This is something I've been wondering for a long time. Was their ultimate goal to become an independent state, or were they just fighting for states' rights and willing to rejoin the Union? It always struck me as strange that they would want independence, because most other Civil Wars are waged because people want a change in government. Could the Civil War have ended in a different way?

Did the germans tilt forward and charge into people with their spikey helmets?

[deleted]

As far as I know, taxes have been part of life for as long as civilization existed. Although I know there have been different kinds of taxes for different products and tariffs for trade, I always thought that income tax was the "core" tax that most governing bodies used to collect revenue. I just recently found out that even in the United States income tax is a relatively recent thing, so my question is who is the first person/people to implement the income tax, where and when was it implemented, and how did the populace reacted to it?

All the records agree that during the Great Rising, people got together and burned John of Gaunt's home in London, but they strictly didn't steal anything, but threw all the wealth they could find into fire or the river. Why him? Why his place? None of the chronicles seem to understand it any better.

People who may have been babies during the Civil War, maybe?

I've always wondered if after they defeated Germany they were just like "Ok thanks America, now go deal with Japan".

(I posted this in r/history, but the bot sent me here.)

Speaking from a completely detached standpoint, how would you regard Hitler as a historical leader?

The reason I ask is because I've noticed a growing trend among edgelords recently, saying things like, "Besides the atrocities, Hitler was actually a great leader," with very little evidence to support them. To me this comes off as the new equivalent of when people used to say, "Ya' know, communism would have worked if Stalin hadn't messed it up in the beginning."

Basically, I view this notion as people trying to go against the grain just for the sake of going against the grain, and trying to exaggerate their own intelligence by holding unconventional opinions.

So I'm looking for some feedback from people who actually have a clue as to what they are talking about. Was Hitler a good leader?

(I trust that being Historians you already have your own criteria determined for what "a good leader" is, but if you want me to elaborate on my definition feel free to ask.)

I know there has been mutinies, but most of the time, conscripts were pretty much loyal to their superiors. Considering the horrible conditions of war and extreme likelihood of death or permanent injury, how didn't people uprise against their states in mass numbers to end this war about dying nothing? What would they even be able to do if your whole army turns against you? At least WW2 had a lot of ideological doctrination and brainwashing, but nationalism in WW1 can't be that strong. Also WW2 warfare was not "certain death" like trench warfare of WW1, you could always survive if you were a good soldier and lucky. But I can't wrap my head around the psychology and mentality of a WW1 soldier.

Was this merely a case of Germans liking Kennedy and disliking Reagan personally? Or had attitudes toward America and American presidents (and presence in Berlin) shifted? Was it a generational shift?

We're there any openly atheist monarchs in Europe? Also, when did western nations begin to accept atheism into everyday society.

I'd ask that posters be careful of the 20 year rule please. :)

(Although sometimes I feel 2035 can't come soon enough!)

Hey All, I know that the US (and Allies?) were able to break a number of codes that really helped swing the Pacific War in their favor. What I am wondering is how messages were actually sent. From what I understand of it, the US sent most messages using Morse code so that each letter was encoded as a series of pulses. Did the Japanese have their own system like Morse to encode Japanese characters? I did some digging and came up with the "Purple" machine which sounds like it used a variant of the Roman alphabet and I guess was transmitted in Morse, but the article also seems to imply it was not the only machine used to encrypt messages. If they used a code different from Morse, was it publicly known or did the cryptographers have to "break" it as well? I have a very basic understanding of both the Japanese language/writing system and cryptography, so my apologies if my assumptions are incorrect.

I'm writing a research paper on the History of Gender and Gender identity. I have found some great sources for "Two-Spirits" in Native American culture but aside from that I'm having trouble locating primary sources from any other society or civilization in which there were more than two genders. Can anyone help point me in a good direction for research? I appreciate any help from here but maybe this question would be better suited for /r/AskSocialScience? Let me know and thank you!

both pre and post Berlin airlift