Japan implemented extremely racist policies towards other local nationalities like korea and china. Im interested if there was a historic culture of racism towards cultures on the mainland or If this was adopted from the western imperial powers? There was a massive influx of western influence in statescraft and techology at the time and I'm wondering if the pseudo-ethnology regarding racial hierarchies in the west played a part in the ideology? Also how did the ideology see the japanese racially in relation to the europeans and americans? As superiors or equals? There seemed to be alot of ideas from europe implanting themselves in japan in this period especially regarding colonialism and empire building, so I am curious if racial superiority is part of a culture creep.

[deleted]

Did early man concern themselves with inbreeding within their own camp?

Hiya folks!

My dad served for more than 25 years with the Australian Defence force (ADF). He has stated before that Australian counterinsurgency strategies and tactics employed during the Vietnam War proved more successful in suppressing Communist guerilla forces and maintaining provincial control than the SOP of US forces. He was deployed during the Malaysian Emergency and has considerable familiarity with the tactics and strategies that Australian forces employed.

My grasp, however, isn't so firm, nor is my understanding of Australian or American tactics in Vietnam. While I've got a decent grasp for strategy, I'd love to know how SOP for the two countries differed at the tactical, operational and strategic levels, and whether there's much credence to my dad's claims of Australian superiority in that regard.

I realise this question is pretty huge in scope - obviously, methodology changed considerably for all parties throughout the conflict, and Australian and US forces were operating on different scales and in different contexts. Still, if anyone is able to shed some light on the situation, that'd be fantastic.

I'm currently taking an English history class and a question I think to myself frequently is how on earth did a story of a (then) 1500 year old jewish man influence kingship on an island a quarter of the way across the globe. Why, and how, did Christianity spread to that extent and also, why would they care about the story of some Jewish guy 1500 years ago? There's zero commonality between the two times, people, or geographical position yet they respected it extremely highly. Why?

I am aware of the misconception that the Roundheads only wore helmets and the Cavaliers only wore wide-plumed hats.

However, what colours were their uniforms? And what precisely were those uniforms?

What would be a german crews reaction to being blasted by an american .50 cal? although none would likely pierce were they good for at least distracting the crew?

Would the Noise of vibrations of being shot by several automatic small arms be enough to cause some sort of panic thus lowering a tanks effectiveness?

Who was almost universally hated the throughout the world before Hitler?

On one hand, it seems like it would obviously have been miserable. So much more likely to lose your children, especially your infants, and death was more present in general. Medical care was lacking (nearly everyone was malnourished too), work was hard and constant, and there's a matter of social justice. First off, gender. There's a 50% chance you'll have 0 rights whatsoever. Even if you are a male, unless you're at the tippy top you are under worse impression than most realize, we complain nowadays that poor people can't afford nice things. If you were a peasant, you simply couldn't have nice things, doesn't even matter if you somehow get the cash. Best case scenario, 5% of the population has rights

However, they were very ignorant, and ignorance is bliss, right? They may have had some way of coping with the loss of babies, and of life in general. The average person was as religious as only wingnuts are today, heaven was a more real thing to them and their society reinforced that more. Opiate of the people, it helps them cope with loss. Perhaps they took more enjoyment in their work, or they thought it good for the soul, somehow found a way to deal with pre industrial farming even though it's probably a bitch to do. And unlike the average American today, they were never under the impression they ought to have rights to begin with.

Do any of you have any insight?

Such as the phrase "Byzantine government regulations" or something like that.

Is there any evidence from either (Union / Confederate) that these alleged events took place?

For an unrelated reason I'm looking into Hofstede's power distance index. Then I was thinking about seafaring cultures through history.

My question is this: have seafaring (as in deep water) peoples always exhibited high power distance behaviour when at sea? Was there almost always one skipper who had a large degree of authority? If not, how things work? I absolutely get consensus decision making in most contexts, but if be interested to see if it (or similar) was ever used in a significant way by a seafaring culture.

Basically I am wondering if bicycle mounted troops had any official form of hand signals to communicate a direction, dismount ect.. I am looking specifically for German signals but any country will do.

I understand he killed a ton of people/was paranoid and crazy/shouldn't have a deal with Hitler who double crossed him, but why was his western foreign policy bad?

The British ended slavery in 1833 with Slavery Abolition Act that compensated slave owners for their loss of "property". Was there any type of push to do this in the United States?

Or was the US too far gone down the road to war at that point?

I'm writing something from the perspective of a member of the Volunteer Fighting Corps, and I'm wondering what she could be doing before the Americans show up. It needs to be unskilled work, suitable for someone not particularly strong, and ideally done in a group (so I can do dialogue and all those other important English-y things). Currently I'm thinking searchlight operator, or maybe rolling bandages. What other options are there?

Of the other options I've considered, nursing or factory work both seem too important to pull people away from so they can be cannon fodder, as well as requiring some level of skill. Cooking again requires skill and would mean more talking to soldiers than fellow Volunteers, so that's probably out. Acting as a runner or water/ammunition bearer again seem too important to sacrifice, and are slightly lonely jobs, which isn't what I'm going for. Firefighting would be perfect, but that seems like you'd need some strength for it and I think the remnants of the Yokusan Sonendan did most of it anyway. Stretcher-bearing again requires strength, and wasn't much of a thing in the Japanese army from what I've read. Manning an anti-aircraft gun is a very combative role (which I don't want initially) and I feel like the crews of those would probably just shoot at incoming Americans rather than charging them with bamboo spears. Finally, radar operation in WW2 Japan was... not a thing. Other than that, I can't really think of anything. What have I missed?

Why did the French colonize eastern Canada when, at the time, the east coast of the U.S. (with its milder winters) had not yet been colonized by other European powers. I'd also like to know how the site for Acadia was chosen, given its limited arable land. Any other information about how the various European powers chose the locations of their colonies is welcome.

How did the interaction between the Germanic tribes and the Romans lead to the structure of political boundaries within Europe? I assuming that it was because of the groups that created settlements within different parts of Europe, for example, the Franks settling on the land above the Iberian Peninsula, which led to the name of France. However, I wanted a professional opinion on this since I am not certain on the matter.

I want to study/work with Mesoamerican history. I already know about how hard it is to find a job with either(at least a job relevant to that kind of degree). Despite that, which would serve me better?

In my American history class, we were discussing various attitudes that were held towards immigrants around the large immigration boom that happened around the American Industrial Revolution, and I noticed there was a lot of antisemitism in America as well as much of Europe during this time. Why did antisemitism seem to be such a common view?

I am aware of the current urge for self-diagnostization among historians (and other scholars in similar fields), the need to put a label on our own time (see Francis Fukuyama and the like). But are there any other significant trends in historical research today?

I know one of the alternatives was to disperse the army and hope they meet up with Conf. General Johnson's troops. What would be the repercussions of such a move?

Thanks for your time.

[deleted]