It recently struck me how this one of the biggest reasons poor whites and poor blacks can't really relate to each other. Was this intended to happen to deliberately and psychologically divide them?

I'm going to school for a history major, but I'm taking a semester off and I'm looking for some stuff to keep my brain in motion during the off time. Is there any other things I should look into?

It seems like a great coincidence that these two men who would rule these places are born in the same place.

He said during the last year before they were liberated, the Red Cross deliveries from Switzerland stopped as a result of the Russian advance. My question is since Switzerland was neutral and supposedly these deliveries were untouchable, why would the Russian advance cause them to stop?

He said after four months they started getting new deliveries from Sweden.

If it matters he was in a camp near the Baltic sea, one that supposedly only for airmen.

Sorry if this is rather specific. What I've found in reading a fair amount of revolutionary history are all these countless quotes of people with revolutionary politics boldly and confidently declaring that revolution is right around the corner, often completely wrong. I'm now looking for the opposite. People who held revolutionary ideals, but were cynical about revolutionary prospects, only for it to turn out that they were on the eve of revolution.

No specific revolution or revolutionary ideology is necessary, though (for bonus points) I would particularly like to find quotes from the French Revolution or other revolts against monarchy, or the Spanish Civil War/Russian Revolution or other revolts against capitalism.

The ideal quote would be something like, "Sure Pierre, we all hate the monarchy, but we won't see a widespread movement to institute a more representative government in our lifetime, mark my words" -Some French revolutionary, 1788

I also understand that it might not be likely that everyone in this sub has my ideal quote just waiting for me, so of course I would be happy just to be pointed in the right direction for books/articles to check in, relevant people to ask this question to, related info, etc. etc. etc.

Thanks so much!

I just read a quote from 1850 that says "the parties in this conflict are not merely abolitionists and slaveholders; they are atheists, socialists, communists, red republicans, Jacobins on the one side, and the friends of order and regulated freedom on the other." The communist manifesto was written in 1848, only two years earlier. I've always been under the impression that communism/socialism started with Marx, so am I wrong about that or did the idea of socialism/communism spread so rapidly that it was being voiced in U.S abolition debate two years later?

Also where else were they sent to if they were deported and not executed or sent to a gulag?

I ran across this question while personally researching the history of American cheese (as one does), and I found sporadic records referencing this event.

As I am able to find, the OPA (Office of Price Administration) was responsible for administrating rationing by civilians during World War 2. Allegedly, The OPA created the restriction on non-american cheeses and cited two reasons: First that it was necessary to promote patriotism through consumption of domestic products and second that it was necessary as a response to wartime trade disruptions causing a lack of export of American cheese and lack of import of European cheeses. Then, only 3 months later, the restriction was lifted in response to US cheese importers lobbying against the ban, claiming it disrupted both their business and American solidarity with our European allies.

Due to the age, brevity, and esoteric nature of the problem, I am unable to locate any official document or even a witness account of the event. I was however able to find several references to the existence of the restriction.

The first reference I found regarding restriction is in the book "For the Duration ...: The United States Goes to War, Pearl Harbor-1942" by Kennet Lee

There is some account also in the book "Paradox of Plenty: A social History of Eating in Modern America" by Harvey Levenstein

Both Lee and Levenstein give all of 2 sentences on the matter and do not cite sources.

There is a mention of the rescinding of the restriction as it was deemed lacking in solidarity with our European allies in "Food and Conflict in Europe in the Age of the Two World Wars" by Frank Trentmann and Flemming Just.

I suspect that if this event occurred, I would be more well known and that I would be able to find better sources. Thanks if anyone has more definite answers.

To clairify, this potentially meant cheese made in the USA, not necessarily the Kraft singles we know as "American cheese" today. As I understand, the phrase "American cheese" was used to refer to either in that era.

"Viking" warriors tend to be depicted in fiction as fighting primarily on foot, with spear and sword, using a "Shield Wall" formation. How accurate is this? Did they not use archers, cavalry or siege engines of any kind? (for the purposes of this question I'm focusing roughly on the 9th century as I believe the "Viking" period lasted up until the late 11th).

Thanks!

Somebody told me today that the reason we call white people "white" and black people "black" was as a way of solidifying the distinction between the two and associating Africans with a color of evil and whites with a sacred color. I believed it initially but I'd like to get a confirmation. Thanks!!

Reading Paddy Griffith's Battle Tactics of the Civil War, I believe he makes a compelling case that the Civil War was much more napoleonic than it was modern. However, I am wondering if battles against Native Americans, who certainly had "non european strategies" influenced the way the army fought and deployed itself in the western territories and states?

Or any sources that could point me towards this.

Thanks

Were they more interested in small scale commerce and government?

I know that not all German servicemen in WW2 were actually members of the National Socialist party. To my knowledge, the majority were not. I have also heard that the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine were generally more ideologically loyal to the party than than the Wehrmacht.

Edit: spelling

It seems they always wear scrubs now, but in old TV shows they wear traditional white nursing uniforms. Why did the change happen and when?

Edit: a word.

The American civil war is noted for its brutality - both one of the first instances of large-scale industrial warfare, as well as weapons that had developed far quicker than military tactics.

Since the Franco-Prussian war shortly followed the civil war, are they comparable in this regard? A quick look at deaths suggests that it might be, but I haven't read much about the war, and I certainly haven't read anything about any elements of "total war" like Sherman employed.

Was there a difference in European culture and militaries, or was it an especially brutish conflict like the US civil war?

Ancient Greek in the form it was used during the Golden age of Pericles and the Peloponnesian War has been studied to great detail, and we have discovered many extremely specific grammar rules, variations of words based on the region they were used in, detailed and multiple meaning for verbs, and guidelines for syntax. However, paper did not exist during that time, and I think (I might be wrong) that ancient Greeks did not widely use parchment or papyrus to write on. This form of ancient Greek was not spread outside of the Greek peninsula, and another, simpler form of it was widely spread by Alexander the Great 's conquering of Asian regions. As far as I know, it was during that Hellenistic period that it became popular to keep written records of scientific achievements and such, and many of them were stored in the library of Alexandreia, which was burned. It was quite a while afterwards that Christian monks started writing down ancient texts, plays and historical records. Therefore, and assuming that all the information I stated above is indeed correct, how do we have enough written record of a dead language to have been able to analyse it to such a detailed extent?

What could generals have done prior to the invention of the tank that would turn the war back into a war of motion like summer 1914? Or was attrition genuinely the only thing that could have worked given what was at their disposal?

Are there historical commonalities or is it just a coincidence of history? What practices were shared between the two systems, whether it was coincidental or not?

In other words, did the native Americans communicate enough with other tribes that word of the arrival of white people was known to tribes in the west?