their incoming male vote to undermine good Protestant ways. Sooo, at this point the Women's Suffrage Movement in the U.S. made their Deal with the Devil. They decided that their national organization would only focus on the right to vote and stay away from all other political matters, which they left to "State's rights" (sound familiar?). That meant they would no longer be putting women's right to vote in a larger political context like Universal Human Equality/Rights. This shift occurred in the 1890s. In 1902/1903, the real betrayal came. That's when the rhetoric went from "staying out of other politics" to "the argument for giving women the vote is to maintain white supremacy". I kid you not, this was the argument that eventually won women the right to vote in the U.S. Too many male people of color and "savages" were getting the right to vote: the votes of educated white women were needed to "save our civilization". Women were enfranchised as a sheer act of power politics, and women themselves were the ones playing this card. I'm very curious as to whether Dr. Ogden will encounter this race-driven logic among her largely white, highbrow "sisters". |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 13, 2014 7:34:22 GMT
Just watched this and it was very enlightening. I had never thought about the French navy and the threat it could have been to the British. Sherman was right, war is hell. War is indeed hell, and the more I study history a question you must constantly ask yourself-when do you pursue peace at all costs (Chamberlain), and when do you refuse to stand idly by no more and act (Churchill). It's not an easy question, and there is no pat one-size-fits-all answer. I didn't know about this event above for years, and the Churchill Foundation was extremely defensive about the above video, but I didn't think it portrayed him negatively at all-if anything, it made me respect him more for how he handled having to decide between two horrible choices-it was a lose/lose. I really wanted to go to this film documentary event about the personal factors that triggered WWI - which was FREE: www.edwardianpromenade.com/tv/bbc-productions-to-commemorate-wwi-shown-in-the-us/But, it started too early on Saturday and I overslept.  |
|
|
|
Post by bookworm1225 on Nov 13, 2014 17:46:23 GMT
I have to watch it again, but perhaps his voice was pitched differently (from holding back laughing). Doesn't he normally have to change his voice (pitched lower) to play William? That, or he was trying not to laugh too much as he said it.  Late to this, I know, but having finally seen the episode, I'd say his voice was like that because the improvised circumscope was heavy, and he was straining to get it up. ... There's no way to word that without sounding dirty, is there? |
|
|
|
Post by Hodge on Nov 13, 2014 17:57:30 GMT
That, or he was trying not to laugh too much as he said it. Late to this, I know, but having finally seen the episode, I'd say his voice was like that because the improvised circumscope was heavy, and he was straining to get it up. ... There's no way to word that without sounding dirty, is there? Nope.  I took it that he was straining to get it up. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 13, 2014 18:36:54 GMT
Late to this, I know, but having finally seen the episode, I'd say his voice was like that because the improvised circumscope was heavy, and he was straining to get it up. ... There's no way to word that without sounding dirty, is there? Nope. I took it that he was straining to get it up. On re-viewing, I thought it sounded fine. Perhaps the problem for CC is that the lines were short and not delivered as "over-precisely" as they often deliver their lines (to sound Victorian). |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 13, 2014 18:47:58 GMT
That, or he was trying not to laugh too much as he said it. Late to this, I know, but having finally seen the episode, I'd say his voice was like that because the improvised circumscope was heavy, and he was straining to get it up. ... There's no way to word that without sounding dirty, is there? It's just too long to spell - I vote to replace it with "thingy", which sounds just as dirty.   |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 13, 2014 18:48:53 GMT
Late to this, I know, but having finally seen the episode, I'd say his voice was like that because the improvised circumscope was heavy, and he was straining to get it up. ... There's no way to word that without sounding dirty, is there? Nope. I took it that he was straining to get it up. OMG I just noticed the double entendre in that. BAD TALBOTRAIL!!! |
|
|
|
Post by monty151 on Nov 13, 2014 19:04:43 GMT
War is indeed hell, and the more I study history a question you must constantly ask yourself-when do you pursue peace at all costs (Chamberlain), and when do you refuse to stand idly by no more and act (Churchill). It's not an easy question, and there is no pat one-size-fits-all answer. I didn't know about this event above for years, and the Churchill Foundation was extremely defensive about the above video, but I didn't think it portrayed him negatively at all-if anything, it made me respect him more for how he handled having to decide between two horrible choices-it was a lose/lose. I really wanted to go to this film documentary event about the personal factors that triggered WWI - which was FREE: www.edwardianpromenade.com/tv/bbc-productions-to-commemorate-wwi-shown-in-the-us/But, it started too early on Saturday and I overslept. |
|
|
|
Post by monty151 on Nov 13, 2014 19:17:17 GMT
I would recommend a 3 part drama called 37 days. It was shown earlier in the year on BBC so might be shown on BBC America. It tells the story from the archduke being shot to Britain declaring war on Germany. Its about alliances in Europe, Germany defends Austria, Britain defends France.
As you may know the Act of succession was changed so that Kate and Wills first birth became king or queen so that a girl born first wouldn't be trumped by a first born boy. If the act of succession had been changed in Queen Victoria's time there would not have been a WW1 as Kaiser Willem would have also been king as his mother was Victoria's first born.
|
|
I took it that he was straining to get it up.
Jan 30, 2013 21:44:55 GMT
Jan 30, 2013 21:44:55 GMT