The AskHistorians Podcast is a project that highlights the users and answers that have helped make /r/AskHistorians one of the largest history discussion forums on the internet. You can subscribe to us via iTunes, Stitcher, or RSS, and now on YouTube and Google Play. You can also catch the latest episodes on SoundCloud and Spotify. If there is another index you'd like the cast listed on, let me know!
This Episode:
Today as it is our 100th episode (and we are fast approaching 700,000 subscribers) we have decided to do something a little different! We have a panel of AskHistorians Moderators to talk about AskHistorians Under the Hood--what it is like to moderate and run the worlds largest academic history forum. AskHistorians has grown a lot in its six, nearly 7 years of existence, spawning several articles, helping several careers, several academic panels (which you can hear on earlier episodes) and this podcast! So if you have no interest in AskHistorians as a reddit community, this podcast might be of less interest to you. But regardless we have a great lineup today. The format today will be brief discussions of individual moderators about different aspects of AskHistorians followed by period of comment by the whole panel!
Today we are joined by
/u/bernardito, better known as Stefan, flaired in Modern Guerrilla and Counterinsurgency, to talk about the development of the subreddit and his own development. You can also catch him on episodes 39 and 40 talking about Algeria and Counter-Insurgency.
/u/commiespaceinvader, also known as Joe, flaired in to Holocaust Nazi Germany and Wehrmacht War Crimes, to talk about holocaust denialism, the academic theories underpinning academia and AskHistorians, and the emotional labor of working on a very difficult topic. You can also catch him on episodes 91 and 57 talking about fascism and Intentionalism and Functionalism in the Holocaust
/u/snapshot52, known as Kyle, flaired in Native American Studies | Colonialism, to talk about theory in a non-western and subaltern points of view, and the difficulties and pleasures of this. You can also catch him on episodes 75 and 80 talking about Indian Policy and Indian Sovereignty and Cultural Genocide against American Indians
/u/chocolatepot, known to her friends and family as Cassidy Percoco, flaired in the History of Western Fashion, to discuss what it is like having interests that are contrarian to the reddit hivemind and culture, and what it is like to bring women's history to life. Catch her on episode 45 talking about Regency Era Fashion
/u/Iphikrates, known as Roel, flaired in Greek Warfare, to talk about being an expert in a field where the academic view is diametrically opposed to the public one, and how AH is a perfect opportunity to do something about it because the questions come from the public. Catch him also on episode 81 discussing Iphikrates and His Reforms
Finally we will have
Questions? Comments?
If you want more specific recommendations for sources or have any follow-up questions, feel free to ask them here! Also feel free to leave any feedback on the format and so on.
If you like the podcast, please rate and review us on iTunes.
Thanks all!
Previous episode and discussion.
Next Episode: /u/ThucydidesWasAwesome is back!
Want to support the Podcast? Help keep history interesting through the AskHistorians Patreon.
Great episode! I especially enjoyed hearing /u/chocolatepot's perspective, especially since it feels like so much of the content in the subreddit does tend to gravitate towards military and political history.
This is a brilliant episode and I think should be required listening for anyone interested in public history and the relationships between historical expertise, public interest, and community building.
Really interesting discussion, thank you all. A few comments:
/u/bernardito
We need links to those early shitposts!
/u/commiespaceinvader
Oh man, yeah, empathy gap is real. Thank you so much, so very much for working through them and rising above the dreck. I know the soul hurt I get reading about parts of your specialty, but reading it as a profession? Man. Thank you so much for your excellent, superb contributions.
/u/snapshot52
You are nailing it. While I am often, not always, resistant to your perspectives, they are always eye opening. Even if being still resistant, you've opened an avenue. Your approach is top notch. Thank you for the education.
/u/chocolatepot
You know your audience, while more mature than most, am still a dude and don't think about this much. That said, have found more than a few of your posts not only engaging, but thought provoking.
Thank you.
/u/Iphikrates
Am so glad you don't see the movie "300" as a yoke over your neck. ha-ha. Read most all of your stuff. (saying most, cuz don't want to seem obsessive or something, and probably miss stuff)
Sorry /u/Georgy_K_Zhukov,
ran out of time, even though you're one of the mods who help keep it all together. :)
On the discussion of historical empathy, I sometimes wonder if I empathize too much with historical people. Reading historical texts and seeing how similar ancient people and their thoughts and ideas and emotions were to myself and those around me is what has always drawn me to history, and yet I've actually been told several times on this forum that I go too far in attributing real "modern" ideas and emotions to them, like abstract ideas of freedom and nationalism even though I feel that I can see those things very clearly when I read many pre-modern historical texts.
What would you say are the limits of viewing historical people as "like us" even when they appear to be very like us in many ways?
Listening to the pod now. As someone who discovered there IS a pod as of episode 99, I want to say thank you to everyone involved in the pod, and the mods who were unable to attend. Without you this sub would be nothing!
For those interested, this was the last public update on the statistics. An end of year one will be forthcoming... at the end of the year.
I guess I don't have a lot to add to the conversation, so thanks for everyone involved in /r/AskHistorians - the lurkers that upvote, the users that answer questions, the mods, thank you!
Ah, one thing to mention, I did ask if there was flaired for south american history or brazilian flaired users. /u/Georgy_K_Zhukov do you know if there is a lot (or not) of them? I ask this because it would be interesting to invite some of them to /r/brasil for an AMA (if they are fine with that), or to get some work done in /r/HistoriaEmPortugues/ . I actually promised to get some work done in their CSS, but I forgot :x I need to get some time to do that.
I absolutely can't wait to queue this up and get listening.
I know you guys said that the 20 year rule doesn't really have an easily identifiable origin on the sub, but has there been much debate over it? I know 9/11 was highlighted as a reason for its existence, but the rule seems like it could preclude some interesting/valuable topics. I mean, I know you don't want 9/11 conspiracy theory jerk offs peddling their ideas in here and who can blame you? But don't the other rules insulate you (or rather, us non-mods) from that? Your handling of Holocaust denialism demonstrates that.
I'm definitely not saying let people ask about the 2016 election, but the rule seems like a shame sometimes. For example, with my IRA question today I'm mostly trying to get a better understanding of the implications of the border debate resulting from Brexit (i.e., might the Troubles be reignited). I couldn't ask specifically about the Good Friday Agreement, so I got as close as I could. I wouldn't expect the mods to allow people to try to predict the future, but it would be nice to see experts address certain contemporary topics with their historical contexts and the strict moderation here putting any soapboxing to the sword.
I know the response to what I'm saying is probably, "that would result in nebulous moderation and be more trouble than it's worth", which is understandable. In that case, is there anywhere else on reddit or the Internet at large to talk about stuff like that with a similarly strong mod team? It seems like you guys are a three star restaurant surrounded by Burger Kings and Taco Bells, but you only serve steak. If I want fish I have to go catch it myself. That's a compliment.
On an unrelated topic, /u/chocolatepot, is it possible you don't catch that much flak for being a woman on a website that trends toward misogyny because you're "staying in your lane" with your expertise in fashion? Sorry if you addressed that specific question, I was driving and may have missed it. The black-and-white formal wear was an excellent example of the types of insidious biases people can have. I'll have to keep a better eye out for my own.
What was the 'Games of troll incident'?
Hey guys, loved this episode. I’ve only started watching the podcast some months ago and am up to episode 36 but I decided to watch a more recent episode and this was a good one. Anyway, my question is directed towards /u/Georgy_K_Zhukov : do you have any data on what percentage of questions are answered by flaired and non-flaired users?
Joe, /u/commiespaceinvader, your first words from around 13:58: "Yes, thank you, and I'm going to start with the concept of [mumble]". Is that "emotional labor", as stated in the header here? You dropped your tone and volume a lot.