Well, the question is, is that “The history of the American continent”, or actually “The history of the United States”? The history of the country “The United States of America” necessarily starts with the colonies that originally formed the country. What was happening out west didn’t really matter until much later.
On a related note, how about the Czechoslovak Legion?
They controlled the Trans-Siberian railroad for a time during the Russian revolution.
Yes. All Enemy Aliens are routinely interned- more or less world wide. And if the USA had just interred Japanese citizens, there would not have been any issue. But we also interned US citizens of Japanese descent.- That was very wrong.
But do note, he was not “President of the United States”- he was president of the Continental congress= more or less Speaker of the house.
Not only that, but Japanese immigrants couldn’t even become citizens if they wanted to, due to the Asian Exclusion Act. Then to intern them for being foreign nationals…
I read a revisionist book a few years ago that tried to defend the internment of Japanese Americans by claiming German Americans and Italian Americans were also interned, and some sleight of hand about the entire west coast being a war production zone. (It also tried to defend Charles Lindbergh).
The numbers tell the story: over 125,000 Japanese American internees, most American citizens.
About 1,800 Italian American internees and 11,000 German American internees, the overwhelming number being foreign nationals.
While I would agree that history is often over-simplified to the point where its not so useful for understanding the past, I can’t really fault American history courses in our schools for focusing on the United States. It’s not meant to be a history of North America it’s meant to be a history of the United States.
That’s fair. I think the bet usually hinges on some technicality that the Articles of Confederation named the nation The United States of America or something like that. It’s one of those got’cha bar bets that would probably result in a fisticuffs.
Yes, this is akin to the “David Rice Atchison was President for a day” hogwash.
This was common knowledge and taught as part of 8th-grade history nationwide back in the day. We learned that Senator Prescott Bush was charged with trading with the enemy and was a sympathizer of Nazi, Germany. He ended up losing 4 companies as a result of the trial. Interestingly enough the Dem and Repubs refused to impeach him for helping the Germans and no time served. He just kept serving in the Senate.
Then in 1979, the Department of Education was created and what was taught in history changed abruptly. Education in America was scrubbed and edited and not for the benefit of American citizens.
If Rachel Maddow is doing the podcast, I would be very suspicious of the information she’s giving. She’s one of the least factual and most opinion-based people out there. Same with Tucker. Both spin off the rails. You’d be better served if you researched it heavily and read about it.
This came out and at the same time the government was bringing in the top Nazis into the American government to work in top positions. Americans had no idea for decades that this had happened. When it was finally leaked, people were furious. Operation Paperclip.
I’ve read of them. I thought their story would make a kick-ass movie.
Yeah. Good point.
Sorry, but equating both Rachel Maddow and Tucker Carlson is not accurate.
Now comes the claim that you can’t expect to literally believe the words that come out of Carlson’s mouth. And that assertion is not coming from Carlson’s critics. It’s being made by a federal judge in the Southern District of New York and by Fox News’s own lawyers in defending Carlson against accusations of slander. It worked, by the way.
Just read U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil’s opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox’s lawyers: The "‘general tenor’ of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not ‘stating actual facts’ about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in ‘exaggeration’ and ‘non-literal commentary.’ "
But in the process of saving the Fox star, the network’s attorneys raised the journalistic question: Just what level of fact-checking does Fox News expect, or subject its opinion shows to?
Media lawyers note this is not the first time this sort of defense has been offered. A $10 million libel lawsuit filed by the owners of One America News Network against MSNBC’s top star, Rachel Maddow, was dismissed in May when the judge ruled she had stretched the established facts allowably: “The context of Maddow’s statement shows reasonable viewers would consider the contested statement to be opinion.”
In the Fox case, Carlson was presenting his own narrative, not even one extrapolating from known facts.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, McDougal, a former Playboy model, had sought to tell her account of an earlier affair with Trump. The National Enquirer tabloid bought McDougal’s story for $150,000 during the 2016 campaign and then buried it to protect Trump from any fallout.
More than two years later, in December 2018, Carlson began presenting Trump as the victim of extortion. Seeking to discredit former Trump attorney Michael Cohen’s tale of hush payments — and alleged campaign finance law violations — Carlson first told viewers, “Remember the facts of the story. These are undisputed.”
But they aren’t undisputed. They’re not even facts.
(Bolding mine)
My brother moved to Kansas City about 5 years after this happened, and vaguely remembered that a big disaster had happened there and asked someone about it. He was told that it was something not brought up in polite conversation.
At first, CT were sort of interesting in it was fascinating that people would believe crazy things, but I’ve heard enough so I have absolutely no need to hear any more.
With the emphasis on “some” because few naturalized Italian or German American citizens were subjected to internment.
But not mentioned at if you grew up in Utah back when I was in school, and I don’t remember it being discussed even in AP history.
Utah history was all about the Mormons. There hadn’t been any Spanish missions in what is now Utah, nor has there been a significant number of Spanish speaking settlers.
Looking back, my AP history teacher must have been a communist (under the current Fox News definition) because we covered the ills of unbridled capitalism.
Until Elon buys the Dope at least.
Because it addresses the diversity of the nation we now have. The history of Aztlan is the history of a third of the US.
Socorro means assistance. It’s the name given, in 1598, to the village of Pilabo by Juan de Onate for the assistance he received.
I don’t propose that this should replace the eastern mythology, but it should get equal time. The wild west is an interesting contrast to Puritanical Plymouth. Onate had a thanksgiving feast when he entered what is now US territory. The date was 30 April 1598. And, while the folks in Plymouth were grubbing around in their gardens and cutting pine poles, others, in Aztlan, were erecting grand cathedrals.
Similarly, people today forget (or aren’t taught) how volatile 19th century capitalism was. There were regular boom and bust cycles, and “panics” that today we’d recognize as serious recessions.
I often hear people bemoan the federal reserve system, but it was put into place in reaction to an economy that relied on rich people (like JP Morgan) to moderate financial catastrophe.
It’s not a history of the origin of the United States though. I’m certainly not arguing against a more comprehensive overview of history in schools, but if I’m teaching about the formation of the United States then Aztlan is going to be very low on my list of things to bring up.
On another tack, there must be lots of bits of history in every country that have just been overlooked in the standard narratives and popular perceptions (and it has occasionally stoked “culture war” controversies). We on the UK have a very patchy notion of the history of empire - not kept “secret”, just overlooked. It’s only in the last few years that it’s sunk in that at the abolition of slavery in the British Empire, the taxpayers paid compensation to the slave-owners, to a massive total amount (and not just to major sugar barons either - plenty of ordinary small savers/investors had their money in slavery-dependent businesses, and claimed compensation).
Perhaps if it’s just political history. One third of the country shouldn’t slip down the memory hole.
Again, I agree, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to place Aztlan in the section on the origins of the United States. Mostly because it has zero to do with the origins of the United States.
It’s the origin of a part of the United States.