#since you know that's what the confederate army did since they were a bunch of evil fucking loser pieces of shit

[navree]

someone needs to have a talk with taylor sheridan because between yellowstone having one of its main antagonists be an evil blood purist native american (whose evil crime is he doesn’t like that a white rancher acts like he owns land that, ya know, was stolen and  also said white rancher is treated as being in the moral right for using his undue influence over the government to have the native american guy arrested on trumped up legal charges and then tell him he’s not oppressed and can’t be mad about the treatment of other native americans he was elected to be responsible for because he went to harvard) and 1883′s main dutton character being a literal soldier in the confederate army, someone’s gotta check if everything’s on the up and up

[vivithefolle]

Not sure if you already talked about this. (I’m pretty sure you have) but someone seemed to notice that when the trio get into fights, Hermione’s always in the right. Even when she’s supposed to be wrong she always seems to be half right. That kind of bothers me. Especially since it’s evident in the whole Scabbers situation.

I have indeed, on Quora, so let’s move yet another answer of mine to Tumblr!

Hermione is seldom wrong in the Harry Potter books. Sometimes she makes mistakes but those mistakes are either completely swept under the rug or downright ignored.

It’s partly due to lazy writing and partly due to Rowling’s own growing bias in favour of her Author Avatar that was fuelled by Steve Kloves, the primary advocate of the Hermione Granger Is The Perfect Girl Ever line of thinking (an utterly ridiculous line of thinking mind you).

Lizo: Steve, Hermione is a character that you have said is one of your favorites. Has that made her easier to write?

Steve: Yeah, I mean, I like writing all three, but I've always loved writing Hermione. Because, I just, one, she's a tremendous character for a lot of reasons for a writer, which also is she can carry exposition in a wonderful way because you just assume she read it in a book. If I need to tell the audience something...

JKR: Absolutely right, I find that all the time in the book, if you need to tell your readers something just put it in her. There are only two characters that you can put it convincingly into their dialogue. One is Hermione, the other is Dumbledore. In both cases you accept, it's plausible that they have, well Dumbledore knows pretty much everything anyway, but that Hermione has read it somewhere. So, she's handy.

Now this, right here, is the exact core of the problem.

Rowling herself admits it: if she wants the readers to have information, she puts Hermione in the scene. Hermione is our primary means of exposition because, like *grits teeth* Sssssteve puts it, it’s easy to assume that she’s read about it somewhere and it makes sense.

That’s all well and good but at first, if you notice, Ron also gave us exposition about the wizarding world, mostly about its culture. He was able to recall the exact year of the Wizarding Confederation that outlawed dragon breeding in Philosopher’s Stone! He explained what were respectively a “Mudblood”, a “Squib”, and Parseltongue, Hermione doing a little exposition about the history of that last one! He was also able to identify Sirius, after being dragged into the Whomping Willow, as an Animagi!

But then Goblet of Fire happens and you can notice the first change that will exponentially grow through the books: instead of Ron, pureblood Ron, born-before-the-end-of-the-war Ron, lived-through-the-aftermath-of-the-war Ron, identifying the Dark Mark, it’s instead Hermione, muggleborn Hermione, lived-as-a-Muggle-for-most-of-her-life Hermione, has-no-idea-about-the-emotional-impact-of-the-Mark Hermione who looks terrified as the Dark Mark shoots into the sky!

And it only will get worse, by the end of the series, Hermione pretty much knows about everything the plot needs her to know, instead of having to work with things she knows but can’t always apply to the situation:

Suddenly has a deep knowledge of Magical Law (in the will of Dumbledore’s chapter, while we had Rufus Scrimgeour who could have provided it to us, or to a lesser extent, Ron could have explained how a wizarding will basically worked)

Is suddenly an expert at finding edible plants and mushrooms. Apparently books are always the goddamn answer in JKR’s world, you can literally learn anything from them

She can decipher all the Tales of Beedle the Bard (may I remind you that they were written in Runes, okay Hermione may have a few years of Ancient Runes education BUT I once tried to translate a 3k+ story I had written for fun, from French to English, which means I knew what the subtleties and intentions were, I knew which turns of phrase I had to preserve so it would make sense in the end, and it still took me two gruelling weeks to get a satisfying result!)

Has suddenly grown a sense of quick-thinking (escaping Xenophilius’ house, using the jinx to make Harry’s face weird-looking) despite it being the only remaining flaw she had at the time (remember when she turned her back on her enemy while he was still conscious just to compliment Harry, and almost died as a result, even though she had been training in the DA to learn how to fight Death Eaters?) Quick-thinking under pressure can be learned, but it takes time and a lot of work to force your brain to override its instinct - and it’s fine because we’re all human and different. But no suddenly Hermione is the Greatest Strategist Evah™ and those silly boys (who actually were the original quick-thinking ones, and one of them was established as the strategist early on) better be grateful for this literal goddess because she protects them from all harm with her superhuman brain.

Somehow knows about Quidditch stuff - she knows about a Snitch’s “memory-touch”. Why should she give all the answers? Why can’t Ron give us this particular tidbit of information?

And then when we come to something Ron actually knows, the damn narration itself goes “woah a book that Ron has read but Hermione hasn’t??? shocking!! incredible!! Ron is not dumb, somebody call the news channel”. But… is that really so surprising? We’ve never seen Hermione read wizarding fiction or even Muggle fiction. We’ve never seen Hermione with anything other than schoolbooks in her hands. Of course Ron has read books she hasn’t read since she doesn’t seem to read fiction at all!

Sorry, bit of a tangent over here.

There are only two characters that you can put it convincingly into their dialogue.

So, that’s one part of the problem: the fact that Rowling, after making Ron our insight into magical culture and Hermione our provider of knowledge, ended up saying “eh whatever I guess Hermione can tell us everything we gotta know because it’s more convenient for me”. Which is a decision that was not based on Hermione’s character, but simply lazy writing. Long story short, it probably went: “Could Ron explain this bit of trivia? Meh, better make Hermione say it cause she’ll have read it in a book. It’s convenient and I won’t need to bother myself with exploring Ron’s characterisation.”

(And thus completely forgetting that Ron could maybe ask his big brothers via owl and provide us with a good heap of extra advanced knowledge - Bill is supposed to have aced his NEWTs after all.)

The other part of the problem is quite simply that Hermione is more often than not, either painted as a victim by the narrative (which makes more people take her side, classic manipulation tactic), or made to be right anytime it’s about a plot point.

Hermione’s mistakes are never explicitly stated, corrected, or even pointed out as being unethical.

Hermione only gets one mistake expressedly pointed out as being a mistake: her misadventure in Polyjuice Potion. The rest of them? Even her crush on Lockhart can’t be counted as a mistake - people get crushes all the time, based solely on physical appearance, it’s not something awful or terrible (Except when it’s Ron who crushes on someone. Ron crushing on someone is absolutely forbidden, and he must be punished with much ridicule and humiliation if he thinks he can get away with not worshipping Hermione like the goddess she is. The nerve of him, really.).

Throughout the books Hermione eventually morphs into Rowling’s Powerful Angel of Vengeance, that punishes the people who dared to do something she disliked - Rita is silenced but at a very ethically dubious price; Marietta gets scarred for life because she was more loyal to her mother than to a bunch of people her friend insisted she hang out with; Umbridge is led to a very, very alarming fate that is never made clear but some people have ideas and they’re not all very kid-friendly; Ron first is “helped” without knowing it because Hermione can’t be bothered to have faith in his capabilities, then when he fails to dutifully reward her for “helping” him, she causes him bodily harm before actively bullying him for not mind-reading her interest in him; causes even more bodily harm to Ron because that’s how feminism works; etc.

Hermione’s mistakes are always justified through the plot itself (which is lazy writing).

Turning into a cat? Only affects her.

The Firebolt? Scabbers? Well, in the end, it was really sent by Sirius Black and Crookshanks really wasn’t the culprit. Therefore all the feelings that were hurt and all the trust lost are irrelevant because Hermione was right all along.

Trying to free the house-elves? Well, it’s the intent that counts, right? And we’re never told enough about house-elf lore to know whether they’re poor brainwashed victims or powerful Penate-like symbiotes who need to serve a wizard to survive?

Kidnapping Rita Skeeter, trapping her and blackmailing her? Rita may be one foul little beetle, but that’s going a bit far, isn’t it? Harry approves? Oh, well, I guess it’s okay then…? A main character can’t have a dubious morality, right?

Manipulating Harry into forming Dumbledore’s Army and forcing him to relive a traumatic event with the same woman she’s kidnapped and blackmail and that she knows he hates? In the end, it all works out for the best and Harry’s hurt feelings don’t matter since it’s all about the greater good.

Using the centaurs to get rid of Umbridge (which poses the highly distressing question of what did the centaurs do to her?), realizing that the centaurs aren’t nice little horsies that are going to gently obey her every orders like good Disney princess’ companions, my goodness could this be an opportunity for character growth - nevermind, here comes Grawp the Giant Ex Machina, saving her arse and protecting Hermione from all that scary possibility of introspection. Thanks, Grawp Ex Machina.

Trying to dissuade a highly stressed-out and irrational Harry from rescuing Sirius by telling him exactly what he needed not to hear, a.k.a. “you have a saving people-thing” which causes Harry to completely go bonkers and go save his godfather without thinking twice? Well she was right after all, it was a trap! Nevermind how mind-boggingly insenstive and inadept at dealing with someone else’s feelings she was being, she was right! That means it wasn’t Hermione’s mistake!… probably. (Geez, I’m sensing a pattern here…)

Endangering Cormac’s life (Confunding him WHILE HE’S ON HIS BROOM) to promote Ron’s success? Oh but that’s so romantic! (Yeaaaah, how romantic to display exactly how much faith you lack in your crush. Top it off with a broken neck and that’s a picture perfect first date!)

Assaulting Ron with magic and causing him even more scars than he already had? But he was being cold with her first, right? And he totally should have known she was asking him out! It’s not like her invitation was even worse than his attempt to ask her out two years earlier! Plus she’s just a teenage girl expressing her emotions, anyone who tries to find fault in this is a disgusting abusive misogynist pig! Ha!

Getting all jealous that Harry is better than her at Potions, then pretending she’s not jealous by claiming that TEH BOOK IS EVIL, HARRY, and giving him the cold shoulder too? But no, she’s right, look, Harry used Sectumsempra and he almost killed Draco, nevermind that he’s very horrified about it! Hermione was right, like she always is!

Hermione Obliviating her parents, which pulls her from the “ethically dubious” zone into the “wow okay I’m pretty sure that this counts as a violation of basic human rights” zone, makes her one of those quirky wizardfolk who have the privilege to control those simple-minded Muggles because it’s for the greater good? But nooo she’s crying about it so it’s obviously very sad and angsty and it shows her devotion to the cause!

Splinching Ron while fleeing from the Ministry? Eeeh, but he’s fine, they’ve got Dittany, he’s good as new!… blood loss? Anaemia? What’s that?

Hermione was wrong about the Deathly Hallows not existing? Um, um, that doesn’t matter, LOOK DOBBY IS DEAD AND HARRY IS BACK TO LOOKING FOR THE HORCRUXES!! Therefore Hermione was right, the Hallows weren’t important for their quest, therefore the Hallows might as well not exist, HERMIONE WAS RIGHT NO REALLY I’VE GOT RECEIPTS -

The books never forget to remind Harry and Ron of their own shortcomings and moments of weakness.

Harry’s wrath and recklessness cost Sirius his life. This is the lesson he has to learn from his entitled behaviour in OotP: actions have consequences, and the greater your responsibility, the greater the cost will be.

Ron’s envy and insecurity lead him astray; they’re used to humiliate, ridicule and torture him throughout the books. They’re supposed to teach him that he’s worth something - but how is he supposed to believe that, when nobody ever tells him he’s worth anything? When nobody ever apologizes to him? When his feelings are taken for granted over and over? When his two friends seem to discard him whenever he does one thing wrong?

Hermione is never punished. Hermione is never said to be wrong, never shown to be wrong, never called out on her behaviour. From Prisoner of Azkaban to mid-Deathly Hallows, she stays exactly the same character. She doesn’t grow up. She doesn’t learn. She doesn’t change. She has virtually no character arc.

The only time, THE ONLY TIME IN SEVEN BOOKS, the only time we have something remotely resembling a call-out of Hermione’s horrible behaviour is with this sole quote in HBP:

Harry was left to ponder in silence the depths to which girls would sink to get revenge.

Note how it’s about “girls” and not Hermione in particular, which implies that any girl would do what Hermione does to Ron. Thanks for the generalization, JKR, but I like to believe I’m actually a decent sort of person that doesn’t resort to petty cruelty and exploits my friends’ insecurities whenever I’m angry with them.

Hermione NEVER has to apologize. Hermione NEVER has to learn from her mistakes because she’s always presented as a victim when she really isn’t. Hermione NEVER develops into something more - she’s emotionally stuck at fourteen years old. Even less than that when you consider that her reaction to Ron’s return in Deathly Hallows is to trash him with her fists - and she was going to get her wand!! The utter psychopathic b- wanted TO THROW BIRDS AT HIM AGAIN!!! - and this reaction is an appropriate one for a four-years old girl, but certainly not for a supposedly “mature” seventeen-years old.

(Yes, because what separates a child from an adult is the ability to reign in your emotions and not succumb to your impulses. Exactly what Ron did when he left the tent (notice that he had drawn his wand, then he left before he could start hexing Harry), he left to calm himself down. Exactly what Hermione fails to do when Ron returns (she has the impulse to strike him and immediately succumbs to it, which proves to us that The Brightest Witch Of Her Age has all the maturity of a very small child).)

All of that, on top of the awful portrayal in the movies which removes all of Ron’s characteristics to stuff them into Hermione and turns her into some impossible epitome of perfection, eventually contributed to the portrayal of Hermione as the one who is always right and knows everything.

Add to it JKR’s own ridiculous bias (“Ron was quite emotionally immature compared to the other two”, yeah right I don’t see him trying to force freedom onto unwilling creatures or making Harry fly into an irrational rage with mere words but you do you, Jo) and the sexist misconception that “girls are innately more mature than boys”, and you get yourself this apparent behemoth of righteousness that was literally the sole reason why those two silly boys survived everything, and don’t you dare criticize this angel of perfection OR ELSE.

[safetypinkerton]

Hollywood Propaganda by Mark Dice 

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/hollywood-propaganda-mark-dice/1137833508

Christianity Under Attack

In order to destroy America, the conspirators are determined to eradicate faith in God and dismantle organized Christianity. Attacking Jesus and Christianity is a sacrament in Hollywood because the far-Left hates Jesus and everything He stands for. It’s not an overstatement to say that many in key positions of power in the entertainment industry (and politics) are Satanists who will someday openly embrace Lucifer as the rebel angel kicked out of Heaven for defying God.

  “I’m glad the Jews killed Christ,” ranted comedian Sarah Silverman in one of her comedy specials. “Good. I’d fucking do it again!” she declares, as her audience agrees in laughter.158 While accepting an Emmy Award one year Kathy Griffin said, “A lot of people come up here and they thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus. He didn’t help me a bit…so all I can say is suck it Jesus! This award is my god now!”159

I’m not saying people shouldn’t be able to make fun of Christians, but no mainstream celebrity would dare make such insults or jokes about Muhammad because Muslims (and Jews) are vigorously protected against any criticism or mockery and only wonderful things can be said about them. Even a slightly edgy joke ignites a barrage of attacks with cries of “Islamophobia” or “anti-Semitism” and gears start moving in the well-funded and massive smear machines like the ADL and the SPLC which quickly move to destroy the person’s career before they can utter another word.

Hating Christians is almost as necessary as believing in climate change if you’re going to be a mainstream Hollywood celebrity. There are very few open Christians in Hollywood, most of them are has-beens like Kevin Sorbo and Kirk Cameron who have been basically blacklisted since being open about their faith.

  Kevin Sorbo was banned from Comicon because he’s a conservative and “pals with Sean Hannity.”160 He and other Christian actors are stuck doing low budget films that get little attention. They’re allowed to exist (for now) as long as they never point out the Bible’s teachings on homosexuality. Only watered down and generic Christian messages are allowed to be said.

After Guardians of the Galaxy star Chris Pratt appeared on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert and happened to discuss his “spirituality,” many online began attacking him for being a Christian and attending a church. Actress Ellen Page (a lesbian) from the X-Men and Inception tweeted, “If you are a famous actor and you belong to an organization that hates a certain group of people, don’t be surprised if someone simply wonders why it’s not addressed. Being anti LGBTQ is wrong, there aren’t two sides. The damage it causes is severe. Full stop.”161

Singer Ellie Goulding threatened to back out of her scheduled performance at the 2019 Thanksgiving NFL halftime show if the Salvation Army didn’t pledge to donate money to LGBT causes. She got the idea after her Instagram comments were flooded with complaints from her fans because the Salvation Army was sponsoring the game to announce their annual Red Kettle Campaign (bell ringers) fundraiser for the homeless.162 Since the Salvation Army is a Christian charity, Goulding’s fans freaked out, accusing them of being “homophobic” and “transphobic.”

They quickly bowed to the pressure and “disavowed” any anti-LGBT beliefs, which basically means they’re disavowing the Bible because even the New Testament denounces homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27 and 1st Corinthians 6:9-10. Many critics claim that only the Old Testament does, but the Book of Romans makes it clear that just because Jesus came to offer salvation doesn’t mean God’s law regarding homosexuality changed.

The Salvation Army also removed a “position statement” from their website that had made it clear “Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex,” and replaced it with one saying “We embrace people regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender identity.”163 One of the world’s largest Christian charities whose very name “The Salvation Army” refers to the salvation of Christ, cowardly bowed down to the Leftist activists out of fear they would be branded “homophobic.”

Christians are easy targets since they’re much more passive than Jews and Muslims when attacked, and Hollywood loves to stereotype them as a bunch of superstitious bigots who don’t know how to have fun. In the rare case that there is a movie favorable to Christianity that gets widespread distribution, that too is attacked.

Passion of the Christ was deemed “anti-Semitic” because it depicts the story of Jesus’ arrest, sham trial, and crucifixion.164 It was the most popular film about the events to be made and wasn’t a straight to DVD release like most others. With Mel Gibson behind it, the film became a huge success, which caused a tremendous backlash.

The ADL [Anti-Defamation League] denounced the film, saying it “continues its unambiguous portrayal of Jews as being responsible for the death of Jesus. There is no question in this film about who is responsible. At every single opportunity, Mr. Gibson’s film reinforces the notion that the Jewish authorities and the Jewish mob are the ones ultimately responsible for the Crucifixion.”165 That’s because that’s what happened!

Technically, the Romans did it, but at the behest of the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem at the time. The Bible makes it very clear what led to Jesus being crucified. Pontius Pilate is quoted in Matthew 27:24 saying, “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” and “It is your responsibility!” meaning the Jewish Pharisees. They were the ones who conspired to have Jesus arrested and killed for “blasphemy” and being a “false” messiah. Pontius Pilate even offered to release Jesus, but the crowd demanded he release Barabbas instead, another man who was being detained for insurrection against Rome, and for murder.166

A critic for the New York Daily News called The Passion of the Christ, “the most virulently anti-Semitic movie made since the German propaganda films of the Second World War.”167 Many others angrily denounced the film when it came out in 2004. Some in the media even blamed it for a supposed “upsurge” in anti-Semitic hate crimes.168

When the History Channel miniseries The Bible was released in 2013, the same cries of “anti-Semitism” rang out.169 The New York Times opinion editor Bari Weiss went so far as to say that it’s a “conspiracy theory” that Jews killed Jesus.170

Even though most Christmas movies aren’t overtly Christian and instead focus of the importance of families reuniting and spending time together, that doesn’t mean they’re not going to come under attack. As the war on western culture continues, the Marxists have set their sights on Christmas too.

Online liberal cesspool Salon.com ran a headline reading “Hallmark movies are fascist propaganda,” and complained they promote “heteronormative whiteness” because there aren’t enough LGBT characters or people of color in them.171

“Hallmark movies, with their emphasis on returning home and the pleasures of the small, domestic life, also send a not-at-all subtle signal of disdain for cosmopolitanism and curiosity about the larger world,” Salon said, “which is exactly the sort of attitude that helps breed the kind of defensive White nationalism that we see growing in strength in the Donald Trump era.”172

The article went on to say that because the Hallmark Channel airs so many Christmas movies, it is promoting, “a set of patriarchal and authoritarian values that are more about White evangelicals defining themselves as an ethnic group, and not about a genuine feeling of spirituality…The very fact that they’re presented as harmless fluff makes it all the more insidious, the way they work to enforce very narrow, White, heteronormative, sexist, provincial ideas of what constitutes ‘normal.’”173

The article wasn’t satire. Salon.com has a deep-seated hatred of Christianity, conservatives and families, and is another cog in the Cultural Marxist machine working to destroy the United States.

Comedian Whitney Cummings was reported to the Human Resources department of a major Hollywood studio after she wished the crew of a TV show she was working on “Merry Christmas” when they wrapped up for the year. She made the revelation while speaking with Conan O’Brian the following December. “Last year, I was working on a TV show, [and] got in trouble with Human Resources for saying ‘Merry Christmas’ to an intern,” she began.174

Conan asked her if she was being serious and she said it was a true story, elaborating, “I was leaving, like on the 18th or whatever…and I was like, ‘Bye guys, Merry Christmas.’” When she returned from vacation after New Year’s she was called to HR and scolded. She joked, “I don’t even care how your Christmas was. It was just a formality. It’s what you say when you leave.”175

Conan O’Brien then replied, “In these times we’re in, that could trigger someone or offend them if it’s not their holiday.”176 She didn’t say which network it was, but she’s been involved with some major shows like NBC’s Whitney (where she played the main character), as well as the CBS sitcom 2 Broke Girls, which she created and was a writer for.

While today it may seem impossible that Christmas movies may become a thing of the past, nobody could have ever guessed that reruns of the classic Dukes of Hazzard would get banned after the Confederate flag was deemed a “hate symbol” in 2015, or that Aunt Jemima pancake syrup, Eskimo Pie ice cream bars, and Uncle Ben’s Rice would be deemed “racially insensitive” and pulled from production a few years later.177

Once someone reminds liberals that the word Christmas is derived from Christ’s Mass and that it is actually a commemoration of the birth of Jesus, they may finally go over the edge and deem Christmas just as offensive as Columbus Day or the Fourth of July. And with the Muslim and Sikh populations increasing in the United States, the American standard of Christmas music playing in shopping malls and retail stores all month long every December may one day come to an end because it’s not “inclusive” and leaves non-Christians feeling “ostracized.”

[thenuanceddebater]

Civil War Response to @uppermandible

So, for whatever reason, I can’t reblog the response @upermandible made to my Civil War post which you can find here. I don’t know why that is, but assuming that I wasn’t blocked and that it’s a tumblr glitch, I’ll do the response here instead. 

so because the union made a law that nobody could leave it the south was just supposed to sit there and take its unfair treatment?

No, but this law “the Union” made (which actually comes from the Constitution which was ratified by both the North and the South) means that the Confederacy has no legitimate right to secede under US law. That means that every single action the Confederacy takes is an act of rebellion against the United States, and that under US law the Confederate States of America doesn’t actually exist. Hence, why the term “Civil War” is still applicable legally speaking. You don’t seem to understand this based on the initial analogy you used (which discussed divorce-- which is a legal matter) and based on your later thoughts in this response as well. 

lets remember that the southern states were disproportionately footing the bill for federal expenses, and were being locked out on how that money was spent, because they had less power in the federal government than the northern states

Disproportionately footing the bill for what exactly? They were being taxed based on population. They artificially exapnded their population numbers through the 3/5 Compromise in the US Constitution. They also agreed to the form of government that was now instituting the bills they didn’t like very much. Also, if you really want to pretend that economics and taxation (or even tariffs) were the primary cause of the Civil War, you’re going to need a heck of a lot of evidence. Since most of the documents of secession didn’t actually mention economics, taxes, or tariffs in the slightest. Do you know what most of them did mention? Slavery. And mistreatment because of slavery. So, please provide me with some primary sources that prove your position here. Otherwise, I’m going to dismiss your argument based on the evidence that actually exists. Oh, and this entire thing is just one gigantic switching the goalpost from “the Confederacy was legitimate in attacking Fort Sumter” to “the Confederacy had moral and understandable reasons for attacking Fort Sumter”. Moral and understandable reasons =/= legitimate. 

the south was not going to be able to afford much of what the federal government was pushing for, and they were otherwise helpless to stop it. their only recourse to this was simply to pack their shit, show Lincoln their favorite finger, then make like horse turds and hit the trail.

You... are aware that the South was wealthier than the North prior to the Civil War, right? Much of that wealth was in land and slaves, but still the South was not a poor area of the United States. Also, none of this makes the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter legitimate. That’s not how legitimacy works. You can tell whatever sob story you want about oppression, but legally speaking oppression does not guarantee legitimacy (especially when that oppression is mostly imagined as opposed to actually extant). 

throughout the interim leading up to the firing on fort sumter, the union was increasingly aggressive to the seceding states. deploying troops to occupy Kentucky, blockading the south, etc. 

...And we’re just going to completely ignore how the Confederacy was attempting to seize federal forts and weapons? Because that doesn’t fit the narrative? Okay. Oh, and also Kentucky declared neutrality at the beginning of the war, but after an attempt by Confederate General Leonidas Polk to take the state failed, they petitioned the Union Army for help. So, that goes against your narrative as well. Especially because Kentucky didn’t come fully under Union control until 1862- well after Fort Sumter fell and the Civil War began. So, maybe check your facts on that one. They seem to be a little off. 

As for blockading the South, you are aware that seeing as the Confederacy had absolutely no legal legitimacy whatsoever it was considered an “area in rebellion” and thus was automatically considered essentially at-war with the United States right? The idea of the blockade was to bring the areas in rebellion back under US control without actually engaging in pitched-battle against American citizens. And again, the United States wasn’t the only side being aggressive. You can’t look at the facts of the situation and tell me that the Confederacy was peaceful and the Confederates were a bunch of angels. Well, I mean you can. But you’d be really, really wrong. 

Most the war was fought in the south. 

Over the course of the war the union lost 642,427 of its 2,672,341-strong military. the confederacy lost  483,026 of its 750,000-strong military.

Irrelevant information is irrelevant. None of this means anything when discussing whether or not the Confederacy’s secession is legitimate. Although, it is worth pointing out that the Union had the harder victory objective, and the South only needed to fight a defensive war. 

Sherman’s army burned everything from atlanta to the coast.

...You are aware that the Union aren’t the only people who burned/ destroyed things right? And you are also aware that the burning of Atlanta wholesale actually wasn’t Sherman’s original plan (or even his plan at all), right? And of course you’re aware that Sherman didn’t in fact burn Savanna Georgia. So, that’s a little misleading. 

very little mercy was shown to even civilians in the south by the union forces

Aaaaand this is downright false. Actually, even the wildest Union troops tended to act much, much better than expected in Confederate households and toward Confederate women. If you don’t believe me, I recommend you read diaries of Confederate matrons who were occupied by Union soldiers, or read some literaure collecting these accounts if you don’t want to track them down individually. I recommend When Sherman Marched North from the Sea: Resistance on the Confederate Home Front. That should clear up some of your misconceptions. 

where even generals ordered that historical monuments to be vandalized 

Not the monuments! Oh the humanity! Still, regardless of whether or not this is accurate (I really don’t know what you’re talking about- it’s general enough to refer to quite a variety of things) destruction of historical monuments is not the same as monumental cruelty to civilian populations. You’re going to need more than just assertions in order to prove that. Sorry. 

even after the war the north took great pains to keep the south crippled

I mean, if you want to talk Reconstruction, we can talk Reconstruction. But, I’m not going to make this post even longer by detailing all the ways this statement is wrong when Reconstruction is unrelated to the Civil War and especially unrelated to the legitimacy of the Confederate Secession. Actually, most of your post is irrelevant to that point. 

even today the south is still responsible for the bulk of federal funds while hardly having a say in how it’s spent.

...You actually can’t be serious with this. Texas (2), Florida (4) [(which isn’t really the South any more)] Georgia (9), North Carolina (10) and Virginia (12) are the Confederate states in the top 15 of states by GDP. Next is Tennessee and Louisiana at 24 which rounds out the Confederate States in the top 25 of states by GDP. South Carolina is 26, Alabama 27, Arkansas is 34, and Mississippi is 37. So, no. The South is definitely not responsible for the majority of federal funds. I have no idea where that nonsense is coming from. But it’s completely and utterly absurd. 

it can be called the war of northern aggression because that is exactly how it went down.

...Except it didn’t. You failed in proving that. Sorry. 

it can be called the war between the states because it was

I mean, sure. That’s a term that;s more popular in the South, but it’s not blatantly incorrect like “War of Northern Aggression”, though the framing is a little off. Also, fun fact: It was called “The Great Rebellion” in the Union during the war.

civil war isn’t really accurate because the confederate states of america was a sovereign nation.

...No it wasn’t. Not legally. If the Confederacy won the Civil War, it’s possible that the war would have been seen as the Confederacy’s Revolutionary War, but they lost. The Confederacy had no legal legitimacy and was not recognized by the United States government as a legal nation. It was an area in rebellion. Simply declaring that you are now a sovereign nation doesn’t actually make you a sovereign nation. Just like simply saying you’re divorced doesn’t actually make you divorced. So, seeing as it was a gigantic rebellion the term Civil War suits it quite nicely. 

And before you even try the American Revolution argument, the United States was not legitimate prior to the Revolutionary War. The Founding Fathers knew this. That’s part of the reason why signing the Declaration of Independence was so courageous. Victory in the Revolutionary War is what made the United States a legitimate nation. Without that victory, even though the Americans did have legitimate political grievance with the British Empire (as they actually were unrepresented unlike the South) they would not have created a legitimate nation through the Declaration of Independence. 

All in all, this was a pretty weak rebuttal. You shifted the goalposts, made assertions without evidence, and got your facts wrong. You’re going to need to do a heck of a lot better if you want to continue the debate. Because this? This was nowhere near good enough. And I think you know that. 

[into-the-demimonde]

Game of Thrones Season 7, Episode 2: Stormborn review

This week on ‘Thrones, Daenerys sizes up her motley crew, the Greyjoys have a family reunion, Arya sees an old friend, Jon faces more division among his allies and Sam takes a gruesome task upon himself.

Virginia: My friend Alex is here again to review the episode with me. What was your favorite, and least favorite, part of the episode?

Alex: My favorite scenes were the ones where Daenerys made preparations for war. Emilia Clarke was such a find for this role, and she has a presence that lends these moments gravitas even when she’s just standing around listening. Her back and forth with Varys is terrific, and you can feel how difficult it is for her to take a risk as big as trusting someone who had to betray his former masters to serve her. Then Olenna gets involved and things get even better.

V: She has to be one of the best side characters on this show. I love that she’s teamed with Dany, and it looks like they’re about to team with Jon Snow. I love Sansa and I like Jon and I’m getting tired of the tension between them. Their reunion last season was wonderful, and it was honestly iconic when they re-hung the Stark banners. I want them to get along. However, more often than not I find myself agreeing with Sansa. She has a keen political mind, a result of what she’s been through with the Lannisters, Boltons etc.

A: There seems to be a running theme through the episode of the good guys, even though they’re finally getting their act together, having a difficult time getting along so they can actually stop the Lannisters and their confederates. Jon and Sansa have destroyed the Boltons and united the North, but they can’t seem to agree on much of anything. I like the way Jon handled things this week; he’s deciding against Sansa, but he’s showing her that he trusts her by putting her in charge in his absence. Last week he just argued with her in front of everybody and it didn’t much help matters. Now he’s putting them on almost equal footing, which hopefully will allow them to be better leaders.

V: I liked his ultimate decision, though at first I suspected he would send her in proxy. My problem is that if he’s taking her and her opinions seriously, he should talk to her about these things BEFORE announcing them to everyone else. Not only would it bring them closer together, it would be better for him because she wouldn’t argue every time.

A: That’s very true, and it’s an indicator of how out of their depth they are. Jon knows how to command an army, but as the King of the North he’s in virgin territory, and territory in which he never really wanted to be. Sansa’s learned a lot from her experiences, but she’s never been in a real leadership position before,and her experience is with people who didn’t care what she said, so she’s got her antennae up for Jon taking her for granted.

V: I guess since she told him exactly how she felt last week, I can’t understand why he didn’t handle things differently this week. Either way, I can’t wait to see him, Tyrion and Daenerys in the same room together next week. However I also feel like something bad is coming. After all, the good guys can’t win this season, or next season wouldn’t exist, right?

A: No, and we got a reminder of that at the end of the episode when Euron destroyed a bunch of Daenerys’ allies. That was a great moment, partly for the action but also because it finally made Euron feel like a real threat. In one fell swoop he severely crippled Dany’s alliance, and he looks like he’s far from done with her.

V: I don’t particularly like Theon, Yara or especially the Sand Snakes, so I can’t say I was even sad. After all, regardless of how “unpredictable” people think the show is, Daenerys will win in the end. So if a few of her more annoying allies die and or lose, it’s all good with me.  Is it bad that I cheered when the Dornish women were being killed?

A: Ha ha, I was doing the same, honestly. That’s what makes this so perfect, too; it gives Euron some teeth while whittling down some of the lesser characters. Yara and the head Sand Snakes are technically still alive, but I doubt they’re all getting out of this. As for Theon, well, I guess what he did shouldn’t be too surprising, but it actually fits with his character. His moments of bravery after being tortured have been fleeting and usually when there was minimal danger to himself around. Once things looked dire(wolf), though, he literally jumped ship. It was a great followup to Yara saying he was her protector.

V: I think Theon was a coward even before being tortured. He was never admirable or likable, and he only became sympathetic when put up against one of the worst monsters in this show. It’s important to remember that he did bad things, and has done very few good or helpful things in his entire life. I’ve been intrigued by Jorah’s condition the entire time, and I hope Sam is able to cure him. But oh my god, that scene was disgusting.

A: I’m just glad Sam is doing something useful. If we have to endure him, he might as well move the plot along. I felt for Jorah during that scene; he’s got to be in tremendous pain, but he can’t scream or Jim Broadbent will put a stop to it. I am happy it looks like he’ll be cured, though; I want to see him get back to Daenerys having fulfilled his promise.

V: And that’s sure to be a great moment. I anticipate a lot of catharsis these last two seasons. I also really enjoyed the short scene with Arya in the bar.

A: That was a nice scene. Arya finding out about the resurgence of House Stark is satisfying, but my favorite part was Hot Pie straight up calling the fight “The Battle of the Bastards.”

V: That was kind of meta, wasn’t it?

A: I love it when shows get to a point where they can do that without it feeling cheap. Everyone knows why he’s really calling it that, but it fits with his character to make it into this legendary event like it was for us. Arya also encountered another old friend, and I imagine I’m in the minority on this but her being reunited temporarily with her direworld didn’t do much for me. I understand the point -- like the wolf, she may have been shaped too much like her experiences to return home -- but it felt like another moment of Arya not doing much.

V: I admit I really liked the scene, though I was hoping Arya would be gaining an army of evil puppies. One thing that disappointed me was Melisandre showing up at Dragonstone. Ewwww.

A: I liked it an “Oh my god, bad things are about to happen” way, because I don’t trust her as far as I can throw a Clegane. She’s no doubt bringing something horrible with her, and I imagine Jon Snow’s arrival will lead to some conflict here.

V: I hope he warns Daenerys what a cunt she is, though I aso doubt it. I thought one scene between Missandei and Grey Worm was quite touching, if unexpected. I’m not surprised they hooked up, I just didn’t expect it to be so physical.

A: That was nice, and I liked how he told her she’s the only thing he’s ever been afraid of. I feel bad that their sexual encounters have to be so one-sided, though. Those slavers deserved their crucifixions.

V: That’s true. I wa thinking that’s awfully selfless of him, since she can’t possibly reciprocate. Nonetheless a sweet moment. How did you like Cersei’s scene?

A: It’s not one of the better Lannister moments, but I like her tactic of using Daenerys’ scorched earth battlefield strategy against her, as well as her uniting of the different armies. Suddenly these guys are facing the prospect of being displaced by foreign hordes and getting set on fire if they say two words about it; Cersi may not look like such a bad option in comparison. And that’s a good thing, because it seems like she isn’t particularly well liked among the other leaders.

V: The best part is that we later find out that only Westerosi armies will be invading King’s Landing. They’re going to prove her wrong and it will be glorious.

A: I love that whole sequence. It’s a brilliant strategy -- though I don’t know how feasible it is now that Euron fucked their shit up -- but even better is how the different members of her war room are all pulling her in a different direction, and Olenna’s ultimate advice is for her to just be herself and do what she believes is right. I read somewhere in its early days someone called this show a medieval fantasy version of The West Wing, and that scene reminded me of a specific moment from that show, where Leo told the President the new strategy would be “Let Bartlet Be Bartlet.” It’s something Jon Snow and Sansa are currently trying to figure out, and despite her many victories, Daenerys is still learning as much as they are.

[sorayahigashikata]

Chapter 87: "Spin spin spin spin spin Spinspinspinspin Spinspinspin AAAAAUGGHH!"

[comic-movieheroesranked]

Cinematic Comic Characters Ranked! (Year 2010) Part I

We’ve reached a decade of lists! To be honest the year 2010 was one of the weakest years when it came to decent comic movies but there were still some good ones! We get two sequels with Iron Man 2 and Predators and the debut of Kick-Ass, The Losers, Jonah Hex, Scott Pilgrim vs The World, and one of the worst movies in cinema, The Last Airbender. Without any more delay here’s #74-51!

*SPOILER ALERT FOR ALL MOVIES HIGHLIGHTED ABOVE*

Cameo Appreciation: Stan Lee (Kick-Ass, Iron Man 2)

In his first cameo that ISN'T a Marvel movie, Stan Lee graces us with his presence in Kick-Ass. It's nothing fancy, he's just seen watching the news, but the fact he agreed to show up is hilarious and super fun. He shows up where he rightfully belongs in Iron Man 2. Like the movie before it, Tony Stark mistakes Stan Lee as a celebrity although this time it's Larry King.

Cameo Appreciation: Peter Parker (Iron Man 2)

Even though it started out as a fan theory, it was later confirmed that little Peter Parker made his MCU debut in Iron Man 2 instead of Captain America: Civil War. He's only a kid but his bravery against bad guys shows early on as he tries to stand up to one of the drones attacking the Expo with his Iron Man costume. Iron Man shows up just in time to really defeat the drone and it would mark the first, but not the last, time Tony Stark comes to Peter's rescue.

Cameo Appreciation: Princess Azula (The Last Airbender)

Towards the end of the film, Firelord Ozai is upset for many reasons. Commander Zhao was killed and his fleet retreated from the Northern Father Tribe, his brother betrayed him and is now a traitor to the country, and his son continues to dishonor him in his eyes. His solution? Release Pincess Azula, one of the greatest villains to appear on the small screen. With the new rules the film has to firebending I wonder how they would explain her blue flames or her lightning bending, but it's for the best that we'll never find out.

74. Adleman Lusk (Jonah Hex)

"It appears the bells are finally ready to toll on Washington."

A corrupt politician working for Turnbull, who basically slaps him around to get what he wants. Once their deal is finished Lusk mentions that if Turnbull were to fail, he'd die. Naturally Turnbul assures him that won't be a problem and kills him right then and there instead.

73. Haru and the Imprisoned Earthbenders (The Last Airbender)

*throws pebble*

Probably one of the biggest disappointments was the prison scene with little Haru and and the other earth benders. Their prison was literally surrounded by earth and yet they couldn't take out the few guards watching them? It took an eleven year old to point out 'Hey, there's rock under your feet!' for them to realize they could've broke out whenever they wanted? Haru's hair was flawless though.

72. Kanna (The Last Airbender)

"He will begin to change hearts, and it is in the heart that all wars are won."

Besides her whiteness, I didn't mind Kanna. She wasn't a big role in the show so there really wasn't a lot of material you could mess up with her. She cares about Katara and Sokka and believes it's their duty to join the Avatar on his mission.

71. Senator Stern (Iron Man 2)

"Funny how annoying a little prick can be, isn't it?"

This guy did not like Tony Stark but only because Tony wouldn't put America first and hand over his suit to the U.S. government. He starts a smear campaign against the Tony the entire film so when Tony saves the day it only makes sense that he forces Stern to be the one to give him his military award.

70. Smith (Jonah Hex)

"You get uglier every time I see you."

I liked Smith, thought he was a bit random, but I liked him. He's the one who's made all the bad ass weapons Jonah flaunts around throughout the movie. He likes working with Jonah and holds no ill will to him despite Jonah serving for the Confederate Army. Him and his two boys are present in Washington when Turnball launches his attack, but laughs it off once Jonah defeats him.

69. Dragon Spirit (The Last Airbender)

"You must show them the power of the ocean."

Ok so this dragon spirit was supposed to somehow guide Aang on his quest but for some reason was telling him to do the exact things in the show that nearly destroyed him and other people. Perfect example? Telling him to create the huge tidal wave against the fire nation. That's not how it went and it was also super weird that he showed up during Aang mourning for Monk Gyatso but it wasn't the biggest mistakes this movie made.

68. Lieutenant Grass (Jonah Hex)

"We want Turnbull dead."

Lieutenant Grass is sent by the President to find Jonah and hire him to take out Turnbull before the other can create his ultimate weapon and attack Washington. Since Turnbull killed his family Jonah easily accepts, but fails to take him out. This leaves Grass as Washington's only defense but he's easily killed by Turnbull's weapon.

67. Master Pakku (The Last Airbender)

"Water benders! Prepare for battle!"

Because of the time constraints, Master Pakku was reduced to more of a background character who taught Aang and Katara how to water bend and who led the Northern Water Tribe to battle against the Fire Nation. Because of this we don't get to see his misogynistic views on female waterbenders and we alos don't know of his love for Kanna, Katara and Sokka's grandma.

66. Sergeant Marcus Williams (Kick-Ass)

"You owe that girl a childhood."

A minor character in the film, Marcus was Big Daddy's partner when he was a cop and took care of Hit-Girl when he was in jail. Because of this, he cares for her well being and vocally does not approve of Big Daddy turning her into a killing machine instead of being a regular child. Still, he's always helping his friend and even becomes Hit-Girl's guardian after Big Daddy dies.

65. Julie Powers (Scott Pilgrim vs The World)

"Stay away from Ramona Flowers!"

Like most girls in the movie, Julie hated Scott but not because she dated him, but because he would date her 'friends' and then they'd leave after they broke up. She's specifically talking about Envy and because of their breakup tries to prevent Scott from dating Ramona. However she seems to forget all about them once Envy comes back to town, who totally doesn't see her as a friend.

64. Agent Coulson (Iron Man 2)

"If you try to escape, or play any sort of games with me, I will taze you and watch "Supernanny" while you drool into the carpet."

Agent Coulson comes back briefly to keep on eye on Tony after his drunk disaster at his birthday party. He's probably only with him for two days tops before Nick Fury reassigns him to New Mexico, where he finds the mighty Mjolnir in the middle of a crate. So, obviously, Coulson was only plugged in to tease the next Marvel movie, Thor.

63. Kyle and Ken Katayanagi (Scott Pilgrim vs The World)

*summons twin dragons*

Even though the Katayanagi twins are the 5th and 6th exes to go up against Scott and should be really strong, they don't really leave a lasting impression. They're able to summon dragons out of their electronic music but with the Sex Bob-Ombs helps, Scott is able to blast these two away with little trouble.

62. Cuchillo (Predators)

"I unleash."

Cuchillo was a powerful drug lord before he was taken by the Predators to be their prey. He talked a big game with his two machine guns, but he did seem older and slower than the rest of the group. He's the first one to go when the Predators unleash their hounds on the group. We don't see him go, but we do see the Predators try to fool the group into a trap with his corpse and pre-recorded pleas.

61. Monk Gyatso (The Last Airbender)

"I won't let them take you, Aang."

I had no problem with Monk Gyatso being black. The Air Nomads aren't technically a nation so, to me, it's fine if their ethnicity is ambiguous. He's Aang's mentor and the closest he has to a father figure. Finding out he can't be with him as the Avatar is what prompts Aang to runaway in the first place, saving him when the Fire Nation arrives and kills Monk Gyatso and the rest of the Air Nomads.

60. Ulysses S. Grant (Jonah Hex)

"This country could use a sheriff."

When the President finds out Turnbull is alive and well, he realizes the man's potential for destruction and declares him a threat to the country. He figures the only one capable of stopping him is Jonah and assigns him the task of killing Turnbull and his men. He mostly stays in the background worrying about Turnbull until Turnbull attacks Washington in the middle of his speech. When Jonah stops him, President Grant offers him a job as the country's sheriff. Jonah declines but they still manage to part on good terms.

59. Stans (Predators)

"If we ever make it home, I'm going to do so much fucking cocaine."

I feel like every movie has to have at least one guy that you just can't for them to die. Stans was that guy. A prisoner on death row, Stans was a really twisted guy who's idea of fun was incredibly questioning. He didn't add anything useful to the group but at least when he was killed it was out of an act of selflessness? His death was the most brutal, which was his spine and skull being ripped out of his body.

58. Stacey Pilgrim (Scott Pilgrim vs The World)

"Wallace? Again?"

Anytime Scott does something stupid his little sister Stacey finds out thanks to Wallace who likes to gossip to her. She's so focused on trying to get Scott busted for dating Ramona and Knives at the same time when she needs to focus her energy on Wallace, who keeps stealing her boyfriends.

57. Marty, Todd, and Erika Cho (Kick-Ass)

"You guys never saw 'One Night in Spider-Man'?"

Marty and Todd are Dave's best friends while Erika is friend's with Katie. The trio didn't start hanging out until Dave and Katie started dating. They're a bunch of regular teenagers that take every opportunity to joke around and have fun. While Marty develops a crush on Hit-Girl, Todd and Erika actually become a couple at the end of the film.

56. Jeb Turnbull (Jonah Hex)

"He was my father! I didn't have a choice!"

Jeb didn't dared disobey his father so when Jonah, his best friend, did, he had no choice but to take him out. Unfortunately for him, Jonah is quicker and has a better shot. Jeb then spends the days of his afterlife watching as his best friend and his father go down their own paths of darkness. When he gets over the fact that Jonah killed him, he decides to help him take down his father once and for all.

55. Roxanne 'Roxy' Richter (Scott Pilgrim vs The World)

"Well I'm just a little bi-furious!"

Roxy is the 4th ex Scott has to battle and the only girl Ramona has dated. She's able to teleport via smoke and owns a pretty deadly belt whip. Ramona has to help Scott take her down since Scott won't fight a girl and Roxy ends up dying from...an orgasm? Turns out the back of her knee is one of her sensitive spots.

54. Matthew Patel (Scott Pilgrim vs The World)

"Pirates are in this year!"

Matthew is Ramona's 1st ex, therefore being Scott's first opponent. His mystic powers involve fire but it doesn't help him much as he's the only ex Scott fights that loses to just him alone. Even the coins Scott's rewarded isn't good enough to get Scott a bus fare, while all the other exes have rewards in the thousands.

53. Mombasa (Predators)

"I'm ready to die. Are you?"

I liked Mombasa. He didn't back down from confrontation and had a sense of honor to him that quickly left him respected among the others in the group. It's a shame that he was the one that died due to Royce's plan because it wasn't a quick death as several spikes shot out and through his body.

52. Commander Zhao (The Last Airbender)

"The Fire Nation's power will not succumb to childhood superstitions!"

With Firelord Ozai becoming a more featured character in the film, a lot of the twisted things that made Commander Zhao so hated in the show wasn't shown in the movie. Zhao just appeared as another lackey and not a dangerous person with no respect for the spirits and a thirst for power that makes him unstable. Killing the moon spirit wasn't even his idea in the film. It also bugged me that instead of the water spirit taking revenge on Zhao, he's taken out by some random waterbenders.

51. Wade Travis (The Losers)

"I was born in Quebec."

Wade was Max's lackey. I thought he was going to be a threat but he didn't really do anything intimidating except for when he threw that guy over the building. He fails at protecting Max's money and when it looks like he's going to do something cool in a motorcycle, Cougar takes him out in an explosion.

[havelovewilltravelproject]

San Antonio: Breakfast Tacos, Texas History, and Mexicans

Two days before I arrived in San Antonio, I received an email from my local host, Jeanne Russell, “I have been reconsidering the river, though I love it, because it won't be very populated and you won't get the true feel of our multi-cultural city…[I] am thinking you should meet me for breakfast tacos at Taco Haven and then we can visit a few spots in my car. Will that work for you?”

She had me at tacos, and hooked me with the idea of a breakfast taco.  As I pulled up to Taco Haven a couple of days later, I knew I was lucky to be enjoying my first breakfast tacos with someone who knows San Antonio really well.  Though not a native, Jeanne’s been a resident for two decades and has worked for two mayors and was an award-winning journalist.  She’s also married to a San Antonio native, who served in the Texas State House.

Jeanne helped me orient to the world of breakfast tacos, a name that’s a bit of a misnomer since people eat them all day, and also as a late night snack after hitting the bars.  San Antonio claims they were started locally, though there’s a debate as to whether they are from the Rio Grande Valley.  I followed her lead and went for the haven taco (papas con chili and queso con chile) and a guacamole taco on homemade corn tortillas.  I also ordered the cucumber lemonade, which was delicious, but very sweet.

Jeanne provided me with an overview of San Antonio’s geography and the general racial/ethnic and socioeconomic divisions in its layout.  Founded as a an agricultural town, it’s laid out like a wagon wheel with a hub and spokes. In broad strokes, the north is affluent, the south is poor.  The east is the center of the Mexican culture (many of the ancestors of San Antonio’s Mexican-Americans were in the city before San Antonio was part of the US, so they refer to themselves as Mexicans) and there’s a stable, but not growing African-American population in the west.  

After we ate our energy, we hopped into Jeanne’s car and she took me to a see a bunch of things including a beautiful mosaic at the Guadalupe Cultural Arts Center and Haven for Hope which is a campus of human services agencies coordinating care to serve homeless people.

However, what stuck out to me most in my discussion with Jeanne, was the running theme of San Antonio (and Texas) history and its relationship with its Mexican population.

The San Antonio Missions

Jeanne told me that the history of San Antonio is the history of Texas.  This is where Texas started and boy was she right.  We stopped by Mission Concepcion to see one of the four original Missions built in the 1700s by the Spanish Franciscans. Mission Concepcion is primarily a big church, and actually Jeanne and her husband were married there. She pointed out that wasn’t why she brought me there.  The building is quite beautiful, and the volunteer docent shared that it is the only Mission or Church building in the Western Hemisphere that has never collapsed or had to be rebuilt.

Later in the day, I returned to The San Antonio Missions Historical Park with my mom (I’m fortunate that she’s joining me for the part of the road trip from San Antonio to Vernon to Dallas).  We visited Mission San Jose, which was a great example of how the Mission was also a community where people lived.  The Visitor’s Center there had a really edifying film on the history and context about how the natives of South Texas came to speak Spanish and practice Catholicism.

So what led the native peoples who had been there for 10,000 years to move into the Missions?   A combination of disease that came with the Europeans that was taking their lives and raids from the well-organized Apaches.  They were driven into the Missions as a means of survival, but it also meant that they had to give up their culture (which they sort of did, and sort of didn’t), learn a new religion, and speak two new languages – Spanish and Latin.

The Missions themselves are beautiful structures and on a day with a blue sky and sunshine, seem a bit otherworldly.

Texas History, The Alamo, and The Republic

The descendants of the Indians and the missionaries didn’t immigrate to the United States, the United States absorbed them.

Quick history refresher for those – who like me – may know they’re supposed to “Remember The Alamo,” but aren’t quite sure what for.   From the Wikipedia

The Battle of the Alamo (February 23 – March 6, 1836) was a pivotal event in the Texas Revolution. Following a 13-day siege, Mexican troops under President General Santa Anna launched an assault on the Alamo Mission near San Antonio de Béxar (modern-day San Antonio, Texas, United States), killing all of the Texian defenders. Santa Anna's cruelty during the battle inspired many Texians—both Texas settlers and adventurers from the United States—to join the Texian Army. Buoyed by a desire for revenge, the Texians defeated the Mexican Army at the Battle of San Jacinto, on April 21, 1836, ending the revolution and making Texas an independent Republic.

Jeanne didn’t grow up in Texas, but her kids are.  And they are taking Texas history in school.  She mentioned that they would share snippits of history with her, which galvanized her to dig deeper into the city and state’s backstory.  With the clear caveat that she is not a historian, she shared some of what struck her.

Santa Ana was trying consolidate power, and it was felt that he was demanding too much of the Mexicans and Texians in San Antonio, and thus they wanted to break free from Mexico and join the United States.  But, folks like Stephen Austin didn’t want to join the U.S. as a slave state as would be required by the Missouri Compromise.  While some of the European settlers owned slaves, they knew that the Mexicans who they lived side-by-side with wouldn’t like that.  More importantly, they didn’t want to get in the middle of the larger slave-free state dynamics taking place in the U.S. at the time.

What she learned is that Texas became an independent Republic not because it was the end goal, but rather because it didn’t see another option and needed a stopgap. But, it’s fascinating that the narrative of Texas is so tied up in independence, doing things it’s own ways.

By chance, the day I met with Jeanne, March 6 was the 181st anniversary of the fall of The Alamo.  In the afternoon, my mom and I decided to visit it.  As we were walking by, we saw that there were chairs and a podium set up for an event. We asked some folks what it was for and ended up talking to one of the women organizing the event who is a member of the Daughters of the Republic of Texas, and organization of women who can trace their family history to the time that Texas was an Independent Republic.  The DRT had been advocating for the day the Alamo fell to be a state holiday. Texas flags already fly at half-mast that day.  The proclamation was going to be announced in a ceremony that afternoon. So, we decided to get a quick bite to eat, and return to check it out.

The ceremony featured a General making remarks about the bravery of men and woman who lost their lives at The Alamo to stand for no retreat and no surrender.  He mentioned how this continued to influence the men and women in the military today, about 20 of which stood behind him holding the state flags of states that had been home to people who died at The Alamo. A state representative who was born in San Antonio presented three of the Daughters of the Republic with the proclamation; there was a closing prayer. Afterwards, there was lemonade and cookies for the crowd. 

Organizations like Daughters of the Republic of Texas (and Sons of the Republic of Texas, their male counterparts) fascinate me.  And so my mom and I took full advantage of the opportunity to chat with a gentleman who was a SRT clad in his orange blazer, chapter buttons, and cowboy hat.  Kenneth was generous in sharing a bit about his involvement in the group, as well as his family history – which he could trace back to Charlemagne’s time—who he was proud to share had helped prevent Islam from taking over Europe. He had family that had fought in the civil war on both the Confederate and Union sides.

I shared with him a bit of what Jeanne had told me about the Republic, independence being a strategy, and not wanting to tangle in the free-slave state dynamics.  He listened politely, and then said that he didn’t think it was entirely true, citing that many of the Texians had come from slave states, and owned slaves.

I’m no historian, and neither is Jeanne or Kenneth.  But if I learned anything through these interactions, it’s that narrative is powerful in shaping history, just as history is powerful in shaping narrative.

A favorite photo from the cookie and lemonade reception in front of the Alamo.  The sculpture is part of the memorial honoring those who fell at the Battle.

Immigration, Refugees, and Faith

One of the things that has surprised me so much on my drives in Texas down to Big Bend and from Big Bend up to San Antonio is that I went through four Border Patrol inspection stops, and saw countless other border patrol trucks on patrol. When I was stopped, despite having a big nylon tarp covering all my gear in the backseat and trunk of my car, it was never searched.  Border Patrol employees were very nice to me, and I was asked, “Are you a U.S. Citizen?” In answering yes, I was waved on through.

The national discussion about immigration, and the current president’s desire to build a wall probably made me even more aware of this than I would have been even a year ago. And given Jeanne’s background as a reporter covering the US-Mexico border and in local government, as well as her own family – her kids and husband identify as Mexican, and her father-in-law still lives across the border in Mexico.  It’s not surprising to me that we ended up talking a bit about immigration and refugees. 

What was interesting to learn is that despite Jeanne’s upbringing which wasn’t very religious, and her husband being raised Catholic, and that they were married at Mission Concepcion, they had started attending the San Antonio Mennonite Fellowship Church in her neighborhood.

When I asked why, she shared that they had been drawn there by the way the Mennonites were advocates for immigrants and refugees, and how they continued to step up and receive refugees – clothe and feed them and give them places to sleep – when they were released from nearby Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers (there are 2 near San Antonio).

Despite its history, or maybe because of it, Texas has a really complex relationship with its Mexican history and immigration and refugees.  San Antonio is where Texas began, and might be the community where that complexity is richest, most interesting, and most fraught.

A special thanks to Jeanne Russell for her generosity in sharing her hometown with me!

[akissatmidnight]

Wow, you guy! I knew we got a ton of readers, but I had no idea so many of you had Scottish roots and it warms the cockles of my historically based soul to see people so interested.  What started out as just a little article has turned into a mini genealogy search, but I like to keep my historical research skills sharp, so it’s all in good fun. You can go back and read part 1, part 2, part 3, and part 4 to see what other clans I’ve brought up. If you don’t see your clan and would like to learn more, maybe I’ll do a part 6, so let me know in the comments!

Clan Donald/MacDonald

Clan Motto: per mare per terras- by sea and by land

Alternative Clan Motto: fraoch eilean- the heathery isle

Ancient

Modern

Weathered

There’s a lot to learn about Clan Donald, so if you’re a member, you might want to dig about! Until then, here are just a few little tidbits…

The Donalds were one of the larger Highland clans and even have clan connections in Ireland. They are also cousins, of sort, with the MacDougal clan, as their founders came from the same Norse family.

They originated from the Norse leader Domhnall mac Ragnail and kept allegiance with the Norwegian kings for more than two hundred years until Haakon IV of Norway was defeated by Alexander III, who then became king of Scotland.

Clan Donald was such a strong supporter of Robert the Bruce, once he became king, he proclaimed that the clan would always hold the right wing of his army in battle, a testament to his faith in their loyalty.

At the end of the 1400s and the beginning of the 1500s, the Donalds lost the title of Earl Ross, which they had held for a few hundred years, meaning they lost their political holding as Lord of the Isles. In a bid to regain the position, chief Domhnall Dubh formed an alliance with King Edward VI of England against James VI of Scotland. While they didn’t get the titles back that they asked for, Edward began giving parts of the clan smaller titles, which kept them separated and lessened their threat to the British Crown.

During the Jacobite uprising, many Donalds fought at Culloden. But when they saw the carnage and began losing many members, they fled, saving their numbers.

The Mackinnon Clan

Clan Motto: Audentes Fortuna Juvat- Fortune Favors the Bold

modern

ancient

This Highland clan had control of many of the Hebride Islands and descended from Alpín mac Echdach, the king of Dál Riata, although historical archives point them having branched off from Clan Gregor. Their name comes from the Gaelic “Mac Fhionghuin”, which means “fair born”.

During the Jacobite rebellion, the Mackinnons threw their whole support behind Bonny Prince Charlie. But, after it failed, things went downhill for the small clan. They lost all of their ancestral land that was gifted to them by Robert the Bruce.

And although the clan was small in size, their level of sass was out of this world! After the failed Jacobite rebellion, the chief of the Mackinnons was taken to England and put on trial. But, because he was so old, they freed him and sent him back to Scotland. As he was getting read to leave court, the English Judge asked him, “If the King were in your power, as you have been in his, what would you have done to him?” The chief replied, “I would do to him, as he has this day done to me; I would send him back to his own country.”

Clan MacDuff

Clan Motto: Deus Juvat- God Assists

modern

hunting

The MacDuffs originated from the royals of the Picts and the early chiefs were the Earls of Fife. The MacDuffs of Fife were considered the most powerful family in the middle ages, and even though they lost the title of Earl of Fife to the Stewarts in the late 1300s, it didn’t stop them from continuing to gain power.

This Lowland clan does not currently have a chief, although the direct line hasn’t died off.

Clan Moffat

Clan Motto: Spero Meliora- I hope for better things

This clan is so old, it’s difficult to place exactly where they came from. It is thought their name is of Norse origins, but they were definitely around by the time William Wallace was fighting for independence. by the 12th century, they owned large swaths of land and were considered minor nobles.

As most border clans, the Moffats were constantly fighting with other families, especially the Johnstones. in 1557 the Johnstones murdered the Moffat’s chief and then burned numerous other clan members alive after trapping them in a building. that was the end of the Moffat chiefs until 1983.

Their clan tartan is rather new, created in 1983 when the chiefdom was reestablished. It’s heavily based on that of Clan Douglas.

Clan Gunn

Clan Motto: Aut pax aut bellum- Either peace or war

ancient

modern

weathered

Their name is among the oldest, coming from a Norse Jarl of Orkney named Gunni in the 1100s, whose wife had inherited the Jarldom of Orkney from her brother. Gunnis’ name meant “war”and he descended from Viking adventurers. Quite the interesting lineage if you’re a Gunn.

Their biggest enemies were Clan Keith and were constantly as war with them. in the 1400s it is said that a member of Clan Keith was in love with the daughter of the Chief of Clan Gunn and kidnapped her to stop her from marrying another man, shortly before her wedding. The girl didn’t return his affection and threw herself off a tower. Obviously, the Gunns were pissed and retaliated, but failed. The two of them finally came to a truce, but when they were supposed to meet in an act of goodwill, the Keiths decided to ambush them. But the Gunns got the last laugh when they killed the Chief of the Keiths and his son.

They participated in the Jacobite rebellion, but on the side of the British.

Bonus: I’m not 100% sure if Timothy Mackenzie Gunn is Scottish, but his name makes me think he hails from the clan!

Clan Macqueen

Clan Motto: Constant and Faithful

This Highland bunch are an Armigerous clan and members of Clan Chattan. They claim relations with Clan Donald and often sided with them in small clan disputes. Another large part of the clan carried the last name MacSween.

They did not participate in the Jacobite rebellion, but still ended up migrating into Ireland, and more notably Australia, beginning in the 1600s.

Clan Kerr

Clan Motto: Sero sed serio- Late, but in earnest

ancient

modern

hunting

The Kerrs were a border clan who has roots in ancient Norway, where they got their name. It comes from the Norse “kjarr” which means “marsh dweller”. It’s also origionally pronounced like “care” but when the mass migration to England and the Americas happened, the pronunciation turned into the modern “car”.

The two largest sections of the clan, the Kerrs of Ferniehurst and the Kerrs of Cessford fought with each other a lot for supremacy, but came together in their feud against Clan Scott. When a Kerr was accidentally killed in the 1520s by the Scotts, who were trying to free King James from Clan Douglas, they waited for their revenge. They knew that the band had been lead by Walter Scott, and waited until 1552 to kill him. Looks like they take their motto to heart!

Here’s a particularly fun fact, the Kerrs were known for being left handed. So much so, that their castles were often designed to suit left handed people. If you’re a Kerr, are you left handed?

Let’s look at our favorite left handed guy!

You read my mind, Fraser

The Farquharson Clan

Clan Motto: Fide et Fortitudine – By Faith and Fortitude

clan

modern

They were members of the Chattan Confederation and originated from the son of a Clan Shaw chief, named Farquhar.

By the end of the 1500s, they were gaining power and took on the nickname, the “Fighting Farquharsons”. They overtook many castles and no one dared oppose them for fear of retribution.

They supported the Stuarts 100% during the Jacobite rebellion and offered the large number of 500 men to the cause. They helped the Jacobites win many battles, but ultimately they couldn’t win the war. The Farquarson wife of the Mackintosh Chief even helped save Prince Charles Stuart’s life, earning her jail time after Culloden.

Clan Boyd

Clan Motto: Confido- I trust

They may be from Norman stock, as their name isn’t a traditional one, but more based on location. One possibility is that they got their name form the Scottish “buidh” which means “fair” or “yellow”. Or it could be a nod to the Isle of Bute.

They were strong supporters of Scottish independence and their ties to Robert the Bruce laid out their future as friends of the nobility. By the 1400s, one Boyd was young King James II’s regent, another his military tutor, and a third married the king’s sister. But they came too close to the crown and were ousted from power. But they regained their standing in the late 1500s when they put their support behind Mary Queen of Scots.

They fought for the Jacobites and the chief was later beheaded in London. His son then took the name Hay in order to try and retake the titles his dead father lost.

Their ancestral castle, formerly Kilmarnock Castle, is now Dean Castle and hosted almost every Scottish royal since it’s building in the 1350s.

Clan Colquhoun

Clan Motto: Si Je Puis – I will if I can

modern

ancient

Colquhoun was a the name of a piece of land that was passed to Umphredus de Kilpatrick by Scottish King Alexander II.

They were a small, but noble family that expanded into what we know as a clan. Their strong ties to the royal family kept them close to all fights between the larger clans, but out of harm’s way. But, they were still very vulnerable to to attack, as they were more strategic people and less physical. This lead to them being slaughtered in large numbers by Clan MacGregor, who as we said before, got a bit rowdy at times.

The Swinton Clan

Clan Motto: J’espere, Je Pense- I Hope, I Think

There is no formally registered Swinton tartan, but some like this tartan and hold it as the Swinton plaid.

This Lowland clan came from Northumbrian stock and was probably named for the village of Swinewood in the 1130s, but a more romanticized version has it getting their name for their bravery in clearing the area of wild boars.

One member, John Swinton, is seen as the possible founder of the Quakers in the 1660s. Actress Tilda Swinton is also a member of this family and she can trace her lineage through the Swinton line, back into the middle ages!

Clan MacLellan

Clan Motto: Think On

Regular tartan #1

Regular tartan #2

Hunting tartan

This Lowland clan is considered Armigerous, as it does not have a chief. They got their name from the Gaelic “MacGille Fholain”, which means “son of the servant of St Fillan”, who was a missionary of the early Celtic Church.

They were allies of William Wallace and followed him into battle. From that time on, they were friends of the nobility and were frequently knighted. by the 1500’s, they were still rising in the peerage and were made titled lords and often seen at court. However, their closeness to the crown took a toll on their wealth. During the Scottish Civil War, their clan was almost bankrupt by their chief, who was a staunch royalist.

The title of chief has been dormant since 1832, so if you’re of the clan and think you have a shot, go for gold and see if you could claim it!

Bonus: Here’s a pic of the Maclellan’s castle, which was built in the mid-late 1500s.

Clan Home

Clan Motto: A Home! A Home! A Home!

Alternative Clan Motto: True to the End

The Home, or Hume as they are sometimes called, hail from the ancient earls of Northumbria that settled in a lard called “Home”, in the lower areas of Scotland.

They were a particularly powerful border clan, partly owing to their wealth and ties to the nobility. By the 1400s, some members were even made Lords of Parliament and the Great Chamberlain of Scotland. But their noble ties and location near the border had a downside, as they were often on the front lines against the English. But even when the English would overtake their lands, the Homes would rally up and push them out like it ain’t no thang.

The English seriously hated Clan Home. The Homes were always by the side of the Scottish kings and kicking English troops off Scottish land. So when Oliver Cromwell finally took some Home lands, and Hume Castle, he garrisoned troops there. (Pictured below). But Hume Castle’s history is really interesting. Built in the 12th century, it was the beacon of the south, responsible for overseeing the border and warning other clans about any English invasions. A fire would be lit in a tall tower, signaling it was time for battle. This was resurrected in the Napoleonic Wars.

But when the Jacobite rebellion came to pass, the Home’s swapped sides and fought with the British. But, in the long run, it was good for the clan. They continued to hold power and even present day Home/Humes are very respected. Think Alec Douglas-Home, the former PM of the UK!

One more tiny fun fact: in 1513, during the Battle of Flodden, the Home leader was rallying the troops by calling, “A Home! A Home!”. But as many under his charge weren’t Homes, they thought he was telling them to go home, so they did. Oops.

Clan Hamilton

Clan Motto: Through

The clan’s chiefs come from the noble Gilberts of Hameldone, appearing around the last 1200s, when Walter Fitz Gilbert was awarded the land, among others, due to his support of Robert the Bruce. This began their rise to power, alongside the Scottish royals.

By the 1400s, they were tightly entwined with the Scottish royal family, as Lord John Hamilton married King James III’s daughter, Mary, adding more titles and land to their clan.This notoriety of being mixed with noble stock kept them largely out of normal clan disputes.

But by the mid 1600’s, the chiefdom was in debt and the lineage so noble, there were fights over who would hold the coveted title. This weakened the clan and they began to drift apart.

Clan MacDowall

Clan Motto: Vincere Vel Mori- To conquer or die

They hail from Galloway and are of the earliest Scots clans in written history, their lineage being noted in the mid 8th century, but being mentioned as early as the 200s as being members of the noble house of Galloway. Bu the 1200s,  the name “M’douall” had appeared, which the modern MacDowall has hailed from.

There is a large MacDowall number in Ireland, due to the English sending poor Scots to settle there and cultivate the land in the early 1700s.

Through some smart marriages, this large, but mostly peaceful, clan has stayed largely out of the battles the clans are known from.

Names asked for, but not included in this list, which is focused on Scottish clans: Kirk (sept of Clan Maxwell), Paterson (sept of the Clan MacLaren and Clan Farquharson), Jack (not a clan, nor a recognized sept, but a last name), Byers (sept of Clan Lindsay), Day (derived from the Irish O’Dea), Fisher (not a clan, nor a recognized sept, but a last name) Tinley (not a clan, nor a recognized sept, but a last name), Alexander (sept of Clan Donald).

But if you’d like to know a bit about your last name, let me know and I’ll tell you a few fun facts! Also, keep an eye our for part 6, since I still have many more names to go, and let me know if your clan hasn’t been mentioned in any of these Outlandish Clan History posts, and I’ll see what I can do!

And if you have time, you can learn about Kelsey’s contemporary novel and her Scottish historical romance series here!

An Outlandish Clan History Part5 Wow, you guy! I knew we got a ton of readers, but I had no idea so many of you had Scottish roots and it warms the cockles of my historically based soul to see people so interested. 

[sorayahigashikata]

Chapter 58: "YOU HAD ONE JOB."