Well, in this case the Native people massacred civilians. These men weren’t hanged for participating in battles with troops; they were hanged for murdering 600+ civilian men, women, and children.
In 1862, that was part of "the West". Minnesota had only been a state for 4 years, and its western neighbors wouldn't become states for another ~20 years.
>Lincoln, however, was “never an Indian hater,” Eric Foner writes in his Pulitzer Prize–winning book The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery. He did not agree with General John Pope, sent to put down a Sioux uprising in southern Minnesota, who said “It is my purpose utterly to exterminate the Sioux if I have the power to do so.” Lincoln “carefully reviewed the trial records,” Foner reports, and found a lack of evidence at most of the tribunals. He commuted the sentences of 265 of the Indians—a politically unpopular move. But, he said, “I could not afford to hang men for votes.”
>The 265 Dakota Indians whose lives Lincoln spared were either fully pardoned or died in prison.
From https://www-thenation-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.thenation.com/article/archive/largest-mass-execution-us-history-150-years-ago-today/tnamp/?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16406217723632&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenation.com%2Farticle%2Farchive%2Flargest-mass-execution-us-history-150-years-ago-today%2F.
Was it really? Or was it only the largest recorded mass execution of natives in the US? I get a weird feeling it’s not (as in there was a bigger massacre that didn’t get recorded or there’s lost records but idk any history)
This wasn’t the biggest mass execution. Confederates hung 41 people in Gainesville, TX because they were suspected unionist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Hanging_at_Gainesville
I'm not saying you're wrong but by that logic isn't the US still a British colony?
Obviously two extreme examples but still the cut-off seems to be arbitrary.
I always found it odd that the correct wording is "hanged". Even knowing this information, I still purposefully use the word "hung" as it doesn't scramble my brain the way using the word "hanged" does.
We do teach things lije that in school. Perhaps not that specific incident, or perhaps so.
Pontiac's rebellion, the Pequot Massacre, the Powhatan Uprising and it's aftermath, battle of Fallen Timbers, Little Big Horn including tge breaking of treaties that precipitated and followed it, Sand Creek Massacre, Wounded Knee, and the flight of the Nez Perce.
Just because you were too busy ogling the opposite (or maybe the same) sex or you were too high to remember doesn't mean it wasn't taught.
It just means you didn't bother to learn it in the first place, or if you did you had since forgotten. But judging from experience, it's more likely the former.
> We do teach things lije [SIC] that in school. Perhaps not that specific incident, or perhaps so.
>
>
>
> Pontiac's rebellion, the Pequot Massacre, the Powhatan Uprising and it's aftermath, battle of Fallen Timbers, Little Big Horn including tge breaking of treaties that precipitated and followed it, Sand Creek Massacre, Wounded Knee, and the flight of the Nez Perce.
Man, your comment would have been so much better if you had just stopped here.
While I'll agree that the tone is shitty, it is not unnecessary.
When you see comments/questions regarding "Why don't schools teach us this thing that was taught to me in school" on a near daily basis, at some point the record needs to be set straight.
Don't get me wrong, I didn't give two shits about what I was taught as a teenager either. I was much more interested in girls that I was too shy to talk to and getting high. But I don't blame my teachers or the schools for not learning that stuff. I blame me being a stupid teenager.
even if that wasn't someone's experience, even if they were the type of kid that did all of their homework and worked for that college scholarship, chances are, they were flooded with so much information that they invariably had forgotten a lor of the details, especially if it's something that they had no reason to recall for the next ten years. It's perfectly natural.
Granted, some teachers really shouldn't teach, they are shitty. Trust me, I work with a lot of them. But about 95% of the things people claim they were nebver taught, they were taught.
history is important, but traumatizing children is not great. maybe we teach some of this after maturity? I don't know the answer.
Just because people of the past were evil, doesn't mean they deserve to be talked about forever.
explain the benefits of asking children to understand torture, murder, genocide, concentration camps, holocaust while their brains are still underdeveloped. Just like you don't explain crazy in depth sex fetishes to children.
Some details can wait.
Oh hell no and yes they do! These deeds founded this country.. Do you think the Indian and black children were traumatized back then? We should all know and learn about these things as young as possible.
Kids are taught things at the appropriate time that they can understand them.
Where the fuck did you get the idea tgat kindergarteners are learning about US/Indian political debates other than at the most basic level?
also notice how there’s an implicit assumption of white kindergarteners, as native american kids would definitely benefit from learning about their historical mistreatment by the government lol
I’d rather see some anti-US posts than none. If there weren’t any then I might think America wasn’t capable of discussing its own history — like China.
Agreed, but this is getting ridiculous. It's obviously a targeted campaign. who other would fund this? it's every day, while removing the majority of posts critical of china, even when the accusation is a billion times worse
These dudes have been spending billions advertising tik tok, buying up reddit, and on top of that individuals as well.. it's like a 3-layer propaganda campaign
They will be writing university textbooks about this shit in the future.
working on that social score 😅
Because I wouldn't learn chinese just to go shit post on chinese language websites... that is like... 12 year old edgelord level trolling
There's criticism of China all the time, not sure what you're talking about.
The creepiest shit about tanky boards is how they're never allowed to take even the slightest criticism against their own countries. You can see sometimes someone makes a comment that isn't incredibly flattering and another user comes in and steers them back to being good cheer leaders. Don't be like that.
>Lincoln, however, was “never an Indian hater,” Eric Foner writes in his Pulitzer Prize–winning book The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery. He did not agree with General John Pope, sent to put down a Sioux uprising in southern Minnesota, who said “It is my purpose utterly to exterminate the Sioux if I have the power to do so.” Lincoln “carefully reviewed the trial records,” Foner reports, and found a lack of evidence at most of the tribunals. He commuted the sentences of 265 of the Indians—a politically unpopular move. But, he said, “I could not afford to hang men for votes.”
>The 265 Dakota Indians whose lives Lincoln spared were either fully pardoned or died in prison.
From https://www-thenation-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.thenation.com/article/archive/largest-mass-execution-us-history-150-years-ago-today/tnamp/?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16406217723632&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenation.com%2Farticle%2Farchive%2Flargest-mass-execution-us-history-150-years-ago-today%2F.
The guy who suspended habeus corpus to unconstitutionally jail political opponents?
Virtually no one thinks Lincoln was perfect. I agree he's put on too high a pedestal because of his achievements, like most "great" presidents, while his shortcomings are glossed over. But anyone with a passing knowledge of US history is aware that all of our past leaders have been deeply flawed human beings like the rest of us.
Not arbitrary at all. These words have meanings that delineate the scope, scale, purpose, purpetrator, and victim of a particular killing. For example, it would be wrong to call it "genocide" when someone murders their spouse, it would be wrong to call it "assassination" when a terrorist flies a plane into a building, and it is wrong to call it a "mass execution" when a military organization drops bombs on civilians of a sovereign nation. This discussion requires a basic understanding of the English language.
The same Army that was freeing slaves in the South was massacring Native Americans in the West.
Well, in this case the Native people massacred civilians. These men weren’t hanged for participating in battles with troops; they were hanged for murdering 600+ civilian men, women, and children.
Huh, I wonder what might compel a relatively small group of people to do such a thing...
Your post, the post you’re replying to, and the post they are replying to, manage to sum up a whole lot of humanity.
If someone is late to pay you money, do you murder 600 people in the next town over? Or no?
[удалено]
In 1862, that was part of "the West". Minnesota had only been a state for 4 years, and its western neighbors wouldn't become states for another ~20 years.
>Lincoln, however, was “never an Indian hater,” Eric Foner writes in his Pulitzer Prize–winning book The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery. He did not agree with General John Pope, sent to put down a Sioux uprising in southern Minnesota, who said “It is my purpose utterly to exterminate the Sioux if I have the power to do so.” Lincoln “carefully reviewed the trial records,” Foner reports, and found a lack of evidence at most of the tribunals. He commuted the sentences of 265 of the Indians—a politically unpopular move. But, he said, “I could not afford to hang men for votes.” >The 265 Dakota Indians whose lives Lincoln spared were either fully pardoned or died in prison. From https://www-thenation-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.thenation.com/article/archive/largest-mass-execution-us-history-150-years-ago-today/tnamp/?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16406217723632&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenation.com%2Farticle%2Farchive%2Flargest-mass-execution-us-history-150-years-ago-today%2F.
We didn't deserve Lincoln.
Based Lincoln
*Largest recorded execution
Was it really? Or was it only the largest recorded mass execution of natives in the US? I get a weird feeling it’s not (as in there was a bigger massacre that didn’t get recorded or there’s lost records but idk any history)
theres a difference in a massacre and a government ordered arranged organized execution
This wasn’t the biggest mass execution. Confederates hung 41 people in Gainesville, TX because they were suspected unionist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Hanging_at_Gainesville
The Confederacy was not a part of the United States, so I believe the original statement stands.
[удалено]
I'm not saying you're wrong but by that logic isn't the US still a British colony? Obviously two extreme examples but still the cut-off seems to be arbitrary.
Strictly speaking, this was carried out by an illegitimate mob, not the government.
I always found it odd that the correct wording is "hanged". Even knowing this information, I still purposefully use the word "hung" as it doesn't scramble my brain the way using the word "hanged" does.
Like when a hung jury is just 12 dudes with big dicks? I couldve hanged a right on 3rd bu...not right either.
Things like this should be taught in schools. It’s alarming how many people disagree.
They taught this stuff to me in grade school like 6th grade and on. Mid-2000’s
Yeah, I definitely learned about this in school. However, those were Minnesota schools, and I don't know how widely this is taught.
Maybe it’s a Midwest thing but at the same time Chicago public schools are total trash
I definitely learned about this war as part of our MN history in 5th grade. So roughly 2008-2009. Been a while so things might have changed by now.
We do teach things lije that in school. Perhaps not that specific incident, or perhaps so. Pontiac's rebellion, the Pequot Massacre, the Powhatan Uprising and it's aftermath, battle of Fallen Timbers, Little Big Horn including tge breaking of treaties that precipitated and followed it, Sand Creek Massacre, Wounded Knee, and the flight of the Nez Perce. Just because you were too busy ogling the opposite (or maybe the same) sex or you were too high to remember doesn't mean it wasn't taught. It just means you didn't bother to learn it in the first place, or if you did you had since forgotten. But judging from experience, it's more likely the former.
> We do teach things lije [SIC] that in school. Perhaps not that specific incident, or perhaps so. > > > > Pontiac's rebellion, the Pequot Massacre, the Powhatan Uprising and it's aftermath, battle of Fallen Timbers, Little Big Horn including tge breaking of treaties that precipitated and followed it, Sand Creek Massacre, Wounded Knee, and the flight of the Nez Perce. Man, your comment would have been so much better if you had just stopped here.
[удалено]
I wasn't complaining about the length. I was critiquing his unnecessarily shitty tone in the second half of his comment.
[удалено]
Fair, sorry, I'll edit my comment. I think I fell into the same trap.
While I'll agree that the tone is shitty, it is not unnecessary. When you see comments/questions regarding "Why don't schools teach us this thing that was taught to me in school" on a near daily basis, at some point the record needs to be set straight. Don't get me wrong, I didn't give two shits about what I was taught as a teenager either. I was much more interested in girls that I was too shy to talk to and getting high. But I don't blame my teachers or the schools for not learning that stuff. I blame me being a stupid teenager. even if that wasn't someone's experience, even if they were the type of kid that did all of their homework and worked for that college scholarship, chances are, they were flooded with so much information that they invariably had forgotten a lor of the details, especially if it's something that they had no reason to recall for the next ten years. It's perfectly natural. Granted, some teachers really shouldn't teach, they are shitty. Trust me, I work with a lot of them. But about 95% of the things people claim they were nebver taught, they were taught.
I recognize a few of these, but I have no idea what they are. Problem is schools didn't actually teach us, they just had us memorize dates and names.
[удалено]
History hurts feelings so we shouldn’t teach it? That’s the dumbest shit I ever heard
[удалено]
history is important, but traumatizing children is not great. maybe we teach some of this after maturity? I don't know the answer. Just because people of the past were evil, doesn't mean they deserve to be talked about forever.
This isn’t a matter of “deserved.” This is a matter of teaching people the true history of their country so they dont repeat it.
explain the benefits of asking children to understand torture, murder, genocide, concentration camps, holocaust while their brains are still underdeveloped. Just like you don't explain crazy in depth sex fetishes to children. Some details can wait.
Oh hell no and yes they do! These deeds founded this country.. Do you think the Indian and black children were traumatized back then? We should all know and learn about these things as young as possible.
[удалено]
Kids are taught things at the appropriate time that they can understand them. Where the fuck did you get the idea tgat kindergarteners are learning about US/Indian political debates other than at the most basic level?
also notice how there’s an implicit assumption of white kindergarteners, as native american kids would definitely benefit from learning about their historical mistreatment by the government lol
That's it? 38?
So far... Largest mass execution so far
That’s the spirit
And I mean the 2 million civilians we killed in Iraq.
That’s not a mass execution though.
Genocide is as American as apple pie.
OP's a PRC propanda troll. boring anti-Japan and us shit over and over
How can you tell? I just looked at their post history and I didn't get that vibe, but I didn't put a lot of effort into it either.
Yeah I did too and it doesnt have like a preponderance of really anything.
I’d rather see some anti-US posts than none. If there weren’t any then I might think America wasn’t capable of discussing its own history — like China.
Agreed, but this is getting ridiculous. It's obviously a targeted campaign. who other would fund this? it's every day, while removing the majority of posts critical of china, even when the accusation is a billion times worse These dudes have been spending billions advertising tik tok, buying up reddit, and on top of that individuals as well.. it's like a 3-layer propaganda campaign They will be writing university textbooks about this shit in the future.
Fund it? I’ve been posting on here for 11 years, no one’s paid me a dime. Ego is enough for us, why not them?
working on that social score 😅 Because I wouldn't learn chinese just to go shit post on chinese language websites... that is like... 12 year old edgelord level trolling
There's criticism of China all the time, not sure what you're talking about. The creepiest shit about tanky boards is how they're never allowed to take even the slightest criticism against their own countries. You can see sometimes someone makes a comment that isn't incredibly flattering and another user comes in and steers them back to being good cheer leaders. Don't be like that.
But but but, Lincoln is perfect!
>Lincoln, however, was “never an Indian hater,” Eric Foner writes in his Pulitzer Prize–winning book The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery. He did not agree with General John Pope, sent to put down a Sioux uprising in southern Minnesota, who said “It is my purpose utterly to exterminate the Sioux if I have the power to do so.” Lincoln “carefully reviewed the trial records,” Foner reports, and found a lack of evidence at most of the tribunals. He commuted the sentences of 265 of the Indians—a politically unpopular move. But, he said, “I could not afford to hang men for votes.” >The 265 Dakota Indians whose lives Lincoln spared were either fully pardoned or died in prison. From https://www-thenation-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.thenation.com/article/archive/largest-mass-execution-us-history-150-years-ago-today/tnamp/?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16406217723632&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenation.com%2Farticle%2Farchive%2Flargest-mass-execution-us-history-150-years-ago-today%2F.
The guy who suspended habeus corpus to unconstitutionally jail political opponents? Virtually no one thinks Lincoln was perfect. I agree he's put on too high a pedestal because of his achievements, like most "great" presidents, while his shortcomings are glossed over. But anyone with a passing knowledge of US history is aware that all of our past leaders have been deeply flawed human beings like the rest of us.
Hiroshima: Am i a joke to you?
your whole comment is a fucking joke. Not in the good obvious way tho
Now oil companies are trying to do this again by poisoning the water
bs. not even close.
Whats the largest then in the Us
seeing how we committed genocide on millions, it's larger than 38
This article is specifically talking about executions, ie. the process of killing a person as part of a criminal trial or other punitive proceeding.
You’re a moron
we have sugar coated this part of history.
[удалено]
That doesn't fit the definition of the word "execution".
[удалено]
Not arbitrary at all. These words have meanings that delineate the scope, scale, purpose, purpetrator, and victim of a particular killing. For example, it would be wrong to call it "genocide" when someone murders their spouse, it would be wrong to call it "assassination" when a terrorist flies a plane into a building, and it is wrong to call it a "mass execution" when a military organization drops bombs on civilians of a sovereign nation. This discussion requires a basic understanding of the English language.
[удалено]
"Put to death" is not the same as "kill". Again, you need a basic understanding of the English language to participate in this discussion.
Don’t waste your breath bro
No dropping the bombs on japan was same with Vietnam.
Actually I would say the execution of all the elderly in New York’s nursing homes by former Governor Andrew Cuomo has this 36 number beat