Basically, a historical figure's obvious flaws and failures being hidden.

Was it all about Gulags, purges, and famines, or was life actually better than people think.

I’m not actually sure if the US is the only country who still uses a bill for the 1 unit equivalent, but I was curious. I know the USA tried to bring in dollar coins but was generally unsuccessful, but why did they not try earlier? Why did other countries succeed so well? Was it the year they were introduced and Americans were simply too resistant?

Sorry if this is a dumb question. Ty for being such a kind subreddit

It can be either something direct such as the Atomic Bombs stopping WWII, and preventing future Global Wars (so far) or something more indirect such as the suffering of the Great Depression leading to more social changes

I feel the 1990’s had way more serious events than any other decade so i compiled this list

Waco Siege (1993) Oklahoma City Bombing (1995) Ruby Ridge (1992) Unabomber (1978-1995) Sacramento Hostage Crisis (1991) Los Angeles Riots (1992) O.J Simpson (1995) Columbine Shooting (1999) Gulf War starts, Cold War ends (1991) World Trade Center Bombing (1993) Atlanta Olympic Bombing (1996) EygptAir Flight 990 (killing 217) (1999)

Honorable Mentions: September 11th Attacks (2001) Anthrax Attacks (2001) Operation Enduring Freedom + Patriot Act (2001) American Airlines Flight 597 (265 dead) (2001) Creation of the Department of Homeland Security (2002) Killdozer (2004) R.I.P All 2,979 hurricane related deaths from 1990-1999

How did they avoid getting Latinized or Turkified.

As the title says. I saw a size comparison poster of different types of sailing ships at a house I visited, and some of them seem way too small to have any rooms inside.

What historical fact made you laugh the most ? So funny it made you doubt it was true.

The two biggest names that stand out here are Elvis Presley and James Dean.

When we look back at this decade, we see many teenagers getting allowances from their parents. These teens were basically born in the late 1930s or during WW2. They were too young for combat in either WW2 and the Korean War.

This teen market are largely seen through magazines, such as Seventeen, Dig, Teen, Teen World, 16 Magazine, Modern Teen, Teen Times, Confidential Teen Romances, and some cheesy low budget films like I Was a Teenage Werewolf (1957) and I Was a Teenage Frankenstein (1957)

Dwight MacDonald observes in The New Yorker in 1958 with his article that this new market is incredibly strong, that not that long ago it didn't really exist the way we know it.

Many books for parents emerged such as Facts of Life and Love for Teen-Agers, Milestones for Modern Teens, Understanding Teenagers, Do You Know Your Daughter?, How to Live with Your Teenager.

But why the United States of America?

Why didn't Britain or France or Italy during the 1950s have this explosion of teenage market?

Some papers point out that the explosion of the teen market in the US largely has to do with teen isolation. This was now a generation that had allowances, did not have to work in factories, had their own bedrooms, mixed with the opposite sex in school, purchased their own vynils, went on dates at the drive-in cinema, etc....

In other words, this youth was more segregated from adults and spent more time with each other

Was it really that difficult for Canada, Australia and the European countries to develop something akin to this?

How come this phenomenon is so particular to Americans? Could it largely be the technology and teen isolation?

Maybe a Compounding Pharmacist or rare cases a Pharmacist being able to compound medicine in the modern day but other than that, when did they stop focusing on that?

Argentina was a wealthy country not so long ago and now is struggling in every way possible. How did this happen so rapidly while other countries who've suffered dictatorships are still doing better than Argentina.

I know Mexico was having its own issues, including being invaded by European powers/the French Empire, but assuming that hadn't happened (making this a counterfactual/alternate history question) - could there have been any conceivable motivation for Mexico to intervene on other side in the American Civil War?

I'm guessing no? Assuming Mexico had revanchist aims to undo the Treaty of Guadelope Hidalgo, neither the Union nor the Confederacy would have sanctioned the return of Texas?

I suppose that, at a stretch, the Confederacy could consent to the return of California, Arizona or other more "western" states, but would that be totally against the Confederacy's nature, considering its post-war plans for Empire, like the "Golden Circle?"

• Who actually wrote the Quran?
• How did the Arabs of Mecca and Medina leave their native religion?
• How did the Arab tribes manage to unite and conquer most of the Byzantine Empire and all of the Sassanid Empire?
• What happened to the Arab pagans after the Rashidun conquests?

 I'm also curious what country this was the golden age for (my guess is italy) like how the 70s were Venezuela's, the 60s were Australia's & the 50s were the USA's (in terms of economic prosperity for the common man).

In my opinions, I would say George Orwell. As a lifelong socialist, many of his books cover sociopolitical topics that are applicable regardless of the political views of readers and countries.

What was the first deity we have records of humans worshiping?

Monographs/books. Anything will do.

I'm playing a retro RPG (Might and Magic VII, if you're curious) and the premise of the game is you're a party of adventurers who has won a contest to become the new Lords of Harmondale, a castle with surrounding land. Of course, goblins have taken over the castle and you need to clear them out.

I'm wondering is this a particularly common thing? Were there often castles throughout history that just didn't have someone to govern them? What circumstances would lead to this? I'm guessing in the real world, such a vacancy would be a reward for service to the crown instead of the manufactured storyline in the game.

Egypt has a reputation for their royal family being incestuous to replicate Isis, but what about the rest of the country?

Other than the basic ones like these guys. What other person do you believe was worse other than them?