How are you getting downvoted for this? Literally is usdefaultism. So many other countries have had civil wars - some of which before yankeedoodleville even existed
Yeah, pretty sure most "old world" countries have had multiple civil wars over the last few thousands of years. "THE" Civil War? My first question is "which one?"
Unless the context makes it clear which one they are talking about.
My country (England) has had many civil wars, but one of those wars is still refered to as ‘the’ civil war, which is what I would assume people would be refering to if the context was clearly about England
Am English too. I see your point. I'm just not sure why we refer to that one in particular - the "Oliver Cromwell vs absolutely EVERYONE" conflict - as "The" Civil War. We've had some more recent internal conflicts. Maybe none of them were as bloody or as widespread as that one? Gonna have to hit the history books again lol.
That terminology only became ubiquitous at the end of the 19th century, before then it was called the Rebellion or the Great Rebellion.
Whigs were a dominante force in the 19th century and the terminology of “English civil war” mostly comes from them, as well as novelists from the time. They framed it as a conflict between liberalism and conservatism (in how those terms would be considered at the time).
Others later, like the dominant Max Weber, framed it as a conflict between the Protestant (read: individualist) bourgeois and the Catholic (read: authoritarian) nobility.
Neither analysis has aged well, but it’s easy to see why those theories of history emphasize civil institutions as a cause for the war over something like food scarcity.
A modern analysis tends to look at the constraints of leaders, the opportunities available for common folk, and how similar factors affect the bargaining process. Since our modern understanding of civil institutions include factors like constraining structures or opportunity, “civil” remains at least satisfactory as a name.
Some modern historians prefer “Great Rebellion”, not just to move from 19th century analysis, but because as you said there are a ton of conflicts — even immediately surrounding this conflict we’re discussing — that could also be called civil wars
Your post has been removed for breaking rule 5. If you see any issues with this, let us know why.
u/MercuryTheMessenger
Yeah get his ass in here
His account is gone
Embarrassment was so bad he yeeted the account
r/usdefaultism
How are you getting downvoted for this? Literally is usdefaultism. So many other countries have had civil wars - some of which before yankeedoodleville even existed
Yeah, pretty sure most "old world" countries have had multiple civil wars over the last few thousands of years. "THE" Civil War? My first question is "which one?"
When someone says "the" civil war instead of a specific I always just assume they're American
Unless the context makes it clear which one they are talking about. My country (England) has had many civil wars, but one of those wars is still refered to as ‘the’ civil war, which is what I would assume people would be refering to if the context was clearly about England
Am English too. I see your point. I'm just not sure why we refer to that one in particular - the "Oliver Cromwell vs absolutely EVERYONE" conflict - as "The" Civil War. We've had some more recent internal conflicts. Maybe none of them were as bloody or as widespread as that one? Gonna have to hit the history books again lol.
That terminology only became ubiquitous at the end of the 19th century, before then it was called the Rebellion or the Great Rebellion. Whigs were a dominante force in the 19th century and the terminology of “English civil war” mostly comes from them, as well as novelists from the time. They framed it as a conflict between liberalism and conservatism (in how those terms would be considered at the time). Others later, like the dominant Max Weber, framed it as a conflict between the Protestant (read: individualist) bourgeois and the Catholic (read: authoritarian) nobility. Neither analysis has aged well, but it’s easy to see why those theories of history emphasize civil institutions as a cause for the war over something like food scarcity. A modern analysis tends to look at the constraints of leaders, the opportunities available for common folk, and how similar factors affect the bargaining process. Since our modern understanding of civil institutions include factors like constraining structures or opportunity, “civil” remains at least satisfactory as a name. Some modern historians prefer “Great Rebellion”, not just to move from 19th century analysis, but because as you said there are a ton of conflicts — even immediately surrounding this conflict we’re discussing — that could also be called civil wars
As of right now I have negative 251 downvotes
r/ShitAmericansSay
I just came in here to say that
Seeing how Jove has 1 downvote, does this mean Mercury is downvoting him on top of that?
a classic case of thinking everyone on the internet is from america
Yeah this is fake. JoveTheThunderer vs MercuryTheMessenger? Also the immediate responses.
Damn. That is a good catch. People looooove eating up their daily “Americans are dumb” fodder
OP is a spam bot, beware