Hello,

What have been the consequences for Berlin development of the 1945 4 zones and then West and East zones?

I know Berlin was more or less gdr capital but Bonn (not bern) was the one for West Germany. What could have been Berlin without that split? How far behind did it fall compared to such capitals as London (who had to be rebuilt too I think?) Paris, Tokyo ? I was thinking in terms of population growth, economic development, soft power...

I know that Berlin was the 2000s European place to be but even today prices are low and it seems more a new political center thanks to Germany rise at the top of Eu than an economic powerhouse and a human megalopolis.

Is it true or am I misunderstanding Berlin evolution? If it's true, how costly was the 40 years of the wall?

Thank you very much for sharing your knowledge!

I'm talking about new imports, or luxuries that might only be found in North America.

So I have been reading up on the polarization of american politics and the loss of the political center. From what I can tell the shift happened in the late 60's and 70's. Essentially people started sorting themselves geographically, the northeast became more homogenized as a liberal bastion and the south lost most of its Democrat representatives as liberals and conservatives sorted themselves geographically. This resulted in the Senate and house becoming more polarized as it became harder for centrist candidates to gain coalitions and win elections.

Why? What about the 70's made us more mobile/willing to move to places where people believe what we believe? Or am I completely off base here?

The Luftwaffe were obviously not an issue for allied air power during the lead in to and actual landings on D-Day but what was the state of the German ground based air defense? I would have thought there was lots of 88mm Flak cannons that would still have had a strong effect on the allied interdiction raids and preliminary bombing of the beaches, but it's not something I seem to be able to find much about.

To clarify, after the war had started. After Concord and Lexington, for instance.

I've heard interview from white Americans on the subject. One was an infantryman under fire and was saved by an all-black tank battalion. He said it was so strange seeing a black man stick his head out and ask if they were alright. Would the French, Belgians, etc. Have similar reactions? How were these guys seen by the locals?

I know that black and Indian colonials served on the western front of WWI, so it may even be something the Europeans were more used to.

I remember reading that it was a cold place. Where you will freeze and be hungry for all time.

More specifically, the way their regimes followed each other and why. I've been watching Rosewater and I'd like a deeper understanding of the situation.

EDIT: and how have I never heard of Mousavi?

Cheers.

When and why it was implemented? There's a post about China not having enough women so is it true they drown female babies? Sorry if this is an ignorant question. Thank you for your responses.

There are so many names for the King and Queen I found so similar to each other. For example, king Henry IV, Charles XI, etc. Why did these kings choose these names?

I don't know much about the history of that region but just by looking at a map I'm surprised that Turkey doesn't control more of them. Especially islands as close to Turkey as Chios and Kalloni

Thanks.

Were people happy about the choices now or were they sorry at the increased cost?

Sorry if this is a strange post for the sub, but I thought this would be the one where it would make the most sense.

So, a little backstory: my family homeschools and I've always been the resident history nerd (Not in school currently myself, just living here), so my mom asked me if I could start teaching history to my younger siblings (age ~10-12) in some of my free time.

For the first "course", my basic idea is to go over how history is done... a sort of "history of historians/historical methods". I thought it would be good to start there, rather than just starting out with some event without explaining how we know what we know about the event. A good foundation to build everything else on, in my opinion.

I'm developing the course myself, but I need to understand the subject well enough on my own before I can simplify it for ten year old consumption...

So here's my question:

What are some good resources to look into for how history is developed and researched? What methods do we use to determine what we know?

Thanks for your help.

It seems like, rather than trying to create a counter-blockade of the British Isles (and provoking the United States in the process), Germany might have been better served by attacking the British Navy itself.

Apologies if there's an answer somewhere on the subreddit already. I found questions about the blockade, but no answer to this particular question.