timschochet's thread- Mods, please move this thread to the Politics Subforum, thank you (2 Viewers)

[rockaction]

Wow. Shaw's Wiki page claims he also set the standard of doubt in criminal law and also set the standard of mens rea for homicide. That's absurd. That amount of brilliance is ludicrous.

Shaw is unheralded as genius. He's like the Learned Hand of jurisprudence but without the learned.

Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemuel_Shaw

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

 

[maxwelledison]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

 

[timschochet]

97. Eli Whitney

I have always believed that I should have had no difficulty in causing my rights to be respected.

Eli Whitney was one of the most important inventors in American history, a central figure of the industrial revolution, one of those who popularized the idea of interchangeable parts which would have such a dramatic impact on the world. But of course his main contribution was the development of the cotton gin. (Gin is short for "engine.") The cotton gin removed the seeds from cotton, which had previously been labor intensive.

I am not a Luddite by any means; normally, technological improvement to our society has been largely positive. But if ever an argument could be made about a new machine that caused more human misery than it relieved, this would be the one. It completely altered the economic situation of the South. Prior to the gin, cotton had not been a major source of agriculture, and slaves were used for tobacco, rice, and sugar. After the gin, cotton exploded and became the main source of southern economy, and the slave population exploded. Slave owners in Virginia and other states in the upper South discovered they could make more money selling their slaves to the cotton states rather than keeping them to grow their own crops.

A very good argument has been made that without the cotton gin, slavery in the United States would have died of it's own accord, as it did in England and several other countries because it was not economically sustainable. This then would have avoided the Civil War. But the cotton gin guaranteed that the South would be tied to slavery as the key to it's existence, and make all the horrors that followed perhaps inevitable.

Like so many other brilliant innovators in American history, Eli Whitney expected to make a fortune from his invention, but never did; it was stolen out from under him. Most of his profits were lost fighting patent battles, and losing. He did make some money manufacturing muskets for the army, but never became rich. He died in 1825 just as the results of his invention were starting to have such a huge impact on human society.

Next up: the seventh of nine children, home schooled, who began life as a travelling salesman...

 

[Don Quixote]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

Yeah, seeing McCarthy, I now understand why I was confused on Brown, as Tim is going by some other definition of "greatest" than I was.

With this definition, I look forward to seeing John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald on the list of 100 Greatest Americans though.

 

[timschochet]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

To me the terms are interchangeable. I would note that a Smithsonian list of the 100 greatest Americans (which doesn't come close to matching mine, BTW) includes Charles Manson. So obviously they're having the same debate.

I can't buy into Manson being on a list whatever definition one uses. But if you want to refer to this as the "most influential" or "most important" rather than "greatest", I don't mind. I will say that of the 100 people I've chosen, most of them I strongly admire at least in some fashion. There are very few on this list that lack any redeeming qualities; McCarthy being one of those.

 

[timschochet]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

Yeah, seeing McCarthy, I know understand why I was confused on Brown, as Tim is going by some other definition of "greatest" than I was.

With this definition, I look forward to seeing John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald on the list of 100 Greatest Americans though.

Two more guys the Smithsonian had. But you won't see them on my list. Briefly considered, and then rejected.

 

[Don Quixote]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

Yeah, seeing McCarthy, I know understand why I was confused on Brown, as Tim is going by some other definition of "greatest" than I was.

With this definition, I look forward to seeing John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald on the list of 100 Greatest Americans though.

Two more guys the Smithsonian had. But you won't see them on my list. Briefly considered, and then rejected.

Are you talking about this list? They use the phrase "most significant," not "greatest."

 

[jwb]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

That's probably what he means by greatest.

John Brown gave a lot of fuel to the "they're coming for us" mentality that spurred the country towards inevitable war. It caused a lot of people in the south to say "See - I told you it was only a matter of time before they used force".

 

[timschochet]

That's fine. I changed the title, because I really don't want to have this debate.

That being said, most of the people on this list are truly great, and they tend to be ranked as much based on their relative greatness as on importance to society. So it's kind of a combination of the two.

 

[rockaction]

That's fine. I changed the title, because I really don't want to have this debate.

That being said, most of the people on this list are truly great, and they tend to be ranked as much based on their relative greatness as on importance to society. So it's kind of a combination of the two.

Yeah, definitionally, greatness is in its impact or weight. Could have just kept it as is.

 

[timschochet]

That's fine. I changed the title, because I really don't want to have this debate.

That being said, most of the people on this list are truly great, and they tend to be ranked as much based on their relative greatness as on importance to society. So it's kind of a combination of the two.

Yeah, definitionally, greatness is in its impact or weight. Could have just kept it as is.

You know what? I agree. Screw it, I'm changing it back. You guys want to nail me, go ahead. Thanks, rockaction!

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

Yep, yep, yep. It's appalling. In his reply he still points out these people are "great", this from the guy who thinks Nixon is "great."

I'm shipping in tomatoes by the crate from Sicily now, plump, fresh, good splatter effect.

 

[timschochet]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

Yep, yep, yep. It's appalling. In his reply he still points out these people are "great", this from the guy who thinks Nixon is "great."

I'm shipping in tomatoes by the crate from Sicily now, plump, fresh, good splatter effect.

I strongly considered Nixon for this list. From 1946 to 1973, he was a central figure in the majority of political events this country faced, which is pretty extraordinary. And of course his trip to China was hugely significant. But I couldn't do it.

 

[timschochet]

Oh, and Saints, you're gonna LOVE my next entry...read the clue again and see if it sounds like anybody you're familiar with.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I have an idea but I'll wait and see, this is turning into a real rogues gallery.

Whitney is interesting though. His inventions created a mass inner migration of poor rural blacks to the cities. NO was forever changed, even today there is a bit of a cultural divide between creole blacks whose presence goes back to the beginning of the city and blacks who trace their presence to migrations to NO from LA & MS around the turn of the century. A few decades earlier and possibly Whitney could have made slavery and the civil war moot.

 

[GibbyGarcia]

Wait, the list of 100 Greatest Americans includes John Brown and Joe McCarthy? Seriously?

WTF? If you said 100 Most Influential....... I can see it. Greatest? They don't belong anywhere near the list at all.

That's probably what he means by greatest.

John Brown gave a lot of fuel to the "they're coming for us" mentality that spurred the country towards inevitable war. It caused a lot of people in the south to say "See - I told you it was only a matter of time before they used force".

Just when I thought this thread couldn't get any better. yankee runs them down AGAIN and the fruits.

I read a great article on "John Brown". It was a defense piece that the "craziness" of John Brown was just propaganda and that his actions were a retaliation of several Southerner attacks that get ignored in the rhetoric. I always love to hear different versions of popular stories... I'll go see if I can find it.

 

[General Tso]

Oh, and Saints, you're gonna LOVE my next entry...read the clue again and see if it sounds like anybody you're familiar with.

Gonna be a long time before he figures this one out.

 

[timschochet]

If you're talking about Kansas, then yeah there was brutality on both sides and John Brown's actions were a retaliation. But that being said, he was still ####### loony tunes. I mean the guy had 5 men tied up, he took a sword and decapitated them. Sane people refrain from that sort of stuff.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

If you're talking about Kansas, then yeah there was brutality on both sides and John Brown's actions were a retaliation. But that being said, he was still ####### loony tunes. I mean the guy had 5 men tied up, he took a sword and decapitated them. Sane people refrain from that sort of stuff.

This is going well, so far the 100 greatest Americans include a demagogue, a terrorist and soon I'm guessing a fascist.

 

[Gawain]

I can't wait until tim ranks all 321,453,804 people in America. I'm hoping to break into the 8 digits.

126,809,563

GLADYS FARTHNOOTH--Boise, Idaho

The Good:

Donates roughly 5% of her 26,000 income in to the education system of Idaho via scratchers. Has never killed a man. Voted in the 2004 election (later challenged because of irregularities). Of her 18 lifetime sexual partners, 2 once worked at Planned Parenthood and 3 still have Obama stickers on their various late-nineties American Sedans.

The Bad:

Has spent roughly 8% of her life watching a cat that can (kind of ) say "oh long johnson." Shoplifted several packs of sheer, no-run pantyhose.

Up Next:

This kiddo, turning three on Friday, just mastered his Big Wheel and has now gone two days without pulling his sister's pigtails.

 

[rockaction]

I can't wait until tim ranks all 321,453,804 people in America. I'm hoping to break into the 8 digits.

126,809,563

GLADYS FARTHNOOTH--Boise, Idaho

The Good:

Donates roughly 5% of her 26,000 income in to the education system of Idaho via scratchers. Has never killed a man. Voted in the 2004 election (later challenged because of irregularities). Of her 18 lifetime sexual partners, 2 once worked at Planned Parenthood and 3 still have Obama stickers on their various late-nineties American Sedans.

The Bad:

Has spent roughly 8% of her life watching a cat that can (kind of ) say "oh long johnson." Shoplifted several packs of sheer, no-run pantyhose.

Up Next:

This kiddo, turning three on Friday, just mastered his Big Wheel and has now gone two days without pulling his sister's pigtails.

OMFUG. Just for the comment.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I can't wait until tim ranks all 321,453,804 people in America. I'm hoping to break into the 8 digits.

126,809,563

GLADYS FARTHNOOTH--Boise, Idaho

The Good:

Donates roughly 5% of her 26,000 income in to the education system of Idaho via scratchers. Has never killed a man. Voted in the 2004 election (later challenged because of irregularities). Of her 18 lifetime sexual partners, 2 once worked at Planned Parenthood and 3 still have Obama stickers on their various late-nineties American Sedans.

The Bad:

Has spent roughly 8% of her life watching a cat that can (kind of ) say "oh long johnson." Shoplifted several packs of sheer, no-run pantyhose.

Up Next:

This kiddo, turning three on Friday, just mastered his Big Wheel and has now gone two days without pulling his sister's pigtails.

I never do this but .

 

[timschochet]

Gladys is underrated.

 

[GibbyGarcia]

99. John Brown

The crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away, but with blood.

Abolitionist and terrorist John Brown first became known to the American public in 1856, when he and his family kidnapped 5 pro-slavery men on the Kansas border and hacked them to death with broadswords. Following this brutal act, Brown disappeared from abolitionist circles, except to secretly meet with several of its more famous leaders such as Frederick Douglas, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Henry Thoreau. At these meetings Brown proposed a revolution to end slavery in the South. Most of the rational men he met believed he was insane, though his cause was righteous.

In 1859 Brown tried to carry it out at Harper's Ferry. It was a futile effort. He was captured (by Robert E. Lee and JEB Stuart), tried, sentenced to death and hung. However, during his trial Brown made several comments that demonstrated his belief in himself and the justification of his cause. The north admired this immensely and treated him as a martyr. The South was outraged by the North's reaction, and was determined to leave the union.

It may be noted that Brown's slave insurrection achieved little and lasted for less than a fortnight, while the Nat Turner rebellion a few decades earlier lasted for weeks and created havoc throughout the South, especially Virginia, which saw the deaths of hundreds. Why then is John Brown on this list and Nat Turner is not? The answer is timing. John Brown's rebellion was a key event, perhaps THE key event which led to the Civil War.

In my thread on the Civil War we engaged in a lengthy debate about whether or not John Brown was a terrorist using the modern sense of the word. I believe he was. He led an organized small group with the purpose of spreading violence, fear, and mayhem in order to achieve specific but wide political goals. To me, that meets all the necessary requirements for a terrorist. Brown was our Osama Bin Laden. Had Bin Laden been captured and tried, his defense would have been much like John Brown's who said:

If it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I submit; so let it be done.Next up: The former marine who would dominate the country for 5 crucial years...

Found it. Bleeding Kansas. Granted, he went there looking for the fight, but there were dozens of armed attacks by pro-slavery Missouri “bands” during this time, looting and burning villiages. They also attacked small groups traveling into Kansas and “freed them of their arms”.

Here’s a short discussion of the attack on Lawrence, KS

http://www.thecivilwarmuse.com/index.php?page=camp-sackett

[SIZE=9pt]John Brown and The Siege of Lawrence, September 14-15 1856[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]On the afternoon of September 14, 1856, the Free State settlement of Lawrence, Kansas Territory was threatened by invasion of an arm of 2700 Pro-slavery Missourians under the command of Generals David R. Atchison and John W. Reid. Encamping near Franklin, four miles southeast of Lawrence, the Missourians were determined to wipe out the town that stood as a symbol of New England abolitionism.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]Less than four months earlier, Atchison and Sheriff Jones led the Sack of Lawrence, destroying the Free State Hotel and the Herald of Freedom and Kansas Free State presses. In the ensuing months, Lawrence was blockaded, and by mid-August, battles were fought in Douglas County at Fort Franklin, Fort Saunders, and For Titus in an attempt to loosen the stranglehold on supply lines into the half-starved Free State fortress. Now the townspeople, armed with everything from Sharps rifles to pitchforks, converged between two circular earthen forts on Massachusetts Street and prepared to defend their town.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]Present and heavily armed that afternoon was John Brown, the fiery New York abolitionist and Captain of the Liberty Guards in Lawrence during the Wakarusa War of early December, 1855. Brown, along with his sons, had spent much of the spring and summer of 1856 engaged in brutal guerrilla warfare against Pro-slavery factions throughout eastern Kansas. Though he had no formal command during the siege, Brown did give an address on tactics to an estimated 300 armed Lawrence citizens as he stood on a dry goods box twenty-five feet west of this plaque. Richard J. Hinton, a correspondent for the Boston Traveller, took down a portion of the address made by Brown, by then a hardened veteran of numerous gun battles with the Pro-slavery forces.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]“GENTLEMEN, – It is said there are twenty-five hundred Missourians down at Franklin, and that they will be here in two hours. You can see for yourselves the smoke they are making by setting fire to the houses in that town. Now is probably the last opportunity you will have of seeing a fight, so that you had better do your best. If they should come up and attack us, don't yell and make a great noise, but remain perfectly silent and still. Wait until they get within twenty-five yards of you; get a good object; be sure you see the hind sight of your gun, then fire. A great deal of powder and lead and very precious time is wasted by shooting too high. You had better aim at their legs than at their heads. In either case, be sure of the hind sights of your guns. It is from neglect of this that I myself have so many times escaped; for if all the bullets that have ever been aimed at me had hit, I should have been as full of holes as a riddle.”[/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]John Brown left Lawrence …for Osawatomie, which two weeks earlier was destroyed by the same forces arrayed against Lawrence. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=9pt]This is a link to a MUCH more detailed assessment of the Bleeding Kansas period.[/SIZE]

http://www1.assumption.edu/ahc/Kansas/

Finally, here is an interesting take on John Brown that explains that what was “crazy” about him was his believe in abolition. FYI, if you haven’t read this book, it’s a must read, if only to question your standard views of several American history events. It made me go and do more reading because he challenges lots of things I held/hold dear.

[SIZE=10pt]Lies My Teacher Told Me[/SIZE]: [SIZE=10pt]Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong[/SIZE] [SIZE=10pt]by James W. Loewen[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Except of chapter : John Brown and Abraham Lincoln (best I could do)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]p173[/SIZE]

John Brown, son of an abolitionist, envisioned a plan to invade the South and free the slaves. In 1859, with financial support from abolitionists, Brown made plans to start a slave rebellion in Virginia, to establish a free state in the Appalachian Mountains, and to spread the rebellion through the South. On October 16, 1859, Brown and eighteen of his men captured the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, in the present state of West Virginia.... He and his men were captured by a force of marines. Brown was brought to trial and convicted of treason against Virginia, murder, and criminal conspiracy. He was hanged on December 2, 1859.

[SIZE=10pt]In all, seven of the twelve textbooks take this neutral approach to John Brown. Their bland paragraphs don't imply that Brown was crazy, but neither do they tell enough about him to explain why he became a hero to so many blacks and non-slaveholding whites.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]p174[/SIZE]

[John Brown] favorably impressed people who spoke with him after his capture, including his jailer and even reporters writing for Democratic newspapers, which supported slavery. Governor Wise of Virginia called him "a man of clear head" after Brown got the better of him in an informal interview. "They are themselves mistaken who take him to be a madman," Governor Wise said. In his message to the Virginia legislature he said Brown showed "quick and clear perception," "rational premises and consecutive reasoning," "composure and self-possession."

[SIZE=10pt]After 1890 textbook authors inferred Brown's madness from his plan, which admittedly was farfetched. Never mind that John Brown himself presciently told Frederick Douglass that the venture would make a stunning impact even if it failed. Nor that his twenty-odd followers can hardly all be considered crazed too. Rather, we must recognize that the insanity with which historians have charged John Brown was never psychological. It was ideological. Brown's actions made no sense to textbook writers between 1890 and about 1970. To make no sense is to be crazy.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Clearly, Brown's contemporaries did not consider him insane. Brown's ideological influence in the month before his hanging, and continuing after his death, was immense. He moved the boundary of acceptable thoughts and deeds regarding slavery. Before Harpers Ferry, to be an abolitionist was not quite acceptable, even in the North. Just talking about freeing slaves-advocating immediate emancipation-was behavior at the outer limit of the ideological continuum. By engaging in armed action, including murder, John Brown made mere verbal abolitionism seem much less radical.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]After an initial shock wave of revulsion against Brown, in the North as well as in the South, Americans were fascinated to hear what he had to say. In his 1859 trial John Brown captured the attention of the nation like no other abolitionist or slaveowner before or since. He knew it: "My whole life before had not afforded me one half the opportunity to plead for the right." '° In his speech to the court on November 2, just before the judge sentenced him to die, Brown argued, "Had I so interfered in behalf of the rich, the powerful, it would have been all right." He referred to the Bible, which he saw in the courtroom, "which teaches me that all things whatsoever I would that men should do to me, I should do even so to them. It teaches me further, to remember them that are in bonds as bound with them. I endeavored to act up to that instruction." Brown went on to claim the high moral ground: "I believe that to have interfered as I have done, as I have always freely admitted I have done, in behalf of His despised poor, I did no wrong but right." Although he objected that his impending death penalty was unjust, he accepted it and pointed to graver injustices: "Now, if it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I say, let it be done." "[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Brown's willingness to go to the gallows for what he thought was right had a moral force of its own. "It seems as if no man had ever died in America before, for in order to die you must first have lived," Henry David Thoreau observed in a eulogy in Boston. "These men, in teaching us how to die, have at the same time taught us how to live." Thoreau went on to compare Brown with Jesus of Nazareth, who had faced a similar death at the hands of the state.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]During the rest of November, Brown provided the nation graceful instruction in how to face death. In Larchmont, New York, George Templeton Strong wrote in his diary, "One's faith in anything is terribly shaken by anybody who is ready to go to the gallows condemning and denouncing it." Brown's letters to his family and friends softened his image, showed his human side, and prompted an outpouring of sympathy for his children and soon-to-be widow, if not for Brown himself His letters to supporters and remarks to journalists, widely circulated, formed a continuing indictment of slavery. We see his charisma in this letter from "a conservative Christian"-so the author signed it-written to Brown in jail: "While I cannot approve of all your acts, I stand in awe of your position since your capture, and dare not oppose you lest I be found fighting against God; for you speak as one having authority, and seem to be strengthened from on high." When Virginia executed John Brown on December 2, making him the first American since the founding of the nation to be hanged as a traitor, church bells mourned in cities throughout the North. Louisa May Alcott, William Dean Howells, Herman Melville, John Greenleaf Whittier, and Walt Whitman were among the poets who responded to the event. "The gaze of Europe is fixed at this moment on America," wrote Victor Hugo from France. Hanging Brown, Hugo predicted, "will open a latent fissure that will finally split the Union asunder. The punishment of John Brown may consolidate slavery in Virginia, but it will certainly shatter the American Democracy. You preserve your shame but you kill your glory."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]Brown remained controversial after his death. Republican congressmen kept their distance from his felonious acts. Nevertheless, Southern slaveowners were appalled at the show of Northern sympathy for Brown and resolved to maintain slavery by any means necessary, including quitting the Union if they lost the next election. Brown's charisma in the North, meanwhile, was not spent but only increased due to what many came to view as his martyrdom. As the war came, as thousands of Americans found themselves making the same commitment to face death that John Brown had made, the force of his example took on new relevance. That's why soldiers marched into battle singing "John Brown's Body." Two years later, church congregations sang Julia Ward Howe's new words to the song: "As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free"-and the identification of John Brown and Jesus Christ took another turn. The next year saw the 54th Massachusetts Colored Regiment parading through Boston to the tune, en route to its heroic destiny with death in South Carolina, while William Lloyd Garrison surveyed the cheering bystanders from a balcony, his hand resting on a bust of John Brown. In February 1865 another Massachusetts colored regiment marched to the tune through the streets of Charleston, South Carolina.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]That was the high point of old John Brown. At the turn of the century, as southern and border states disfranchised African Americans, as lynchings proliferated, as blackface minstrel shows came to dominate American popular culture, white America abandoned the last shards of racial idealism.[/SIZE]

 

[timschochet]

96. Huey Long

The time has come for all good men to rise above principle.

Only in Louisiana? He attended a few months at LSU (couldn't afford the textbooks), a few months at Oklahoma University, a year at Tulane Law School, and somehow convinced the state board to give him the bar. He started winning workman's law cases. Then he sued Standard Oil and became famous. He ran for office, and became one of the first American politicians to recognize the importance of radio. From the beginning he was a populist; he was the candidate of "every man"- but unlike most southern populists of the time, "every man" for Huey included blacks- he ran against the KKK, and made it clear he was a "friend" of poor black farmers.

In 1928 Long became governor of Louisiana, elected as an Andrew Jackson-like people's rebellion against the corporate interests that ruled the state. He began a huge public works program, mostly by bullying his opponents. The rural poor, black and white alike, regarded Huey as their hero. They didn't notice, or didn't care, that Huey's methods were underhanded. And that he quickly became the most powerful governor in American history, and then the most powerful Senator, controlling every aspect of his state's business (and later, beyond the state and including the entire region.)

Saints referred to Long as a fascist, and this may be true in a sense, but he was very different from the famous fascists of the era like Hitler and Mussolini. Huey was an American dictator, and as such he had great charm and a sense of humor, which is characteristic of the American populist. There is no question that his control of Louisiana was absolute. I have only briefly touched on his career here; his story is entirely fascinating and well worth reading about, (including the famous fictional account, All The King's Men).

Huey Long supported FDR in the 1932 election and that support was key to FDR's victory. But then Long turned against the New Deal and planned to run for President himself with his own plan, "Share Our Wealth". He might have become a serious threat to FDR in 1936, and had he been elected, he might be much higher up this list- or he might have turned the United States into his own dictatorship. We'll never know, because Huey was assassinated before this could ever happen.

Up next: Rose up from the streets of Brooklyn to become a star on Tin Pan Alley...

 

[timschochet]

I really like James Loewen. That entire book is extremely informative. And though it's certainly leftist in outlook, it tends to be less polemical than Howard Zinn, and thus a more enjoyable read IMO.

But I don't agree with his take on Brown. I get what he's trying to do with that argument, but the righteousness of Brown's views on slavery, and the awful acts by the slaveowners in Kansas, doesn't justify the cold-bloodedness or insanity of Brown's brutal acts.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Erg - "every man" for Huey included blacks- he ran against the KKK" - he played both sides of the fence, Tim. He very much prayed on the poor white agricultural and rural fears that blacks were going to take their jobs, that was a constant struggle and in front of the white crowds he had no problem reminding them of it. As for the KKK the problem for him is they were an established power base, where they submitted to hi political will he was very happy work with them and use them. One of the places where Huey and his cronies went to hide money was the northshore where the KKK was strong, needless to say money solved all alleged divisions.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Gladys is awesome. That and the fruit is better than what I'm doing. I should just stop.

 

[Gawain]

Gladys is awesome. That and the fruit is better than what I'm doing. I should just stop.

You should not!

The counter point to tim's rankings is great.

 

[timschochet]

Erg - "every man" for Huey included blacks- he ran against the KKK" - he played both sides of the fence, Tim. He very much prayed on the poor white agricultural and rural fears that blacks were going to take their jobs, that was a constant struggle and in front of the white crowds he had no problem reminding them of it. As for the KKK the problem for him is they were an established power base, where they submitted to hi political will he was very happy work with them and use them. One of the places where Huey and his cronies went to hide money was the northshore where the KKK was strong, needless to say money solved all alleged divisions.

Well sure. But even so, just the fact that Long was even willing to go to the pretense of being considerate of black interests was extremely unusual for a southern politician of his time. I think it was part of the reason he was so successful. His enemies were all individual enemies, and upper class enemies,- again, the opposite of other fascists of the time. And I believe that this sort of thing is peculiar to America. As Sinclair Lewis famously pointed out, if America is going to have a fascist, it's going to be a "man of the people", and likely from the Democratic party.

 

[timschochet]

Gladys is awesome. That and the fruit is better than what I'm doing. I should just stop.

Please don't.

 

[John Bender]

Next segment of fruit countdown is coming soon. Having YouTube issues uploading the tribute video.

Hopefully can work it out today

 

[John Bender]

I shoulda went with top 10. Top 20 is a lot of shtick to come up with. I think I did ok with number 18 though.

 

[timschochet]

Stephen King, in his novel The Dead Zone, also tackled this issue. Greg Stilson's success and personality is largely based on Huey Long, and King explained in an interview that Long's charm and good humor was the only way that a dictatorship would ever succeed in the United States.

Now let's contrast Long with McCarthy. Curiously enough, many liberal historians and thinkers dwell on McCarthy and the threat of fascism he represented, and ignore Huey Long (perhaps because Long started off as a Democrat and a "liberal".) But McCarthy, despite all of his immense power, had NO shot of becoming America's dictator. He wasn't bright enough, or cunning enough, and he had no idea how to manipulate his power beyond his station. More importantly, he completely lacked charisma, and the first time McCarthy ever had to spend an extended period in front of TV cameras, he was destroyed.

Long on the other hand exuded smarts and charisma, and really could have been a threat to ending American democracy.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

"Elected as an Andrew Jackson-like people's rebellion against the corporate interests that ruled the state" - serious revisionism. Jax and Huey do not belong in the same sentence. - Huey first got elected to the Public Service Commission, still a hub of corruption, and it was there that he learned that power over corporations only carried weight if exercised, but it wasn't long after that he was cutting deals, as governor he was impeached and survived the impeachment by bribery and threats, and used his power and money gained from the public service commission and as governor to bribe local officials who drove turnout such as it was back then to his way.

Huey had something called the "Deduct Box" - basically almost any revenue that came through his offices at the PSC or as governor had an informal excise that went into his pockets. Supposedly his friend Seymour Weiss had an actual "box" at the Roosevelt Hotel but in reality the money went all over. Aside from the KKK and the oil and utility companies, Huey also ultimately aligned with the Louisiana Mafia, the oldest in the US.

For reference for his hand in hand treatment of the oil companies, look up the "Win Or Lose Corporation" - to this day Huey's heirs and those of his close cronies receive a percentage of Louisiana's state oil revenues, and much of that money goes into the pockets of key LA legislators who of course keep any investigation into the WOLC's revenues ever getting started. The man could even steal from the grave. Meanwhile LA still gets a ridiculously low share of oil revenues compared to other states.

Ultimately his talents and vision were such that he could have had a very real shot at being a fascist dictator of the USA. In LA when he was killed he had his own band of brownshirt guards, machine gun nests across from NO city hall, youth camps, etc. He was on his way. Ultimately his own guards accidentally shot him during an alleged assassination attempt.

One of the saddest and most disgraceful chapters in American history.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Erg - "every man" for Huey included blacks- he ran against the KKK" - he played both sides of the fence, Tim. He very much prayed on the poor white agricultural and rural fears that blacks were going to take their jobs, that was a constant struggle and in front of the white crowds he had no problem reminding them of it. As for the KKK the problem for him is they were an established power base, where they submitted to hi political will he was very happy work with them and use them. One of the places where Huey and his cronies went to hide money was the northshore where the KKK was strong, needless to say money solved all alleged divisions.

Well sure. But even so, just the fact that Long was even willing to go to the pretense of being considerate of black interests was extremely unusual for a southern politician of his time. I think it was part of the reason he was so successful. His enemies were all individual enemies, and upper class enemies,- again, the opposite of other fascists of the time. And I believe that this sort of thing is peculiar to America. As Sinclair Lewis famously pointed out, if America is going to have a fascist, it's going to be a "man of the people", and likely from the Democratic party.

He and Earl frequently used the n-word in their speeches. They were from Winn Parish and as racist as they come. The Huey routine was to use the threat of one thing to gain favor from the opposition. So he railed against the oil companies while he took money from them. He spoke of helping the poor blacks while telling poor whites they needed to support him to keep them from taking their jobs. In front of a Catholic audience he said he was Catholic, in front of a Protestant audience he said he was Protestant.

Also when you point to Andrew Jackson that is completely inappropriate, Winn Parish had a long history of populists and socialists. I think one year the Parish actually voted for Eugene Debs. Huey was influenced by his own backyard.

 

[timschochet]

Saints, why did you write "alleged assassination attempt"? Is that part in question? I was unaware of that fact.

 

[GibbyGarcia]

I really like James Loewen. That entire book is extremely informative. And though it's certainly leftist in outlook, it tends to be less polemical than Howard Zinn, and thus a more enjoyable read IMO.

But I don't agree with his take on Brown. I get what he's trying to do with that argument, but the righteousness of Brown's views on slavery, and the awful acts by the slaveowners in Kansas, doesn't justify the cold-bloodedness or insanity of Brown's brutal acts.

Oh, I'm not arguing that at all. Just expanding on the historical subject matter around one of your folks. I like the trend of this thread, which has been mostly informative and civil. I have no plans to alter that.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Saints, why did you write "alleged assassination attempt"? Is that part in question? I was unaware of that fact.

Very much so. Carl Weiss definitely approached Huey, we know that much. You have to realize that by that time Huey walked around with a group of personal, handpicked guards, like 20 men, in brown uniforms, who went with him everywhere. Weiss broke in to Huey's space in a hallway at the Capitol - mind you, Huey was a US Senator, but he was in the LA Capitol telling legislatures and his own governor how to rule on a particular bill that he himself had created - the original official story was that he had a gun but that was not certain. One theory, which carries a lot of weight, was that Weiss (whose father-in-law had been the victim of one of Huey's political purges) reached out to Huey, the guards, who carried Thompson machine guns (Tommy guns) freaked out and started shooting, hitting Huey, Indeed at the Capitol you can still see the bullet holes. At the hospital supposedly the doctors were too frightened of political repercussions (ie their jobs at the State Lady of the Lake Hospital in BR) to operate or intervene properly, the surgery and decision making was botched, and Huey died on the table.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

If the Soursop, Papaya and Mango are given similar short shrift I will be hopping mad, I tell you.

 

[timschochet]

Fascinating stuff Saints. They show you the bullet holes when you take a tour of the Capitol?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Fascinating stuff Saints. They show you the bullet holes when you take a tour of the Capitol?

Yeah, and IIRC I don't think you even need a tour. I think he was walking out of the legislature at the time.

This is an old depiction but it conveys the men with machine guns shooting. It's questioned today whether Weiss even had a gun actually. He was a doctor.

Here's a picture of Huey with his uniformed guards.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Stephen King, in his novel The Dead Zone, also tackled this issue. Greg Stilson's success and personality is largely based on Huey Long, and King explained in an interview that Long's charm and good humor was the only way that a dictatorship would ever succeed in the United States.

Now let's contrast Long with McCarthy. Curiously enough, many liberal historians and thinkers dwell on McCarthy and the threat of fascism he represented, and ignore Huey Long (perhaps because Long started off as a Democrat and a "liberal".) But McCarthy, despite all of his immense power, had NO shot of becoming America's dictator. He wasn't bright enough, or cunning enough, and he had no idea how to manipulate his power beyond his station. More importantly, he completely lacked charisma, and the first time McCarthy ever had to spend an extended period in front of TV cameras, he was destroyed.

Long on the other hand exuded smarts and charisma, and really could have been a threat to ending American democracy.

I agree with all of this. McCarthy was a drunk who just learned the trick of mass accusation in American media.

Long had it all. His speaking mannerism had the same sort of wild gesticulating and designed hand and arm and body movements that Hitler had (and supposedly Hitler learned it from fascist speakers in Vienna). With national radio and press, and ultimately tv at his disposal, his potential for destruction would have been unlimited. He definitely would have kept the US out of WW2 btw.

Huey did a lot of stuff that could be called national socialism. And he did build roads, and he did build schools and give free textbooks, and he did speak directly to the poor, and I will say he did a great job on the hospitals. And though I know I come across as conservative because of my criticisms the reality is I think if Obama and the liberals were serious they would look at the socialist system for public health created in LA (and since largely destroyed in the last 10 years, which to me is a shame). Note though ever single mile, page, program, and bed came with money and power that went directly to Huey.

The problem of course like the national socialists is that despite these "good" things or "advancements" they came with a price, including massive corruption, very considerable intermingling of corporate and state (which also happened with the nazis), widespread and overt intimidation of elected officials and the public by force and threat, and an almost complete elimination of our normal American democratic processes.

Personally I think it would have been better to have Joseph Welch on your list and as far as Louisiana is concerned we have never had a real, effective reformer, but I guess I would take Jean Lafitte, because at least he fought for America, New Orleans and Louisiana, and in the process helped secure the Louisiana Purchase.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

(Sorry - just one more note, I just came across this)

- One the issue of US presidents, we have this in today's news from the estimable public servant, Lois Lerner:

The Senate report examined 1.5 million pages of emails from the IRS, including many from Lerner in which she discusses her sometimes unconventional political views.

“Look my view is that Lincoln was our worst president not our best,” she told a friend in 2014, after she left the IRS. “He should (have) let the south go. We really do seem to have 2 totally different mindsets.”

http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/08/05/senate-report-lois-lerner-also-targeted-bristol-palin/

What a great gal, huh?

 

[rockaction]

(Sorry - just one more note, I just came across this)

- One the issue of US presidents, we have this in today's news from the estimable public servant, Lois Lerner:

The Senate report examined 1.5 million pages of emails from the IRS, including many from Lerner in which she discusses her sometimes unconventional political views.

“Look my view is that Lincoln was our worst president not our best,” she told a friend in 2014, after she left the IRS. “He should (have) let the south go. We really do seem to have 2 totally different mindsets.”

http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/08/05/senate-report-lois-lerner-also-targeted-bristol-palin/

What a great gal, huh?

Lois Lerner and the iRS scandal is clearly a right-wing issue raised by the right-wing media under a right-wing presidency.

 

[John Bender]

18. PEAR

I really hate pears but I had to be impartial to produce (get it?) a great list here for you people.

Actually true - they will ripen faster if you put them next to bananas - that's how much bananas rule compared to pears.

Pears only have one use: covered in heavy syrup in canned fruit cocktail otherwise they are the fruit of the devil. If I had thought this whole thing through, I'd probably not even rank pears on this list. I really hate pears.

The word "pear" is also a homonym but don't call them that to their face as it's not very politically correct and the devil will eat your soul for calling his fruit a homonym. But hey, at least they can get married in any state now! Progress.

I didn't want to do a tribute video for the pear but I did anyway.

Number 18 on the countdown of best fruits....

The Fruit of the Devil; The Pear...

My tribute to pears: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJyQwprX1vY

Stay tuned to the countdown for a special request and dedication coming up next...

 

[timschochet]

I used to dislike pears but this client sends me Bartletts every year for Christmas and they're actually quite tasty.

 

[timschochet]

BTW, shoutout to General Tso for guessing two of my clues so far. Nice work!

 

[Arodin]

99. John Brown

The crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away, but with blood.

Abolitionist and terrorist John Brown first became known to the American public in 1856, when he and his family kidnapped 5 pro-slavery men on the Kansas border and hacked them to death with broadswords. Following this brutal act, Brown disappeared from abolitionist circles, except to secretly meet with several of its more famous leaders such as Frederick Douglas, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Henry Thoreau. At these meetings Brown proposed a revolution to end slavery in the South. Most of the rational men he met believed he was insane, though his cause was righteous.

In 1859 Brown tried to carry it out at Harper's Ferry. It was a futile effort. He was captured (by Robert E. Lee and JEB Stuart), tried, sentenced to death and hung. However, during his trial Brown made several comments that demonstrated his belief in himself and the justification of his cause. The north admired this immensely and treated him as a martyr. The South was outraged by the North's reaction, and was determined to leave the union.

It may be noted that Brown's slave insurrection achieved little and lasted for less than a fortnight, while the Nat Turner rebellion a few decades earlier lasted for weeks and created havoc throughout the South, especially Virginia, which saw the deaths of hundreds. Why then is John Brown on this list and Nat Turner is not? The answer is timing. John Brown's rebellion was a key event, perhaps THE key event which led to the Civil War.

In my thread on the Civil War we engaged in a lengthy debate about whether or not John Brown was a terrorist using the modern sense of the word. I believe he was. He led an organized small group with the purpose of spreading violence, fear, and mayhem in order to achieve specific but wide political goals. To me, that meets all the necessary requirements for a terrorist. Brown was our Osama Bin Laden. Had Bin Laden been captured and tried, his defense would have been much like John Brown's who said:

If it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I submit; so let it be done.Next up: The former marine who would dominate the country for 5 crucial years...

Given the severity with which you judged Presidents for genocidal behavior, it surprises me that you consider a psychotic mass murderer to be one of the 99 greatest Americans ever... Surely there were some more peaceful abolitionists who also did more to advance the cause of abolition than Brown? I can think of half a dozen off the top of my head, and don't expect them all to make the list of 98 remaining...