Reputation
1,102
Top tag
Next privilege 1,250 Rep.
Create tag synonyms
Badges
6 10
Newest
 Yearling
Impact
~31k people reached

Mar
21
comment Napoleon's exploits in 1785
In referring to his comrade are you talking about Pasquale Paoli? That's at least the spelling I see most commonly.
Mar
21
comment Given Hitler's Austrian ancestry, why did he develop German nationalism rather than Austrian nationalism?
The history/psychology barrier seems arbitrary and somewhat irrelevant here. History is a social science, it will always involve psychology on some level. Seeing as this question can be answered using a historical basis in regards to the historical boundaries/movements of the German people I would say it is a valid history question.
Mar
21
comment Has the American Civil War led to any significant innovations in 19th-century warfare?
None of this is about American superiority as you seem to imply. I'm not saying that other countries were incapable of this, rather that the American Civil War occurred at a time where a lot of these innovations came into play. The bias here is yours. Please keep the commentary factually based and emotionally unmotivated. When you actually research the numbers you'll find that the US was highly industrialized beyond most European countries because of a lack of available labor and not because of some kind of American Exceptionalism. "The Battle Cry of Freedom" covers this extensively.
Mar
21
comment Has the American Civil War led to any significant innovations in 19th-century warfare?
You ought to heavily fact check your comment. Saying that the US was the most industrialized nation does not exclude other nations being industrialized. Obviously how you measure that is subjective but in terms of factories and railway density the US was at or near the top. The Prussians used breechloading rifles and railroads in a war AFTER the Civil War had ended. The Royal Navy had 2 ironclad ships during the period when the US was making dozens.
Mar
19
revised Has the American Civil War led to any significant innovations in 19th-century warfare?
Removed first, off-topic sentence
Mar
1
revised How Many German Born American Citizens served for the U.S. in World War II?
Generalized the core question and removed the the lengthy and off topic statement of opinions on the matter.
Feb
28
suggested approved edit on How Many German Born American Citizens served for the U.S. in World War II?
Feb
28
answered How Many German Born American Citizens served for the U.S. in World War II?
Feb
28
comment How Many German Born American Citizens served for the U.S. in World War II?
The question as stated could be revised to remove the opinion sections and fit with the nature of this site. I understand and respect why you are asking the question, though in an academic sense the answer won't change if the reasoning is removed and it distracts from getting the data you want.
Feb
26
comment Why did Native Americans die from European diseases while Europeans didn't catch serious diseases from the New World?
@twosheds Finally thank you for the discourse. While I would normally write an answer yours is going to be the reference on this topic for the foreseeable future and I appreciate your willingness to take things into consideration.
Feb
26
comment Why did Native Americans die from European diseases while Europeans didn't catch serious diseases from the New World?
@twosheds That's fair, I am particularly sensitive on that issue because I feel that perpetuating the idea that the Americas were 1000+ years behind Europe and Asia is inaccurate at best and offensive at worst. Your points are well made though I wouldn't mind seeing some of that in the answer as well.
Feb
26
comment Why did Native Americans die from European diseases while Europeans didn't catch serious diseases from the New World?
@twosheds The population point is valid. The issue that I think still remains is why did the Americas produce one disease and Europe produced dozens. Even with reductions in trade and populations it fails in my mind to account for that shortfall. I would offer for your consideration the theories that look at the Americas lack of large land mammals and domesticatable creatures to explain that.
Feb
26
comment Why did Native Americans die from European diseases while Europeans didn't catch serious diseases from the New World?
@twosheds I agree, there's nothing equivalent to the Mediterranean in the Americas and trade there would be of a different character. But as it applies to disease I'm not sure there's a substantive enough difference to say it answers the original question. Items from S America made their way up to the Great Lakes and by all indications trade was a consistent force over the centuries. In both cases the flow of goods should reflect a flow of disease as well so I don't think that answers the original question.
Feb
26
comment Why did Native Americans die from European diseases while Europeans didn't catch serious diseases from the New World?
@twosheds ...In some estimates N America would be in the same ballpark as the population of Europe. For long periods of time trade between Asia and Europe simply didn't exist. The Silk Road was a byproduct of Mongol rule, not a persistent phenomenon. In both cases it's hard to say by exactly how much they were different, and it's possible they weren't as far off as we assume. The problem is that so much of the evidence in the Americas was either not researched or has been destroyed. In light of that I think the answer should focus what we do know rather than speculative numbers.
Feb
26
comment Why did Native Americans die from European diseases while Europeans didn't catch serious diseases from the New World?
@twosheds - My main issue is that your argument, as it currently exists, rests on a lot of assumptions not supported by evidence. "American population densities just don't compare to Europe, India, or Asia." and "not as intense as in Eurasia." can certainly have truth to them but since so much relies on those numbers there needs to be more there...
Feb
26
comment Why did Native Americans die from European diseases while Europeans didn't catch serious diseases from the New World?
The answer to this question can be explained by one factor: A mass extinction of domesticatable animals roughly 13K years ago led to a near total absence of zoonotic diseases, which in turn led to the people of the Americas having no cultural or biological defenses against them when they arrived. The Americas were so susceptible to disease because of a dense and interconnected population, not in spite of them. Revising the answer to one that fits with the historical evidence and deals with the logical inconsistencies in points 2 and 3 would earn an upvote.
Feb
26
comment Why did Native Americans die from European diseases while Europeans didn't catch serious diseases from the New World?
This answer buys wholeheartedly into the myth that the early Americas were sparsely populated and separated into isolated tribes. The assumption flies in the face of a whole host of evidence. Artifacts across the country show a thriving trade network was in place for long periods before Columbus. Firsthand accounts from the late 1400s/early 1500s described a densely populated continent.
Feb
11
awarded  Nice Answer
Oct
28
awarded  Enlightened
Oct
28
awarded  Nice Answer