Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 102 posts

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#41

Post by NoImmatureAdHom »

est31 wrote: post #21
wahern wrote: post #7

One of my great-grandfather's stories was that soon after immigrating from Poland he and his father found work mining coal in Indian Country (soon to become Oklahoma). The family lived in a shack abutting the local tavern. Everybody (including at least 3 children) slept on the floor due to the frequent bullets coming from the tavern.

TBH in many places in the US you still have regular shootings, and bullets also do get into homes. Residential homes are also built way more crappily now than the log cabins of old times. So nothing much changed about the shooting part. Compare it to Europe which has deweaponized itself.

This isn't true. Shootings are very, very rare. And they are concentrated in certain types of places (e.g., poor urban ghetto) such that the parts of the country that aren't these places have vanishingly small probabilities of being hurt by a shooting.

Gun murders in the U.S. are a very low percentage of deaths (0.39%) and preventable deaths (~1.1%, there's some disagreement about what's "preventable"). That's 0.0036% of the population per year gun-murdered. That this statistic is 3x some other country's is irrelevant because 3x a small number is still a small number. If your goal is to prevent untimely deaths, focus on boring things like falls, car accidents, and diabetes.

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#42

Post by NoImmatureAdHom »

golemotron wrote: post #9
Footkerchief wrote: post #6

> By 1775, however, sporadic rioting and violence in and around taverns transitioned into outright war when a group of ‘minute men’ gathered at the Buckman Tavern in Lexington, Massachusetts on 19 April 1775, just before murdering more than 70 British troops. Murder of the British is a strange take on the events of Lexington and Concord. The author appears to be scraping. Is the assertion that the taverns caused publ…

> As is still so often the case when white, powerful men felt threatened, they banded together to create, and separate, the ‘other’. This was gratuitous too. Out-group formation happens across all cultures regardless of ethnicity or sex.

The author is very obviously just a racist. He can hardly be blamed, it's necessary for success in his field. Perhaps we should cancel him anyway.

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#43

Post by [deleted] »

Footkerchief wrote: post #6

> By 1775, however, sporadic rioting and violence in and around taverns transitioned into outright war when a group of ‘minute men’ gathered at the Buckman Tavern in Lexington, Massachusetts on 19 April 1775, just before murdering more than 70 British troops. Murder of the British is a strange take on the events of Lexington and Concord. The author appears to be scraping. Is the assertion that the taverns caused publ…

[deleted]

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#44

Post by rayiner »

scarmig wrote: post #31
codyb wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once described the caste system as “racism invented by people who look alike” and my girlfriend from Madya Pradesh (Central Indian Province) thought that was very apt. Humans are great, until you let them form groups, once that happens you’ll get tribalism and prejudice almost every time as far as I can tell. Even sports’ fans will beat eachother up sometimes.

I'm increasingly hearing the idea (from Hindu nationalists?) that the caste system was the invention of the British, not anything indigenous. If anyone's in the know, I'd be curious to hear what's broadly accepted among historians nowadays.

It can’t be a British invention. My understanding of Bangladeshi history is that we converted to Islam to escape the caste system. That predated British rule by hundreds of years.

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#45

Post by throwaway0a5e »

floren wrote: post #8
Footkerchief wrote: post #6

> By 1775, however, sporadic rioting and violence in and around taverns transitioned into outright war when a group of ‘minute men’ gathered at the Buckman Tavern in Lexington, Massachusetts on 19 April 1775, just before murdering more than 70 British troops. Murder of the British is a strange take on the events of Lexington and Concord. The author appears to be scraping. Is the assertion that the taverns caused publ…

He has some, ah, unique takes scattered throughout: > American forces – well, the French and Spanish forces, along with the sputtering Americans – managed to win the American Revolution in 1783. Make no mistake, the French forces were key, but to lay the victory at the feet of the Spanish ahead of the Americans throws the whole piece into question.

By 1780 it was a matter of when and not if. The American people had been so thoroughly brutalized by the British at that point that there was certainly going to be ongoing violence as long as there were British soldiers around to shoot at. So then the British options are genocide or wash their hands of it. And the Bible says you're not supposed to commit genocide against other Christians let alone people who might be British subjects (also you need them alive to work to pay taxes and the population needs to exist as a hedge against French influence) so since that option isn't really on the table the question at that point is at what point do the British wash their hands of it.

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#46

Post by throwaway0a5e »

exabrial wrote: post #25
Footkerchief wrote: post #6

> By 1775, however, sporadic rioting and violence in and around taverns transitioned into outright war when a group of ‘minute men’ gathered at the Buckman Tavern in Lexington, Massachusetts on 19 April 1775, just before murdering more than 70 British troops. Murder of the British is a strange take on the events of Lexington and Concord. The author appears to be scraping. Is the assertion that the taverns caused publ…

Agree. Remember the British were already under order to raid the towns for supplies ('powder and ball'). In Lexington, the militia had made a show of force, following which gunfire was exchanged, and the British officers authorized a "huzzah" in celebration of the death of several militia members. Quite a stretch to call resisting an army under orders to seize munitions by force "murder" per say, this was a clear act…

Even if you don't side with the militia, by any reasonably modern code of ethics and rules of engagement "resisting a uniformed army by force" is completely and totally fair game. Armies exist to project state violence. Sometimes people take them up on the offer.

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#47

Post by throwaway0a5e »

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #41
est31 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TBH in many places in the US you still have regular shootings, and bullets also do get into homes. Residential homes are also built way more crappily now than the log cabins of old times. So nothing much changed about the shooting part. Compare it to Europe which has deweaponized itself.

This isn't true. Shootings are very, very rare. And they are concentrated in certain types of places (e.g., poor urban ghetto) such that the parts of the country that aren't these places have vanishingly small probabilities of being hurt by a shooting. Gun murders in the U.S. are a very low percentage of deaths (0.39%) and preventable deaths (~1.1%, there's some disagreement about what's "preventable"). That's 0.0036…

>. And they are concentrated in certain types of places (e.g., poor urban ghetto) such that the parts of the country that aren't these places have vanishingly small probabilities of being hurt by a shooting.

And even then they are basically concentrated around illegal parts of the economy. Drug traffickers, pimps, etc. can't use the courts and the police so when it comes to settling disputes they have to DIY their own threats of violence that other people usually outsource to the state.

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#48

Post by rayiner »

scarmig wrote: post #32
rayiner wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not. In Bangladesh, we precisely identify the town or village ethnic Bangladeshis come from, but have a single word to refer to all non-Bangladeshis (“bideshi,” meaning “foreigner”). The article reads like the author wrote it, and then sprinkled in “white men” randomly wherever it fit grammatically. Maybe it helped get the thing published.

Is that label typically applied to anyone not an ethnic Bangladeshi, or to people who aren't citizens of Bangladesh? E.g. if there's a Bangladeshi in India, would they be bideshi? Conversely, if there's someone who moved to Bangladesh from Pakistan but are current citizens, do they get that label? (this is to satisfy my own curiosity about identity formation on the subcontinent, not accidentally stumbling on some hot…

In my experience it is applied to people who are not ethnically Bangladeshi, or who are but were not raised in Bangladesh. E.g. https://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2020/01/15/speaking-the-langu...

> In Bengali, the term bideshi is used to describe a foreigner. The literal translation is "without land." This past summer, during six weeks conducting research on a global health project in Bangladesh, I heard the term often -- in reference to me.

> It felt strange, as I was born in Bangladesh and lived there until I was 3. To me, Bangladesh is where I can easily blend into a crowd. Bengali was the first language I learned. I visit often to see family. I feel a sense of ownership and belonging in Bangladesh that I have not always felt in America.

Citizenship isn’t particularly meaningful in Bangladesh. You can’t become Bangladeshi by acquiring citizenship.

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#49

Post by flycaliguy »

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #27
Footkerchief wrote: post #6

> By 1775, however, sporadic rioting and violence in and around taverns transitioned into outright war when a group of ‘minute men’ gathered at the Buckman Tavern in Lexington, Massachusetts on 19 April 1775, just before murdering more than 70 British troops. Murder of the British is a strange take on the events of Lexington and Concord. The author appears to be scraping. Is the assertion that the taverns caused publ…

> Murder of the British is a strange take on the events of Lexington and Concord. The outbreak of the American Revolution in 1775 can fairly be called an act of violence. The American colonies in the early days of the conflict were pretty evenly split between loyalists and revolutionaries. The latter ultimately won the day in large part by burning down loyalists’ houses or tarring and feathering them, sending some of…

As a Canadian: A tar and feather illustration is among the most memorable from my childhood.

Re: Violent, lively and brash, taverns were everywhere in early colonial America

#50

Post by klmadfejno »

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #27
Footkerchief wrote: post #6

> By 1775, however, sporadic rioting and violence in and around taverns transitioned into outright war when a group of ‘minute men’ gathered at the Buckman Tavern in Lexington, Massachusetts on 19 April 1775, just before murdering more than 70 British troops. Murder of the British is a strange take on the events of Lexington and Concord. The author appears to be scraping. Is the assertion that the taverns caused publ…

> Murder of the British is a strange take on the events of Lexington and Concord. The outbreak of the American Revolution in 1775 can fairly be called an act of violence. The American colonies in the early days of the conflict were pretty evenly split between loyalists and revolutionaries. The latter ultimately won the day in large part by burning down loyalists’ houses or tarring and feathering them, sending some of…

Nobody is doubting it was an act of violence. The oddity is that they're calling it an act of murder as opposed to an act of war. Murder sounds like a bunch of criminals, which is a really one sided take. The british soldiers were there to destroy colonial military supplies. It may be technically correct, but you don't hear about how the GIs murdered a bunch of Nazis on the beaches of Normandy or whatever other war suits your fancy. Save for the particularly one sided conflicts.

I got history from american public education, and while half of it was garbage, and half of it was dull internal politics of isolationism, there was no ambiguity that the revolutionary war was a bloody conflict.

Post reply on HN