news
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today/ . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
view the rest of the comments
Andrew Jackson's policies have almost no relevance to 21st century American politics. Almost no president before the Civil War does.
You want to disparage me for not understanding AMERICAN history, when Andrew Jackson isn't even considered one of the 10 worst presidents by historians. Pre-Civil war Presidents like Polk, Taylor, Buchanan, etc are considered worse, but Europeans have never even heard of them. Then there is Andrew Johnson, the Confederate sympathizer VP who became president after Lincoln's assassination, and cancelled most of the Reconstruction efforts, establishing the Jim Crow laws, and starting the ferocious racism that dominated America for the next century.
If you want to choose a bad president as an example, you can do worse that Jackson.
By the way, I have a degree in history.
I think you have an actual problem keeping a point together, at this point I feel bad even arguing.
I said Trump was the most American president. As in he delivers the ideals of what America represents (in reality, not your liberal nationalist nonsense). When you said “No” so persuasively, I offered Jackson as another great representative of what America stands for, white supremacy and murder. You were very confused by this.
I do believe you have a history degree, you very likely 1. Have a very standard liberal university degree. 2. Have a wildly non-materialist view of history.
Presidential rankings are less important than music video rankings, I don’t care which bastard you like more.
I also hate people who always need the last word so I am doing my part in extending this.
pathetic
wipe your ass with it
hey what biases do these historians have? why do they think genocide doesn't play when evaluating presidents?
Who said they don't consider genocide in their rankings? American historians are brutal towards presidents that supported slavery and the Native American genocide. I've never seen a single authentic scholarly historian ( not a propagandist) justify either one of those terrible atrocities.
Those mid-19th century presidents are excoriated precisely because of their support of slavery and the Native American genocide.
As an American historian, how do you feel about president Joe Biden?
He's epic chungus 😋
Can we get
but the heads are all Biden and the medal is also bidens head?
This is either No True Scotsman or you have never engaged in the most mild evaluation of historiography. There have always been and continue to be historians who are defensive of slavery in cases like George Washington's. Mostly though, people seem to just sort of gloss over it in his case where they might be more emphatic toward less sacred cows. Yes, obviously there are also many historians who will attack most or all of the pre-Civil War Presidents.
Alright, so No True Scotsman
I'm also kind of skeptical of the substance even of your claim about those specific books, because you've been doing a lot of handwaving of American crimes that you nominally condemn elsewhere in this thread, and you and I both know there are countless tellings of the history of American slavers that handwring about the obvious evil but ultimately don't take it that seriously. It's paying a tax more than anything.
It's been 4 hours, you gonna answer this or nah?
Name em
Literally everyone president supported or currently supports the native American genocide. When you take the reigns of the government responsible for it and it doesn't stop, you are supporting it. Tacit support counts. If youre arguing that every US president was scum, I agree but it makes picking the worst one kinda unimportant
If you're going to lie, at least make it plausible.
If you had a degree in history, you would know what a hinge point the civil war was