Sorry if this is not the right place to ask this but I struggled to find another subreddit that could adequately answer my question.

The AMA of the Holocaust survivor currently on the front page made me think of all the people who say it's unfathomable to them that people at the time who knew about the holocaust were just letting it happen.

Isn't that no different the majority of the world today in regards to North Korea? Is there a big difference between what happened during the Holocaust and what is currently going on in North Korea?

I hope this is the correct place to post this, but for my History class I need to do a research study on a topic of our own choice. It is for 20% of the overall marks.

For my research study, I picked the V-1 rocket and how it affected London. I already have one secondary source for it and I wouldn't mind getting a primary source also for it. Any help is appreciated :)

[deleted]

I recall encountering this anecdote illustrating the sexual ignorance of the times in a book review in the NYT, NYRB or TLS 15 or 20 years ago. Since then I have searched in vain for the source or even the review it appeared in. Before I give up and assume it's apocryphal, perhaps someone here can identify it.

What were some of the different views that bog related cultures had towards the bogs themselves? Were the bogs generally just seen as an easy way to dump unwanted items? Were they like Stargates, in the sense many are in awe of their power while others just see a effective trash removal system? Or did societies see them in both a religious but fearful sense, like Shai-Hullid (may His passing cleanse the world)?

In all seriousness, how did the cultures normally associated with bogs feel about bogs in general during the height of their normal or ceremonial use?

Just curious about the accuracy of this book. It's definitely been an enjoyable read so far.

He had promised all power to the workers Soviets in his April theses and temporarily went along with the idea of a constituent assembly, but communism was slower than Lenin had wanted:

• The rest of Europe didn't undergo socialist revolutions as Lenin had expected.
• The unrest in the countryside meant that Lenin couldn't deny land to the peasants and so went against communist principles to give them ownership of the land.
• Despite its name, War Communism went against the principles of Communism by taking power from the workers and putting factories under the control of industrialist individuals.

Did the single-party state simply arise from the fact that socialism wasn't yet fully implemented yet in Russia, and the Communist party would need to stay in rule to embed it?

Edit: Moreover Russia had been in a state of political flux for so long that economic issues had not been dealt with. Perhaps the single-party state was considered necessary until economic issues could be resolved.

With his conquests bringing him into India, was there any interaction with the seat of power in China? Were they aware? Was there trade through an ancient version of the silk road? Did Alexander ever express a wish to move his forces towards China sometime in the future?

Edit: Sorry typo in the title, Mary not marry

[deleted]

[deleted]

How was England historically more influential, powerful and dominant than its neighbours?

Edit:I apologise for the poor choice of the word conquer.

I'd love for someone to tell me about resources of history concerning the ancient middle eastern empires. Preferably good blogs, youtube channels etc to start off with easily digested information.

Here's the catch, most of what i'w found so far, ties very very heavily to religion of the area. And while that is interesting in it's own right, it's not what i'm looking for.

I'd like, more specifically, resources concerning architecture, habitats, farming, tools, technology, military etc etc. And with as little religious coloring and flavor as possible.

Anyone have anything?

P.S, What i mean by "Ancient" is pretty much everything from the Abassid Empire and backwards in time, which, i know, can hardly be considered "Ancient".

As a more general formulation : Was the Roman army a ladder for the lowest classes to climb in the Roman society ?

Thank you !

[deleted]

I feel like the significance of the Titanic is sometimes exaggerated in media because of the disaster that followed it's launch. How newsworthy was it when it actually launched? Was it really this household name that the films make it out to be or did it just become that way due to its fate?