Top 25 events in modern US history
- Thread starter Marvin the Martian
- Start date
The only answer I can think of is that Brian Williams was present and reported on all of those.
M I right?
I am thinking that they were all printed on the same kind of paper or paper from the same manufacturer? If not that, I got nothing.
@Marvin the Martian you going to keep us in suspense.
None of them exist any longer. His point was that today is being recorded for posterity in ways that even big events of the past were not.
I forget which silent movie I saw where Dennis James was playing organ and commented it was one of the best selling silent film movies ever. But when the movie run ended, cinemas sent the reels back and they were destroyed. Everyone thought it was gone forever, but over decades it was discovered a reel was saved here, a snippet saved there, and now most of the film exists and is shown.
For myself 1-12 are all taken up by the 1/6 committee hearings. That’s the type of world changing stuff we’ll all be telling our grand children about.
While I agree about Trump being too recent, something to remember is that he is the first (and hopefully only) president ever impeached twice. Regardless of whether you like the guy or not, that is a pretty significant event.
The Challenger explosion and JFK are the ones missing that really surprises me. When you talk to people of different generations, you typically will get the "Where were you when...." question. Depending on the generation, you will get Pearl Harbor, 9/11, JFK's assassination, and the Challenger. And only one those made the list.
The Challenger explosion and JFK are the ones missing that really surprises me. When you talk to people of different generations, you typically will get the "Where were you when...." question. Depending on the generation, you will get Pearl Harbor, 9/11, JFK's assassination, and the Challenger. And only one those made the list.
I wonder if he felt the need to put in something in the life of his students? Not a value judgement, Obama's election seems more historic.
I dont even know about that one. Victoria Woodhall and Stephen Douglas running in 1872? Granted on a no win long shot at the time but still a woman and a former slave actually even running in 1872 ?
Maybe he inserted his own fears. I personally agree with the line of thought that Trump pass as will his elected supporters. Notice the word elected.
Radio, TV and internet should be there
Treaty of Versailles
Panama Canal
1st National Park?
Obama election
Interstate road system
Ford creates assembly line
Darn Marvin, what are you trying to do? Change this place into a peaceful zone? 🤣
CNN had an interesting story up yesterday. In the 50s some research was done involving teen boys. They were put in two different teams, bussed to a remote area in different busses and came up with their team names. They stayed and ate separately and immediately hated each other.
The nighttime talks around the campfire did nothing to change their attitudes toward each other. Than the experimenter clogged their water supply, if they were going to have water they had to work together to fix it. And they did, and it brought them together.
He said today we are in two teams. Where we live is D or R, where we worship is D or R, we marry largely by D or R (I see there is now an Rs only dating app). The guy referencing the story above thinks we need compulsory national service. A year or two where all kids out of high school work toward a common goal with people of the other party.
Your comment made me think of it, bringing people together for peace. I am not a fan of compulsory national service, but it does make me wonder if there could be merit. I wonder 8f a trial program, voluntary but with free education or something, could be done with attitudes tracked before, during, after.
I also wonder how long it lasts.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I ama huge fan of compulsory national service. Also makes a good entry way for immigrants (have them do double time to become citizens).
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I think the 13th precludes mandatory service, but the military draft survived the 13th. So it isn't inconceivable.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I just read about the case challenging it that sprung out of WW I. Interestingly, the Court in that case said that one reason it was OK was that the Congress had declared war. I wonder what happens or if anyone tried challenging it in Korea or Vietnam?
The power to raise an army is in direct opposition to the ban on involuntary servitude, so one has to give. I get that. But there's no power to provide for mandatory public service that could "trump" the 13th. It might be a good idea, but you can't mandate it. You'd have to incentivize the shit out of it, much like the military does now.
I think the power to mandate public service is an Article I issue, not a 13th issue. “Servitude” has always meant slavery which is non-compensated service. Mandatory public service is not that. .
It's the "involuntary" part that comes into play, compensation notwithstanding.
We have many examples of allowable involuntary employment and compensated service.. Taft Hartley, mandatory overtime, emergency powers, some public accommodations regulations, and various other kinds of employee mandates.
Now you're just digging in your heels. None of that compares to a program of mandated national/public service.
Involuntary Servitude is nowhere the same as mandated public service. I was using your framework. I think “involuntary servitude” has a particular meaning which is slavery. The words are not susceptible to parsing.
When you don’t understand something, you should just say so and other smart people here will explain it to you.
This is the 1917 case Brad mentioned, it does not seem that court ruled compensated servitude is different just 9n its own:
“as we are unable to conceive upon what theory the exaction by government from the citizen of the performance of his supreme and noble duty of contributing to the defense of the rights and honor of the nation, as the result of a war declared by the great representative body of the people, can be said to be the imposition of involuntary servitude in violation of the prohibitions of the Thirteenth Amendment, we are constrained to the conclusion that the contention to that effect is refuted by its mere statement.”
The first clause of the 13th amendment bans both slavery and involuntary servitude. The basic principles of textual interpretation require us to accept that involuntary servitude means something other than slavery, less we reduce the phrase to a mere redundancy.
Last edited:
slavery is a subset of involuntary servitude. Slavery includes the concept of owning, buying and selling people while involuntary servitude doesn’t. Being compensated for your labor is inconsistent with sevidude. Indentured servants was the issue addressed, at least in my view.
Last edited:
I know. This isn’t the first time I think SCOTUS got the analysis wrong. Taking apart judicial opinions is part of the tradecraft.
Your view changes freely. First it was slavery, now it's indentured servitude. But the few times the courts have addressed the issue, they've made it clear the 13th Amendment should be read broadly. I think the argument that compensation is inconsistent with involuntary servitude is rejected by SCOTUS itself when it overturned peonage laws. After all, the debt in question was nothing more than an advance on remuneration. But what SCOTUS highlighted as the key had nothing to do with compensation - it was compulsion. The state could not compel anyone to provide service. It could force the debtor to pay back funds he gained for work he never completed, but it could not force him to actually work. It is that compulsion that is the central element of involuntary servitude.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
COH’s arguments are the ones you would have to use to defend compulsory national service.
I don’t think the text allows it, even though I think it would be. A great idea for the country.
I’ll admit, though, that until Uncle Mark brought it up, I’d never thought about the 13th Amendment. UncleMark, go to law school! It’ll also help you defend against this serious case brewing over your secret blocking and locking history as a mod.
I also think compulsory national service would be a great idea.
Tell my why this wouldn't work as a way around the 13th Amendment problem:
Reinstitute the draft. We already know it's constitutional because the 13th Amendment doesn't prohibit citizens from being expected to fulfill those duties they owe to the state, including defense. However, in addition to the draft, you also set up a completely voluntary non-military national service program. People who volunteer for this service program and complete a course of say, at least three years, become exempt from the draft.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
It would be attacked as a pretext (and so all the arguments previously mentioned come in) and also because no war had been declared.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I’d be fine with it. 14th already protects against discrimination in using it and would have to be reiterated in new amendment
Similar threads
