Non's thread of misconceptions of American History

[eynon81]

I figure I'd stick this in General Discussion because History is so political now-a-days and because the history sub-forum doesn't see much action. So as per Philly's request here are some of the bigger misconceptions in nut shell form, I'm happy to hash out anything you guys want to talk about.

1. The Pilgrims killed the Indians they ate the first Thanksgiving with; not really...The Pilgrims killed indians, just not the ones they were buddies with. The English and Wampanoag stayed allies for generations after the arrival of the Pilgrims. In 1675 (55 years later) the English and Wampanoag did go to war, but they really weren't Pilgrims anymore by then.

2. The Colonists stood no chance against the might of the British Empire; no, the odds were a lot more even than that. The British were an awesome naval and commercial power in the 1770s, but their army sucked. Also the war was unpopular among many English, so the Brits had to recruit large numbers of Irish, German, Swiss, and even Russians to fight in North America. the costs of recruiting these troops and then shipping them across and ocean were enormous. The Colonials meanwhile were not total push-overs, they had a semi-professional military structure in place that had experience from the French and Indian Wars. The number 1 problem the Americans faced was a lack of powder and a lack of cash. Issues that were largely solved once the French got in the fight.

3. The Confederates were defending states rights; not really. The North got up in arms because the Dred Scott case and Fugitive Slave Act was messing with their rights. The Confederates in Missouri and Tennessee did not respect the rights of their fellow citizens as neither state's peoples voted to break away. Also the Confederate government was, in practice, much more invasive on the rights and liberties of its members than the US government. War was over slavery yo.

4. The Founders were rabid capitalists; nope. As a group they didn't like/distrusted corporations and limited their creation. They also disliked large financial institutions (cept Hamilton). They generally wanted a free market based around smaller commercial partnerships and owner/operator joints.

5. Protests created the civil rights movement and ended Vietnam; not really. Many of the huge step forward in Civil Right were won in Court Rooms, not on the streets. Meanwhile the Vietnam war just kind petered out on it's own via Nixon's Peace with Honor policy...Watergate assured that we were not going to get back in once the Paris Peace Treaty was broken.

oh yeah - http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/why-we-cant- ... us-history

[Philly]

For starters I have a question about #4, as this probably pertains the most to present day issues. Though it may have been hard to envision modern corporations today, what level of intrusion would the founders have thought proper to prevent such massive conglomerates from concentrating power and wealth? It's understandable that they didn't like them, but would they support regulation to stop them?

[eynon81]

[Spider]

6. Slavery wasn't focused on North America. Slavery is often associated primarily with the US, but in reality something like 90% of the slaves transported from Africa wound up in Latin America, particularly Brazil and the Caribbean. Sugar plantations and mining being the driving factors, as well as extremely high mortality rates in Spanish, French, and Portuguese colonies.

(Obvious disclaimer is obvious: No, not excusing, or condoning slavery, or whatever other negative trolling you can come up with.)

[Spider]

Good thread btw, non. Probably going to get politically incorrect in a hurry.

[Philly]

[eynon81]

[Spider]

[wormwood]

[The Comrade]

that the civil war wasn't about slavery.

yes it f**k was.