Zombie
@Zombie@feddit.uk
- Comment on The only woman on the Declaration of Independence 1 week ago:
Context:
Mary Katharine Goddard (June 16, 1738 – August 12, 1816) was an early American publisher, and the postmaster of the Baltimore Post Office from 1775 to 1789. She was the older sister of William Goddard, also a publisher and printer. She was the second printer to print the Declaration of Independence. Her copy, the Goddard Broadside, was commissioned by Congress in 1777, and was the first to include the names of the signatories.[1][2] In 1998, Goddard was inducted into the Maryland Women’s Hall of Fame.[3] Goddard owned a slave named Belinda Starling. Upon her death in 1816, Goddard’s will posthumously freed Starling and bequeathed to her all of Goddard’s property.[4]
- Comment on Alan Turing could have lived his whole life twice over and he would still have to wait 18 years for Gay Marriage to be legalized in the UK 1 week ago:
Propaganda? Lmfao. Alright.
- Comment on Alan Turing could have lived his whole life twice over and he would still have to wait 18 years for Gay Marriage to be legalized in the UK 1 week ago:
We didn’t keep our parliament. It was dissolved and only reestablished in 1999 after decades of Tory rule and protest from both the Scottish people and political class.
The legal system is merely a formality, what does Westminster care if we use a different court system when we’re still beholden to the same laws? A treaty was signed keeping it, why risk throwing that all away to impose a judicial system that is very similar to what Scotland uses anyway.
The enthusiastic participation in Empire is a mixed bag. There were both proponents and opponents, both in the common folk and the political class.
You seem to have strong opinions for somebody who has clearly not read anything on the topic.
If reading isn’t your style, this YouTube channel is interesting:
Slavery from a Scottish point of view https://youtu.be/ilPrYoVrdNE
The Massacre of Glencoe https://youtu.be/-FZktUwCgk8
- Comment on Alan Turing could have lived his whole life twice over and he would still have to wait 18 years for Gay Marriage to be legalized in the UK 1 week ago:
Aye, okay, only if you completely ignore the entire history of Scotland and England from about 1100 onwards.
- Comment on Alan Turing could have lived his whole life twice over and he would still have to wait 18 years for Gay Marriage to be legalized in the UK 1 week ago:
What you’ve said isn’t even close to historical fact.
Wales didn’t voluntarily join the union because it wasn’t an independent nation at the time. It was colonised by the English.
The Laws in Wales Acts 1535 and 1542 (Welsh: Y Deddfau Cyfreithiau yng Nghymru 1535 a 1542), also called the Acts of Union (Welsh: Y Deddfau Uno), were acts of the Parliament of England under King Henry VIII causing Wales to be incorporated into the realm of the Kingdom of England.
The legal system of England and the norms of English administration, including the use of the English language only, were applied to a mainly Welsh-speaking Wales. This created a single state and legal jurisdiction, which is now called England and Wales.
In 1284, with the Statute of Rhuddlan, England had annexed Wales, which was excluded from parliamentary representation in Westminster. Wales was divided between the Principality of Wales and many feudal territories called the marcher Lordships, which were effectively unified under the laws. The English system of county government was also extended across all of Wales.
en.wikipedia.org/…/Laws_in_Wales_Acts_1535_and_15…
As for Scotland, yes the parliament voted for it but there was much shenanigans afoot.
The Treaty details were agreed on 22 July 1706, and separate Acts of Union were then passed by the parliaments of England and Scotland to put the agreed Articles into effect. The Treaty of Union was eventually passed in the Parliament of Scotland. The first Parliament of Scotland was a unicameral Parliament that was first mentioned on record in the 13th century, when a meeting took place in Kirkliston in 1235. The Parliament met until “prorogued sine die” following months of intense debate, with 110 voting in favour for the treaty to 67 against. It is notable that 123 of the 300 members of Parliament were missing from one of the most controversial votes of the age. The passing of the vote has been described as a vote “to end Scotland’s independence”.[3]
After the negotiations ended on 22 July 1706, separate acts of parliament were drafted by both parliaments to implement the agreed Articles of Union. The Scots proponents of union believed that failure to agree to the Articles would result in the imposition of a union under less favourable terms, and English troops were stationed just south of the Scottish border and also in northern Ireland as an “encouragement”. Months of fierce debate in both capital cities and throughout both kingdoms followed. In Scotland, the debate on occasion dissolved into civil disorder, most notably involving the notorious “Edinburgh Mob”,[13] which threatened “Destruction to all the Promoters of the Union”.[14]
As the Parliament of Scotland was deliberating on 22 October 1706, the session had to be suspended “because the mob was threatening to break in”;[15] although this did not ultimately occur, they subsequently “attacked the house of Sir Patrick Johnston, a commissioner for union and former Lord Provost of Edinburgh.”[15] “Troops were brought into the city with orders to shoot if necessary, and several regiments were placed at Queensberry’s disposal on the Scottish border and in Ireland in the event of trouble.”[16] The prospect of a union of the kingdoms was deeply unpopular among the Scottish population at large, and talk of an uprising was widespread.[17] However, the treaty was signed and the documents were rushed south with a large military escort. Andrew Fletcher, a prominent Scottish patriot, argued that the ratification of the treaty would see Scotland “more like a conquered province”.[18]
- Comment on I am begging the mods to make this into a rule 2 weeks ago:
Aye, normally bot accounts have a wee robot emoji, but I don’t see anything for Grumpus
- Comment on I am begging the mods to make this into a rule 2 weeks ago:
Genuinely starting to think this is just a bot account, it doesn’t provide context because it has no means of knowing the context.
It pulls images and titles from Reddit (or elsewhere) and is spitting it back out at us.
- Comment on Shout out to ancient translators, we never hear much about them 3 weeks ago:
Well, that and it’s a trick of diplomacy. It gives you some extra time to think. It’s still done today. For example, Putin when discussing in German or English.
Not to mention if your “barbarian” isn’t as good as you thought, or claimed, then it removes the chance of an embarrassing misunderstanding.
- Comment on SCOTLAND FOREVER 4 weeks ago:
Checkmate. They got merged into one in 1994, just called The Highlanders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlanders_(Seaforth,_Gordons_and_Camerons)
There’s also the wildcard, the Atholl Highlanders.
It has been described as the only legal private army in Europe.[3]
- Comment on The Flavian Amphitheatre is clearly the superior console 4 weeks ago:
TFW PugJesus stops providing context with memes
P.S. Naval battles were for real!
- Comment on Excellent point... 4 weeks ago:
You clearly don’t know what anarchism truly is, but rather have an idea of what you think it is. I suggest giving the book I linked a quick browse. It’s not very long and is written specifically to be accessible to those who have never studied anarchism in depth.
But before I tell you what Anarchism is, I want to tell you what it is not.
That is necessary because so much falsehood has been spread about Anarchism. Even intelligent persons often have entirely wrong notions about it.
Link again for your convenience.
- Comment on Excellent point... 4 weeks ago:
Who said anything about being alone?
One of the core tenets of anarcho-communism (which this book is explaining and advocating for) is mutual aid.
Anarchy doesn’t mean no rules, it means no rulers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_aid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Aid:_A_Factor_of_Evolution
Therefore I must tell you, first of all, what Anarchism is not.
It is not bombs, disorder, or chaos.
It is not robbery and murder.
It is not a war of each against all.
It is not a return to barbarism or to the wild state of man.
Anarchism is the very opposite of all that.
Anarchism means that you should be free; that no one should enslave you, boss you, rob you, or impose upon you.
It means that you should be free to do the things you want to do; and that you should not be compelled to do what you don’t want to do.
It means that you should have a chance to choose the kind of a life you want to live, and live it without anybody interfering.
It means that the next fellow should have the same freedom as you, that every one should have the same rights and liberties.
- Comment on Toyohiro Akiyama deserved better 4 weeks ago:
The standard cigarettes in the UK are 20 packs of Super King size. Assuming it’s the same in Japan:
At 24 hours in a day, 8 hours of sleep, that leaves 16 hours awake.
20 x 4 = 80 cigarettes
80 cigarettes in 16 hours is one every 12 minutes. Considering a cigarette takes about 5 minutes to smoke, that’s almost as much time with a cigarette as without. The entire time he’s awake.
And he thought he could just give that up for a jaunt in space? No wonder he hated it!
- Comment on Excellent point... 4 weeks ago:
As is the case now.
Are you free, really? Free to do what? To live as you please? To do what you please?
Let’s see. How do you live? What does your freedom amount to?
You depend on your employer for your wages or your salary, don’t you? And your wages determine your way of living, don’t they? The conditions of your life, even what you eat and drink, where you go and with whom you associate, — all of it depends on your wages.
No, you are not a free man. You are dependent on your employer and on your wages. You are really a wage slave.
The whole working class, under the capitalist system, is dependent on the capitalist class. The workers are wage slaves.
So, what becomes of your freedom? What can you do with it? Can you do more with it than your wages permit?
Can’t you see that your wage — your salary or income — is all the freedom that you have? Your freedom, your liberty, don’t go a step further than the wages you get.
The freedom that is given you on paper, that is written down in law books and constitutions, does not do you a bit of good. Such freedom only means that you have the right to do a certain thing. But it doesn’t mean that you can do it. To be able to do it, you must have the chance, the opportunity. You have a right to eat three fine meals a day, but if you haven’t the means, the opportunity to get those meals, then what good is that right to you?
So freedom really means opportunity to satisfy your needs and wants. If your freedom does not give you that opportunity, than it does you no good. Real freedom means opportunity and well-being. If it does not mean that, it means nothing.
from Now and After by Alexander Berkman, Chapter 3: Law and Government. Available to read for free here.
- Comment on "We made a series of mistakes": GOG apologise for emailing Nazi symbols to people in newsletter about Slavic fantasy game 4 weeks ago:
It is language dependent, because they’re lazy. That’s also what the user you responded to said.
Source: I read the GOG forums when the news first broke
Being in Germany though, you do now have the opportunity to do something about this which most don’t. You have been sent explicit Nazi imagery, which as far as I’m aware is illegal.
- Comment on And sources. It would be nice if we could learn something instead of being left confused by a meme we have no clue of what it is about. 5 weeks ago:
Context:
Recent meme posters have disregarded PugJesus’ standard practice of giving historical context with memes, and instead been posting the memes alone. This has left some viewers confused and annoyed because they don’t understand the memes without the context.
Bernie Sanders is an American Democrat politician who in 2019 released a video asking for financial support from his supporters for his 2020 presidential nomination. This is a meme that has changed the subtitles of a scene from that video to humorously request context with future meme posts.
This is a context post to provide context for OPs request for context.
- Comment on William Wallace didn’t look like that 5 weeks ago:
Wallace’s most famous battle is arguably the Battle of Stirling Bridge. A smaller force of 5-6,000 infantry and 300 cavalry defeated 7,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry!
As the name suggests, it’s key component was the bridge at Stirling. It was a bottleneck which Wallace used to his advantage to defeat the larger force.
This battle was portrayed in Braveheart, with one teensy tiny bit of “artistic liberty”. They forgot the bloody bridge!
They did however get the historically accurate mediaeval car in shot though
- Comment on One more... 5 weeks ago:
- Comment on Naming it World War 1 was a bad omen 5 weeks ago:
But how get America into the war when her people were expressly against it? Didn’t they elect Wilson as President on the clear promise to keep the country out of war?
In former days, under absolute monarchs, the subjects were simply compelled to obey the king’s command. But that often involved resistance and the danger of rebellion. In modern times there are surer and safer means of making the people serve the interests of their rulers. All that is necessary is to talk them into believing that they themselves want what their masters want them to do; that it is to their own interests, good for their country, good for humanity. In this manner the noble and fine instincts of man are harnessed to do the dirty work of the capitalistic master class, to the shame and injury of mankind.
Modern inventions help in this game and make it comparatively easy. The printed word, the telegraph, the telephone, and radio are all sure aids in this matter. The genius of man, having produced those wonderful things, is exploited and degraded in the interests of Mammon and Mars.
President Wilson invented a new device to snare the American people into the war for the benefit of Big Business. Woodrow Wilson, the former college president, discovered a ‘war for democracy’, a ‘war to end war’. With that hypocritical motto a country-wide campaign was started, rousing the worst tendencies of intolerance, persecution, and murder in American hearts; filling them with venom and hatred against every one who had the courage to voice an honest and independent opinion; beating up, imprisoning, and deporting those who dared to say that it was a capitalistic war for profits. Conscientious objectors to the taking of human life were brutally maltreated as ‘slackers’ and condemned to long penitentiary terms; men and women who reminded their Christian countrymen of the Nazarene’s command, ‘Thou shalt not kill’, were branded cowards and shut up in prison; radicals who declared that the war was only in the interests of capitalism were treated as ‘vicious foreigners, and ‘enemy spies’. Special laws were rushed through to stifle every free expression of opinion. Dire punishment was meted out to every objector. From the Atlantic to the Pacific hundred-percenters, drunk with murderous patriotism, spread terror. The whole country went mad with the frenzy of jingoism. The nation-wide militarist propaganda at last swept the American people into the field of carnage.
Wilson was ‘too proud to fight’, but not too proud to send others to do the fighting for his financial backers. He was ‘too proud to fight’, but not too proud to help the American plutocracy coin gold out of the lives of seventy thousand Americans left dead on European battlefields.
The ‘war for democracy’, the ‘war to end war’ proved the greatest sham in history. As a matter of fact, it started a chain of new wars not yet ended. It has since been admitted, even by Wilson himself, that the war served no purpose except to reap vast profits for Big Business. It created more complications in European affairs than had ever existed before. It pauperized Germany and France, and brought them to the brink of national bankruptcy. It loaded the peoples of Europe with stupendous debts, and put unbearable burdens upon their working classes. The resources of every country were strained. The progress of science was registered by new facilities of destruction. Christian precept was proven by the multiplication of murder, and the treaties were signed with human blood.
The World War built huge fortunes for the lords of finance — and tombs for the workers.
And to-day? To-day we stand again on the brink of a new war, far greater and more terrible than the last holocaust. Every government is preparing for it and appropriating millions of dollars of the workers’ sweat and blood for the coming carnage.
from Now and After by Alexander Berkman, Chapter 6: War? Available to read for free here.
Written between WW1 and 2.
- Comment on Olive oil is love, olive oil is life 5 weeks ago:
Butter in a Mediterranean climate before the invention of refrigeration can go bad… very quickly.
If only they knew this one simple trick!
- Comment on You seem a cultured forest creature! I hate to kill you... 5 weeks ago:
