Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

It has come to my attention that one of my favorite Political posters on this forum, the distinguished and honorable AZGF does not read (and has not ever read) world history... so in light of this startling discovery I have crated a thread where various posters can suggest some Wold History topics and "good reads"

For starters I think (1)Thucydides epic tale "History of the Peloponnesian War"
a detailed chronicling of the war between Athens and Sparta

Second of course would be (2) Tacitus "The Annals of Imperial Rome" taking place shortly after the fall of the Republic (a government overthrow of epic proportion) Tacitus details the following Imperial rule starting with Tiberius (if I remember correctly)

Please continue: Thank you History 101 will begin for AZGF tomorrow

Fuck that, he needs to read A People's History of the United States before he even thinks about tackling world history.

Grizalltheway wrote:**** that, he needs to read A People's History of the United States before he even thinks about tackling world history.

Young Streetwalker, I'll see your Howard Zinn and raise you Noam Chomsky.

Ivytalk wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:**** that, he needs to read A People's History of the United States before he even thinks about tackling world history.

Young Streetwalker, I'll see your Howard Zinn and raise you Noam Chomsky.

Call.

Grizalltheway wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:
Young Streetwalker, I'll see your Howard Zinn and raise you Noam Chomsky.

Call.

Full house: three Frank Friedels and two Chomskys. Whaddya got?

I get the impression you guys aren't taking this request seriously...
1st - there is no way AZGF would read any Chomsky
2nd Friedel was a senile old professor who incessantly babbled on about FDR

Chizzang wrote:I get the impression you guys aren't taking this request seriously...
1st - there is no way AZGF would read any Chomsky
2nd Friedel was a senile old professor who incessantly babbled on about FDR

And third, the fact that you had to pull a 5,000 year old revolution out of your ASS to try and make your weak-assed point is victory enough for me.

Go back to your textbooks, junior.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:I get the impression you guys aren't taking this request seriously...
1st - there is no way AZGF would read any Chomsky
2nd Friedel was a senile old professor who incessantly babbled on about FDR

And third, the fact that you had to pull a 5,000 year old revolution out of your ASS to try and make your weak-assed point is victory enough for me.

Go back to your textbooks, junior.

I give you: 1991 USSR

AZGrizFan wrote:And third, the fact that you had to pull a 5,000 year old revolution out of your ASS to try and make your weak-assed point is victory enough for me.

Wiki - lists over 20 Political Revolutions resulting in governmental changes globally since 1999

I'm pretty sure that AZ has read his fair share of Michener, so he's good to go

Chizzang wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
And third, the fact that you had to pull a 5,000 year old revolution out of your ASS to try and make your weak-assed point is victory enough for me.

Go back to your textbooks, junior.

I give you: 1991 USSR

I give you 1980-1988, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev

Gorbachev's attempts at reform as well as summit conferences with United States President Ronald Reagan and his reorientation of Soviet strategic aims contributed to the end of the Cold War, ended the political supremacy of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

No Gorbachev, no "revolution". If it were so easy, why weren't the Russian people able to successfully revolt under Stalin, Malenkov, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov or Chernenko?

bandl wrote:I'm pretty sure that AZ has read his fair share of Michener, so he's good to go

Got a funny James Michener story:
So when I was living in Baltimore the house we lived in had a small Study / Library that my dad used to sit in an read on weekends and after work... so for like 3 years a hard back copy of James Michener's epic tomb "Chesapeake" sat on a small reading table in the library...

years go by

One day:
Me:Hey Dad, why is that book always sitting there
Dad: Because I'm reading it
Me: It's been sitting there for three years
Dad: It's a long book


Later he admitted to A) Never finishing that book B) Hating James Michener

AZGrizFan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:

I give you: 1991 USSR

I give you 1980-1988, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev

Gorbachev's attempts at reform as well as summit conferences with United States President Ronald Reagan and his reorientation of Soviet strategic aims contributed to the end of the Cold War, ended the political supremacy of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

No Gorbachev, no "revolution". If it were so easy, why weren't the Russian people able to successfully revolt under Stalin, Malenkov, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov or Chernenko?

First of all: Dumbfuckistan... nobody said "it was easy"
Second: There have been over 20 revolutions that have changed the political structure of countries in the last 10 years

Face it: You're just WRONG - it happens - let it go

Chizzang wrote:

bandl wrote:I'm pretty sure that AZ has read his fair share of Michener, so he's good to go

Got a funny James Michener story:
So when I was living in Baltimore the house we lived in had a small Study / Library that my dad used to sit in an read on weekends and after work... so for like 3 years a hard back copy of James Michener's epic tomb "Chesapeake" sat on a small reading table in the library...

years go by

One day:
Me:Hey Dad, why is that book always sitting there
Dad: Because I'm reading it
Me: It's been sitting there for three years
Dad: It's a long book


Later he admitted to A) Never finishing that book B) Hating James Michener

My wife was just reading that book actually. After about a month and 800 pages, and still another 300 or so to go, she said 'Fuck it, I can't read 40 pages about oysters. I'm done with this book.' She got so close.

Chizzang wrote:Wiki - lists over 20 Political Revolutions resulting in governmental changes globally since 1999

There's a significant difference between a revolution and an "uprising". And most of those listed by wiki are in completely unstable environments like Niger, Azerbaijan, Darfur, Sudan, etc.

Weak effort, at best.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:Wiki - lists over 20 Political Revolutions resulting in governmental changes globally since 1999

There's a significant difference between a revolution and an "uprising". And most of those listed by wiki are in completely unstable environments like Niger, Azerbaijan, Darfur, Sudan, etc.

Weak effort, at best.

No, you're just WRONG...
Governments change - frequently - and history shows us this over and over - but you've never actually read any history so I can see why this is so confusing for you and your closed confused conservative mind

The world is "in flux" constantly - and people have the power to change their governments...
The reason those systems are "unstable" is because of unhappy populations... that's the cause of unstable = people

Do you "get it"
Show me a stable political platform = I'll show you a basically satisfied people
Show me an unstable platform = I'll show you unhappy people

Governments change when "The people" organize and over throw them... happens ALL THE TIME

it's only been going on for 10,000 years Dude - Read A Book

Wait, are you saying AZ has a problem with reading?

Chizzang wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
There's a significant difference between a revolution and an "uprising". And most of those listed by wiki are in completely unstable environments like Niger, Azerbaijan, Darfur, Sudan, etc.

Weak effort, at best.

No, you're just WRONG...
Governments change - frequently - and history shows us this over and over - but you've never actually read any history so I can see why this is so confusing for you and your closed confused conservative mind

The world is "in flux" constantly - and people have the power to change their governments...
The reason those systems are "unstable" is because of unhappy populations... that's the cause of unstable = people

Do you "get it"
Show me a stable political platform = I'll show you a basically satisfied people
Show me an unstable platform = I'll show you unhappy people

Governments change when "The people" organize and over throw them... happens ALL THE TIME

it's only been going on for 10,000 years Dude - Read A Book

And this whole discussion began because you insisted people had no interest in democracy. That's simply a retarded statement.

Chizzang wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
There's a significant difference between a revolution and an "uprising". And most of those listed by wiki are in completely unstable environments like Niger, Azerbaijan, Darfur, Sudan, etc.

Weak effort, at best.

No, you're just WRONG...
Governments change - frequently - and history shows us this over and over - but you've never actually read any history so I can see why this is so confusing for you and your closed confused conservative mind

The world is "in flux" constantly - and people have the power to change their governments...
The reason those systems are "unstable" is because of unhappy populations... that's the cause of unstable = people

Do you "get it"
Show me a stable political platform = I'll show you a basically satisfied people
Show me an unstable platform = I'll show you unhappy people

Governments change when "The people" organize and over throw them... happens ALL THE TIME

it's only been going on for 10,000 years Dude - Read A Book

Going back to your original point. I think self determination, egalitarianism, upward mobility, cooperation...democracy are very strong human impulses perhaps partly innate but definetly learned throughout the ages as man progresses. People don't simply chose a life of indentured servitude and living under draconian laws like we see in the theocracies of the muslim world.

So I've got to side with Z on this one.

BTW, the only Michener book I've read is Carribbean and I found it very entertaining.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
No, you're just WRONG...
Governments change - frequently - and history shows us this over and over - but you've never actually read any history so I can see why this is so confusing for you and your closed confused conservative mind

The world is "in flux" constantly - and people have the power to change their governments...
The reason those systems are "unstable" is because of unhappy populations... that's the cause of unstable = people

Do you "get it"
Show me a stable political platform = I'll show you a basically satisfied people
Show me an unstable platform = I'll show you unhappy people

Governments change when "The people" organize and over throw them... happens ALL THE TIME

it's only been going on for 10,000 years Dude - Read A Book

And this whole discussion began because you insisted people had no interest in democracy. That's simply a retarded statement.

No..
again you're showing your reading competency issues

I said: We cannot give those democracy that are not interested in it... which is dramatically different than what you're implying I said

Now you're just making me sad for you...

Chizzang wrote: I said: We cannot give those democracy that are not interested in it... which is dramatically different than what you're implying I said

Now you're just making me sad for you...

And how could they be interested in something they've never been exposed to?

kalm wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
No, you're just WRONG...
Governments change - frequently - and history shows us this over and over - but you've never actually read any history so I can see why this is so confusing for you and your closed confused conservative mind

The world is "in flux" constantly - and people have the power to change their governments...
The reason those systems are "unstable" is because of unhappy populations... that's the cause of unstable = people

Do you "get it"
Show me a stable political platform = I'll show you a basically satisfied people
Show me an unstable platform = I'll show you unhappy people

Governments change when "The people" organize and over throw them... happens ALL THE TIME

it's only been going on for 10,000 years Dude - Read A Book

Going back to your original point. I think self determination, egalitarianism, upward mobility, cooperation...democracy are very strong human impulses perhaps partly innate but definetly learned throughout the ages as man progresses. People don't simply chose a life of indentured servitude and living under draconian laws like we see in the theocracies of the muslim world.

So I've got to side with Z on this one.

No they don't chose that - but India had (and still has to a degree a class system) and they for some unknown reason - even now functioning under The Republic of India and calling itself a Union of Government the people still cling to a class system

Free peoples in a free country - with a republic as a political format - still choose a "class system" to govern themselves in their own communities...

explain that..?

There are cultures in this world that do not hold the notion of Democracy as inherently valuable

Chizzang wrote: There are cultures in this world that do not hold the notion of Democracy as inherently valuable

And those would be cultures that have never LIVED under a democracy.

Ok.... after reading this thread I would like to recommend to AZ Seven Pillars of Wisdom by TE Lawrence.