Comments by "Adam Bainbridge" (@AdamMGTF) on "American Civil War - River War Pt 2 - With reflections on other naval matters" video.

  1. Sadly this comment doesn't shock me. The more I engage with history online, the more and more I've become frustrated. I'm not frustrated by Americans (having visited many countries. It's one of the few where literally everyone was happy to see you, talk to you and just generally 'be nice'). But I am frustrated A: By the general very poor understanding Americans have about the rest of the world and it's history. B: the general assumption (if not core belief) that all world history is American history. C: the increasing trend upwards which suggests history is learnt from computer games and films and D: most worryingly. That when anyone from an expert, to a well red amateur tries to help educate, or to try and explain a point of view from the rest of the world, or point out inaccuracy. The response is not "thanks, I didn't know that. I'd like to learn more", it's an immediate defensive response or just a fall back on core beliefs (wether true or not). Interestingly. The op mentioned that world history classes weren't very good. If I said that regarding my education* then my friends who were into history would A: generally launch into a tirade against Westminster. Because we are English. But B: we would talk about things we wish we knew. Where as the posters below, are instantly focused on the political aspect of what's right to teach about the history of America. The heavy irony being. If history was taught in the USA the way it is here. You'd realise that as sad as some aspects of Americas history is. It's nothing new in human history. *The fact that world history and American history is taught as separate subjects, kind of proves my point. I was taught history at school. My nieces and nephews are taught history. Not 'english history' and. 'world history'. Of course there is a bias towards teaching from the English point of view. I mean the nepolionic wars are taught from the point of view of the French. But it's still taught as a whole. Even areas where the uk wasn't involved. P.s. a good example of the sort of US centralised view of the world, is seen in this video. The chap drach is talking to is fantastic. I'm going to find more of his videos now. But. And this is a small thing, but something I've noticed before. He keeps on calling the American civil war. 'The civil war'. Why?!
    8
  2. Im still struggleing to understand that. After all, after the English civil war. Neither side felt the need to stay armed afterwards. Nor did it happen in any other European country in a post civil war environment. NI in the 20thC doesn't count as that was an active war. Australia was colonised. The new colonists came from a similar mix of backgrounds and famously (though as many 'fun' facts it's a little over hyped) many early settlers were convicted criminals. Yet, no 'gun culture'. I've heard all kinds of 'explainations' as to why Americans have this gun culture. None make sense historically. Otherwise why is freedom of speech, religion and democracy the norm in Europe and most other ex colony's (sadly the Ukraine being an exception right now). The only argument I've ever thought makes total sense. Was a chap on the forgotten weapons channel who replied to someone posting about how Americans need guns to protect freedom or some nonsense. The guy just replied "bullshit. We have guns because we can, and because there fuckin cool. That's why I have mine". I loved that brutal honesty.
    7
  3. Huh?
    3
  4. "Wabash" just makes me think of cartoons. Or the ship whil-e-cyote would sail into battle. What a name
    2
  5. Not a bad summary of the whole video :) Tho it's worth pointing out that the iornclads may have been very good for defence in immediate costal waters. But don't forget. Had america needed to fight a proper blue water navy. The iornclads wouldn't be much use. As a blockade off the coast with huge "proper" iornclads would still strangle the economy.
    2
  6. It's worth noting three things. 1: the French happened and the British empire didn't want another world rival and another 100 years of war. US world policy has echoes of this post ww2 2: Germany was a very very new country. Yet inspite of Bismarck holding Germany back. Germany still rapidly began gobbling up any spot of land it could and as already having, arguably the world's best land army. Was now looking worldwide. Note point 1. This happend with France and it cost a couple of generations near continuous war. 3: Americans don't tend to like the word 'empire'. But they had one. And it was expanding at a heck of a rate. Not just had the US gobbled up most of a continent (and would sparadically fight for the rest). But she had and would continue to gain island colony's. Arguably the current American empire is global, much like they used to say about the empire of GB. The sun never sets on American territory. So yeh. Hope that helps
    2
  7.  @TraditionalAnglican  Yeh, I understand that. I remember making my comment not long after a discussion with a chap where I had commented asking something like. "Could you explain which you mean by "Civil War"?' the video was discussing US/Spanish war and covering general history of both navys so knowing which civil war was important. I had an angry reply from an american who said something like 'I suppose you want it called the war of northern agression'. Which meant nothing to me at the time. Had to google it. I had a good few chaps all thinking I was some sort of southern american racist/history revisionist. But it did track with the whole 'well americans discount any history other than their own' ,thing. Which seemed to continue when i was commenting here. Ironically. I had never heard of this 'war of northern agression' and the Americans didn't consider there would be a civil war other than their own.
    2
  8. I think he pretty much planned his itinerary in 2019 🤣
    1
  9. The Crimean war? Remember, the uk kicked off the industrial revolution. Not to mention the nepolionic wars. Which was the first time industry was mobilised en-mass. Especially ship building, cannon forgeing etc. Oh, and the bunderskrig of course. Contemporaneous with the American civil war. The American civil war may have been the first industrial war in American history. But it wasn't the first in history.
    1
  10. Sadly "major documentaries" aren't what they were. The BBC is a public organisation and most of the public aren't interested in nerd level history. Those members of the public that are interested are watching this video 🤣 Also. When looking for talking heads, the BBC and other producers. Will always go to academic experts. I.e professors. or they will get some "famous" none entity to present.
    1
  11. Pop the question in patron :) otherwise sadly drach is unlikely to see this post.
    1
  12. I've never heard of any of that. So I'd find that interesting. I wonder how much drach knows (given that books on the history of the American civil war aren't popular here.)
    1
  13. Pretty much. Civil war Vs just being nice 🤣
    1