American history buffs: Check in here!

I requested this group in the Lounge and it generated a lot of interest, so Skinner created it. For historical posterity:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=1996096&mesg_id=1996096
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=120x24660

:hi:

:hi:

but I enjoy learning more about history. Thanks!

but interested in this stuff anyway....

So, checking in.

"I'd love to be a buff. ... What do you have to do to be a buff?"

"Well, sleeping less than 18 hours a day would be a start."

A little Seinfeld humor for any fans out there...

while bouncing between it and a double math/physics major, and, predictably, ending up with no degree at all. That was a very long time ago, but I've kept up my history interest a lot more over the years more than I've kept up an interest in solving partial differential equations :)

One class. What am I thinking?

Anyway, I can empathize. Got to that graduating semester, realized I could not teach HS the rest of my life, mostly because I couldn't tolerate the thought of being forced to coach a sport at the same time just to get hired, realized I was broke and couldn't live on the TA stipend I'd been offered, and got a job.

I've never stopped studying, though. I probably churn out more history "work" than I did while I was a student. I just do it because I love it and earn a living in other ways.

I'm particularly interested in the history of the American Radical Tradition, Women in US, Minorities... basically in the real history we are not told.

I'm your man.

but unfortunately I'm very rusty on American involvement. Except for Rising Sun by Toland I haven't read enough about the Pacific War at all. I hope you can help me out there in the ensuing months!

I got a 5 on my AP US history exam a couple of years back, which fit quite nicely with my major. I just wish I could get copies of my essay responses.:)

I'm a fan of history generally.

American history is becoming even more interesting to me given the apparent insanity rampant in our country.

we must understand the past

Or another way,

Those who do not learn from history, are condemned to repeat it

Let the discusion begin

who know history, but don't believe it could never happen to us? Surely America isn't susceptible to unjust wars, revolution, and poverty?

I have a B.A. in both American and Russian.

splotchy on a good day. But I am always game for learning. Count me in.

Hope I actually get to teach this stuff sometime soon.

:hi:

I love modern American political history. Nothin like it. Even though I missed most of that period, I've tried to make up for it with hundreds of hours of reading, and the insight of two embittered baby boomers who lived through it.

I'm interested in all eras of American history with a special emphasis on the Civil War. My idea of an ideal vacation is one spent battlefield walking.

but I am joining ANYWAY!

In my humble opinion, any discussion of American history really should include mention of Howard Zinn's work.

A People's History of the United States is the place to start.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/PeoplesHistory_Zinn.html

here's a few of exerpts from the first chapter Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress:

*****

Arawak men and women, naked, tawny, and full of wonder, emerged from their villages onto the island's beaches and swam out to get a closer look at the strange big boat. When Columbus and his sailors came ashore, carrying swords, speaking oddly, the Arawaks ran to greet them, brought them food, water, gifts. He later wrote of this in his log:

"They... brought us parrots and balls of cotton and spears and many other things, which they exchanged for the glass beads and hawks' bells. They willingly traded everything they owned.... They were well-built, with good bodies and handsome features.... They do not bear arms, and do not know them, for I showed them a sword, they took it by the edge and cut themselves out of ignorance. They have no iron. Their spears are made of cane.... They would make fine servants.... With fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want."

*****

The treatment of heroes (Columbus) and their victims (the Arawaks) the quiet acceptance of conquest and murder in the name of progress-is only one aspect of a certain approach to history, in which the past is told from the point of view of governments, conquerors, diplomats, leaders. It is as if they, like Columbus, deserve universal acceptance, as if they-the Founding Fathers, Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Kennedy, the leading members of Congress, the famous Justices of the Supreme Court-represent the nation as a whole. The pretense is that there really is such a thing as "the United States," subject to occasional conflicts and quarrels, but fundamentally a community of people with common interests. It is as if there really is a "national interest" represented in the Constitution, in territorial expansion, in the laws passed by Congress, the decisions of the courts, the development of capitalism, the culture of education and the mass media.

"History is the memory of states," wrote Henry Kissinger in his first book, A World Restored, in which he proceeded to tell the history of nineteenth-century Europe from the viewpoint of the leaders of Austria and England, ignoring the millions who suffered from those states men's policies. From his standpoint, the "peace" that Europe had before the French Revolution was "restored" by the diplomacy of a few national leaders.

But for factory workers in England, farmers in France, colored people in Asia and Africa, women and children everywhere except in the upper classes, it was a world of conquest, violence, hunger, exploitation-a world not restored but disintegrated.

*****

When the Pilgrims came to New England they too were coming not to vacant land but to territory inhabited by tribes of Indians. The governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, John Winthrop, created the excuse to take Indian land by declaring the area legally a "vacuum." The Indians, he said, had not "subdued" the land, and therefore had only a "natural" right to it, but not a "civil right." A "natural right" did not have legal standing.

The Puritans also appealed to the Bible, Psalms 2:8: "Ask of me, and I shall give thee, the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession." And to justify their use of force to take the land, they cited Romans 13:2: "Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."

*****


on edit: I'm kind of new to this DU forum thing. It appears that perhaps I should have just been "checking in" in this thread and maybe should have started a separate thread on Zinn's work. I apologize in advance for my ignorance...

Everybody should read his work.

must-reads.

Zinn is one of those historians who seems to reaxh his conclusion first, then looks for evidence to fit it. He's a good writer but he forces EVRYTHING into a Marxist perspective, whether it fits or not..

... whatever...

I discovered Zinn's work when I sought first-hand accounts of history by people (as opposed to the political leaders for the day) after reading some logs of passengers on the Mayflower regarding their experiences. I was appalled at how they looked at the native people that were already here when they arrived.

Zinn's writing opened my eyes quite a bit. much of it stood in stark contrast to what I had been taught in school. Then again, I've always preferred oral history to written history.

Of course, that doesn't mean that I believe everything he says without question. If you know of anything that refutes the first-hand accounts he cites in his books, it'd be great if you could point me to them.

His first hand accounts are often quite good and very interesting. It's his INTREPRETATIONS I often think go against the evidence. For example, his reduction of motives for US foreign policy to money and overseas business expansion. While that was certainly often a motive very few historians still use it as the sole motive. There are also social, religious, racial, humanitarian, and politic motives that must be taken into account.

Of course, one can cherry pick first hand accounts too, to prove a poiint one has already decided upon.

and am fully aware that it is the interpretations of historians that can often get in the way of the truth. That is why I like to see as many accounts as possible and try to interpret things for myself. That is also why I cited Zinn's work as a starting point in learning about history of this country as an alternative to what most have already been taught in grade school.

I am looking forward to learning a lot through this forum.

just wish there had been caveats attached to all the texts I read in school, as I think bias is present in all history. Two of the big shocks of my life were learning about the Japanese internment camps in the U.S. during WW II and learning that there women at Valley Forge during that terrible winter. I understand not telling younger kids about camp followers but I think the presence of the officers' wives at all the winter encampments should always be part of the narrative. Though their accomodations were better than most soldiers had, the wives suffered from the cold and many gave birth under the primitive conditions of the winter camps. They also had to cross enemy lines to get to the camps and were often smuggling food, too. Women and minority populations have undoubtedly gotten short shrift in history books.

but he definitely has a perspective. But he also "admits" that within the first few pages. As well as reminds you that so does every other historian (if nothing else through what information they filter out and what they decide is important).

For a Marxist try Michael Parenti. His People's History of Rome is excellent!! Can't recommend it more. http://www.michaelparenti.org/Caesar.html . But now I've drifted outside the forum scope ;-)

enjoyed listening to him, looked up what I could find online, haven't read his books, though.

I find Parenti's work useless due to sloppiness and deliberate misinformation

Those who casually dismiss Howard Zinn and his most original, unique and icon smashing view on traditional history rarely back up their criticisms with facts. And you are right in that he is the first to "admit" that he also has his own perspective. I am one who is forever grateful to Zinn for his "bottom-side up" view of history. It was and still is brilliant revelation.

and I could find you scores of books written from the perspective of the little guy on most topics in history (at least modern history)

I find Zinn, Chomsky and others to be very one sided, myopic and unreadable

I look forward to learning from you all. I read more European history (medieval, Renaissance Italy, Tudor England, Byzantine) than American but am getting more interested in learning about my ancestors' lives here as well as in England as I continue trying to solve some genealogical mysteries. I'm going to be delving into Civil War records in months to come and visiting battlefields in GA and TN.

I love history.

I love history, but have no particular experise.

Westward expansion, pioneers, Native American, etc. But I am thilled to have a place to come and learn some other stuff, and a place to ask questions!

American history is fascinating.

Maybe I'm more of an anthropologist but diaries, personal letters, journals and objects from daily life offer an insight into the lives of Americans which I find fascinating. I'm also a bit of an art history freak; America's art reveals many subtleties of the decade in which they were produced. It's like a fun mystery novel! ;)

Looking forward to learning more here in this forum! :hi:

A People's History of the American Revolution. I didn't read all of it but what I did was fascinating. Letters and diaries and such of average Joes and Joans during the time of the American Revolution. Very interesting stuff, especially the stuff from people who thought the Brits and the Aristocrats trying to take their place were both full of it haha.

That's exactly the type of portal into history that I'm talking about, thanks! :)

Anyone else into that?

Checking in.

Is this thing on?

Glad to have the forum.

I majored in it in college. I specialized in British History but American History interests me too, there is just less of it. :-)

Do professionals count? :)

When I reread my note in the light of day I realized that it could easily come off as really snotty. I did not mean it that way, but had intended it to be tongue-in-cheek and teasing. My apologies to anyone who was offended.

WF

As I work on my geneology I delve more and more into our history; esp. our (US) formative years.

I have a BA and MA in history, with a focus on Russian history, but I currently manage an American history grant at a college and worked many years in history museums.

I'm the guy.

I'm also brand new to DU. I have been looking around DU for a while, but I only just registered. I think the study of history shows us trends and patterns in current political developments and gives us a broader perspective against which to measure events. I look forward to some interesting discussions.

B.A. in history although not specifically American. I did take a number of American classes, though.

by David Hackett Fischer. How the four earliest immigrant groups formed American culture and politics. Anyone else read it? A great perspective on the founding of America.

I've been planning to read Albion's Seed. From what I've heard of it, it helps explain the current rift in the country. The Puritan/Quaker legacy of the North vs. the Cavalier/Scots-Irish legacy of the South.

Sorry I didn't respond sooner--just checked my messages now. I think Albion's Seed is the only book I've come across that does in-depth research on the 4 early groups that founded this country. I keep dipping back into it, and recommend it to anyone w/an interest in history. What I find fascinating is that the "ways of doing," (as Fischer puts it) persist to this day, and travel to entirely different immigrant groups over time. I'm looking forward to a book he supposed to be releasing concerning plantation society--he offers proof, apparently, that far from being a "necessary" economic system, slavery was in fact part of a particular social system, persisting even when it often didn't make economic sense. When, and if, he publishes this book, I would expect a _lot_ of fireworks.

I look forward to some indepth discussions once I've read it.

History has always been one of my favorite hobbies :hi:

:toast:

I only stumbled here recently. I love the idea of this group.

Another forum on DU to rob me of my day. -chuckle-

I love history. In my spare time I'm working on my family's history which began in this country in 1738. This has encouraged me to study the bigger picture - often family events can only be understood in the context of what was going on in the country at the time.

I hope we get a lot of discussions going in here.

History is my favorite subject. I am particualarly fond of little known history; no 4 Jul 1776 stuff can equate to the knowledge that we should actually be celebrating the birth of this nation before that. There are several schools of thought on just when the nation actually broke with England, some going back to 1772, so I am always looking for new and precious little known history....:D

This is a favorite topic, along with the Constitution.