I was reading up on the 1968 election on Wikipedia, and there was a line about how George Wallace (segregationist and leader of the American Independance Party) considered selecting Colonel Sanders as his running mate.

Did this come close to happening? Anything you'd like to share about this footnote in history would be wonderful.

I'm writing my history coursework and I'm trying to make am point that I'm not sure I'm correct about. I assumed that a paid worker would work harder than a slave but I can't find any sources related to this. If someone could tell me if I'm right or wrong or link some sources it would be greatly appreciated

He was killed just a little over a week after killing President Lincoln. I also don't want to single out JWB. How would anyone get caught in a crime in the 1800's and before? No internet, no wire, no photography, no video, no way for anyone outside of a certain mile radius to know who you were. Couldn't have JWB simply have gotten away 50 or so miles and use a new alias and no one will have ever known a difference?

[deleted]

I wondering what are some r/askhistorians ‘ thoughts on themes (and fallacies) in history. I want to be better at sorting through some of the biases (and BS) that so often becomes part of “the narrative” ... Im looking for things akin to “the great man theory/ fallacy” or “the peaceful & noble Native/savage (American Indian) fallacy”

What are some other historiography things to be aware of as I read more histories

I've recently become interested in the history of Liberia and noticed some comparisons to the history of Israel.

In the 19th century, writers such as Theodor Herzl and Yehuda Bibas wrote about creating in a Jewish homeland in what was then Palestine. During the same century, Charles Fenton Mercer and Jehudi Ashmun wrote about creating a country in Africa for freed American slaves.

The Jewish Zionists believed that Jews would always be treated as second class citizens in Europe and North America and subjected to discrimination. The African Zionists believed that African-Americans would always be treated as second class citizens and subjected to discrimination. Herzl and Bibas proposed creating a country governed by Jews in their ancestral homeland. Mercer and Ashmun proposed creating a country governed by Africans in their ancestral homeland.

In the mid-19th century, Liberia, the Republic of Maryland (which would later join Liberia), and Sierra Leone were established. Freed slaves from the United States, Great Britain, and Canada formed their own governments and sovereign states which still exist today. When slavery was abolished, wealthy Christians paid for African-Americans who had experienced unimaginable horrors to travel to Africa and live in a country created by their own people for their own people.

Israel wasn't created until 1948. However, it did finally fulfill the dreams of creating a Jewish state in the Holy Land. When the Holocaust ended, people and institutions paid for Jews who had experienced unimaginable horrors to live in a country created by their own people for their own people.

I'm fascinated by how Liberia and Israel emerged very similarly. I'm also interested in where they went differently. Israel has become a major influence in geopolitics and is seen as a possible place to live and work for millions of Jews and non-Jews around the world. Many Jews take great pride in Israel and travel there, move there, or request to be buried there. Liberia does not seem to be that influential in geopolitics. I haven't met any African-Americans taking pride in Liberia, traveling there, moving there, or requesting to be buried there.

The reasons I've tried considering for this divergence can be easily debunked. 1. Maybe western Africa is too politically unstable? So is the Middle East. 2. Maybe freed slaves couldn't afford to travel to Africa? Holocaust survivors couldn't afford to travel to Israel.

I'd really like to know more about how these two countries are both similar and different in their development and global perception.

[deleted]

Any facts/figures would be nice! Also interested to know whether social policy could be said to be 'Communist' in terms of the economy (workers rights, education etc) and whether the economy stayed Communist throughout WW2, Cold War. Thanks!

I'm writing a paper comparing Hernan Cortes' and Pizzaro's leadership tactics. I have a few sources but I need to find more of them based on Pizzaro. Feel free to tell the narrative as well. I love this topic. Thanks.

So many victorian novels feature a "Jeeves" character - an obliging, unobtrusive servant who lives to ease his master's life. Who were these guys? How did they end up in these positions? How did they feel about essentially devoting their lives to the comfort of another person? What were their lives like?

Why was there two attempts by Canada to try and annex Turks and Caicos?

According to Wikipedia "In 1917, Canadian Prime Minister Robert Borden suggested that the Turks and Caicos join Canada, but this suggestion was rejected by British Prime Minister David Lloyd George."

And "In 1974, Canadian New Democratic Party MP Max Saltsman tried to use his Private Member's Bill for legislation to annex the islands to Canada, but it did not pass in the Canadian House of Common".

Why do so many people talk about the Holocaust, and so few about the Cambodian, Armenian genocides and the purges in Communist China and the USSR? If you think about it, the Holocaust was motivated by paranoia of a Jewish conspiracy, while the Cambodian genocide was an attempt to kill anyone who would oppose the brainwashing of children into child soldiers. Is it just because of the constant noise of Holocaust deniers, or is it just because the Holocaust was the one with the most Western involvement?

Given the vast distance between them, was it even possible for the Germans and Japanese to communicate? Did they need to at all?

I suppose what actually preoccupies me about this is a kind of evolutionary biology thing - everything I thought I knew about modern dentistry suggests you'll be in incredible pain and they'll all fall out very quickly if you don't brush them, but surely most humans outlive their teeth by some distance in those circumstances. How did people manage, and what were the sociocultural consequences of people becoming toothless in their prime (if that happened)?

What I mean is, say two gentlemen were duelling over a woman. If they were to duel with swords, then the man with the greatest skill would win and so would be the rightful winner of the lady.

However, duelling with pistols doesn't seem to have this same test of skill and so seems rather more a game of luck to see who survives. How would it be a true test of who was the best man?

Specifically curious around 790 CE, but any timeframe would be a good answer

I'm looking to find some books on American and European history written in the 1800s, but I'm struggling to find search terms to find relevant results. Any suggestions? I'm sure I'll be modifying these parameters so a general solution would be appreciated.