History of US immigration thread
I'm a Brit but I am really interested in the era of late 1800's early 1900's immigration to the US (Probably because of films making it look romantic) how did the US go about attracting Europeans to immigrate? Did they buy posters/advertisements in newspaper saying "We're trying to fill our country up, come on over" or what?
Also how did people mostly immigrate, individually or family groups, groups of friends? From a modern perspective it seems pretty crazy to get on a boat to go to a brand new country you don't speak the language, have never seen before, maybe don't know anybody etc especially from a modern perspective were people check out whereever they go on google maps beforehand.
Anyone have any interesting facts on the this topic? Discuss.
They were offered free land to farm
Fun Fact: my great grandpa immigrated from Italy when he was a young boy in the early 1900s and brought this swiss harmonica with him that i now have.
pls add to history books
>>1408119
Pretty cool
Why are the Greeks so wewuzist? Every single Greek I have talked to on the internet started bragging about ancient Greece at one point, I am starting to think all Greeks behave like this.
Because Greece is a shithole with nothing going for it, the population aren't much related to the ancients except by the language, they have no good history for the last 2000 years, so all they can cling onto is the ancients.
At least its real though, unlike slavs and blacks who just make shit up
>>1407640
Greek history is pretty great they should be proud of it nothing wrong in that
>>1407686
>being proud in shit you have nothing to do with
what's next you're going to be proud in the specific subjective interpretation of the brain to the outside stimuli of reality?
you're going to be proud of the fundamental laws of the universe?
in the product of DNA sequencing?
be proud in something that actually points to your virtuous as a living human being not to ideal concepts that are influenced by nothing but ego masturbation and inferiority complex.
![Titanic_t00.mkv_snapshot_01.47.11_[2016.07.12_20.09.42].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/PAaXOIe.jpg "Titanic t00.mkv snapshot 01.47.11 [2016.07.12 20.09.42]")
I know everyone likes to scapegoat him as being a coward for surviving the Titanic, BUT I feel him being alive was critical for the testimony hearings. Having someone from the head of White Star itself would be more beneficial than having him dead
Mmm. I'm torn on Ismay. I don't think it's wrong for him to want to live, and no one can begrudge him that.
I think the reason the contemporary and modern reaction to Ismay surving is so visceral for several reasons.
1) Ismay was not an ordinary passenger. He was the acting director of the White Star line, and was acting in an official capacity while the ship was sinking through certain actions such as when he relieved women of their duties (he even forced several female crew members into the boats, saying 'you are just women, not crew, now'). Is he crew, or passenger? He seemed to have wanted it both ways.
2) Multiple eyewitness accounts make it credible that the circumstances surrounding loading this lifeboat were not peaceful, orderly or calm. Ismay repeatedly insisted that there were 'no passengers left to fill the boat' (yet by multiple accounts, certainly there were) and that it was not chaotic (despite reports from multiple people of gunshots, needing to form human link chains so they could get women and children onto the boat, and so on). He seemed to want to downplay his choice by amending the circumstances--"It didn't matter that I got on because there weren't passengers aren't and it was so calm!"
3) The unfairness of it. If the 14 year old bellboys were deemed "adult crew/adult men" and couldn't get onto a lifeboat, why should Ismay be allowed a spot so easily?
It didn't help that Ismay's behavior and decisions after the sinking didn't endear him to the victims' families or eyes of the public.
>>1405751
Let's see how wiling you are to die just for your honor
I feel compelled to post that last week I went to a museum and saw the actual violin Wallace Hartley played as the ship went down. Eerie as hell.
A couple of questions that I have:
1. What was Napoleons aim in all his wars? was it European unification?
2. Did Hitler want to unify all Europe under a fascist Regime?
3. Why is it always the English who are opposed to any dominate power in Europe but never seek to gain land within Europe and become the continental power?
>>1413406
>1. What was Napoleons aim in all his wars? was it European unification?
No. After the French Revolution, every monarchy in Europe became an enemy of the French. He was trying to defeat them to force them to recognize the French Republic.
>2. Did Hitler want to unify all Europe under a fascist Regime?
Unclear. According to his own rhetoric, he just wanted to unite all "Germans," who just so happened to live in various foreign countries.
>3. Why is it always the English who are opposed to any dominate power in Europe but never seek to gain land within Europe and become the continental power?
They have never had the strength to do that.
>>1413406
>Why is it always the English who are opposed to any dominate power in Europe but never seek to gain land within Europe and become the continental power?
Its location makes it hard to be attacked but also hard to attack other countries
>>1413450
>French Empire
FTFY
>He who fights too long against dragons becomes a dragon himself; and if you gaze too long into the abyss, the abyss will gaze into you.
What does it mean ?
“For I am I: ergo, the truth of myself; my own sphinx, conflict, chaos, vortex—asymmetric to all rhythms, oblique to all paths. I am the prism between black and white: mine own unison in duality.”
>newfags can't stare into the abyss and feel the cold nothingness creeping its way into their soul
seriously, you should just consider a well paying job with retirement in sight and 1.5 kids.
>>1410384
It means Hegel was right
3 will fight for you
the rest will try to kill you
who do you pick?
USA
USSR
Germany
>>1405524
My grandfather who is Greek always tells me of how good of a leader Metaxas is, so I suppose him, Selassie and Hitler
>>1405524
>Hitler/shadow fuhrer
He has a lot of charisma
>The aussie
They're always good in a fight
>Mao
He has like a gazillion worshippers who will fight and die for him.
im curious about the ways in which towns and cities were fortified over the ages, but im not sure where to begin to get a good understanding of what was done, when it was done, and why it was done, /his/.
the current extent of my knowledge is that we began fortifying towns and cities on naturally hard to challenge ground with the motte and bailey approach, and irregular city planning made it difficult for an army to reach the inner rings of the city, protecting the various different classes of society.
Fortifications are much, much older than that. They predate history. The oldest settlements we even know about (Jericho, etc) were surrounded by walls.
>>1416194
true, but walls are one thing, im more interested in the developments in fortifications, such as the changing to rounded stone fortifications to defeat siege tactics, and the gradual decline of them as cannons rose in popularity.
We've used walls since civilisation began
So I recently decided to convert to Mormonism and the more I look into it the more it looks like the perfect Christian religion. So why don't more Christians embrace it?
>>1415686
because Mormonism is one of the few religions to be so fucking wrong we can be 100% certain it is wrong. even if the world is an illusion it's still wrong
>>1415686
It's the perfect American religion.
Other Christian sects generally have the bedrock of thousands of years of theological research.
You have a convicted criminal from Vermont.
>>1415686
Because it's not Christianity. You'd understand this if you weren't the kind of person that chooses religion for superficial lifestyle reasons.
You'd think the European powers would have learned from the American Civil War that trench warfare is terrible and tends to stagnate, was it out of necessity that they fought a trench warfare despite this?
Trench warfare was a nessesary evil. It was the worst tactic for the western front in WWI except all the other ones.
>>1415611
Because the doctrines of the worlds powers hadent changed, and that alot of military theorists didnt see the civil war as represenative of wars that would be fought in europe
Nobody expected or wanted trench warfare when the war began, most military experts thought that the speed of both the mobilization and movement of the troops would mean that the faster side would win, and fairly quickly... but then everyone was too fast, nobody got the upper hand, and so trench warfare it was.
why do people still use the argument that china and russia weren't real comunism?
>>1415296
Because in communism everyone is supposed to live well. The fact that they didn't, makes people think that it wasn't communism. Also they don't know what communism really is.
because the state, wages and class divisions still existed
>>1415296
because it's only real communism if there isn't a genocide and/or famine
So, how did we end up getting rid of the anarchist and communist terrorists anyway? They were the big bads of the 1890s-1920s and 1970s-1980s.
>>1414850
"Big bads" meaning "unironically the good guys"
"They" tried killing them but that didn't really work.
Everyone stopped caring as much about anarchism after WW1, and especially after the Soviet Union came along and started to monopolize the market on idealistic misfits.
Communist terrorism kind of dropped off after the USSR fell.
>>1414850
>that anarchist death toll
>"anarchists claimed the lives of President Sadi Carnot of France (1894), Antonio Cánovas del Castillo, the prime minister of Spain (1897), Empress Elizabeth of Austria (1898), King Umberto of Italy (1900), President William McKinley of the United States (1901) and José Canalejas y Méndez, another Spanish prime minister (1912)."
http://www.economist.com/node/4292760
Would it have worked?
Given that it was a 'design-only[' aircraft, one can easily assume that that immediate design probably had flaws in it that needed to be worked out, just like every other machine and piece of equipment when it is being built and tested.
>>1414703
Do you think the final product would have been able to fill the 'Amerika Bomber' role?
>>1414707
Depends on what operations the Wehrmacht and Schutzstaffel would be having the Luftwaffe do, for its time.
Hey, being curious, can someone describe to me what the industrial music group Laibach stands for? Is it a legitimate political message or is it another one of these music groups that "challenges society"?
>it another one of these music groups that "challenges society"?
This, the latter. Some of their most notable songs are pop covers - critiquing cult of personality in entertainment with their dictator-like artistic image. They also did a cover of abrasive, angry covers of several countries' national anthems and wear the modified uniforms of whatever country they're performing in, stripped of patches and redecorated to look ominous: what else do you think the purpose would be?
>>1414922
Honestly, the number of theories and political identities they wear and imply, makes it virtually impossible for me to dictate that they are "severely fascist" or "parodying it".
>>1414922
A good example is their cover of Queen's One Vision. Lyrics like:
>One man, one goal,
>One mission.
>One heart, one soul,
>Just one solution.
>One flash of light, yeah,
>One god, one vision.
and
>So give me your hands,
>Give me your hearts.
>I'm ready.
>There's only one direction.
>One world, one nation,
>Yeah, one vision.
take on a really different meaning when they're sung in German by a shirtless man, set to a martial anthem and titled "Birth of a Nation."
I'm really a fan of their Sympathy for the Devil cover because of how demonic it sounds compared to the original Rolling Stones caterwauling.
Though honestly I'd say they peaked in the mid 90s. Their newer stuff hasn't been as subversive or entertaining.
>>1414969
IIRC at one point, Laibach was banned simultaneously from preforming in both Yugoslavia and in West Germany/Austria, because the governments thought they were either fascist, communist, or democratic subversives.
But anyways, Zizek did a little talk about what he thinks Laibach's ideology is. It seems pretty on point to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BZl8ScVYvA
When did the french stop being called franks?
the nobility looked at Germany then looked at Italy and decided at some point they wanted to be more latin sounding
Probably aroound this time:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_Empire
>>1414443
Really? That early
I honestly imagined it went on well into the high middle ages
Was Pinochet a gud boi?
Yes, can't have enough free helicopter rides.
>>1414382
naice meem m9 XDDDDD
Bro we were gonna try peaceful communism this time it isn't fair!!
