• GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    But the “Patriots” of today could just directly be portrayed as confederates without any dissonant subcontext. Why sully a cool painting for a meme

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s a bullshit painting based largely on myth and misunderstanding of history. The dudes on that boat were ready to kill Washington and Washington had a simple choice, lead a fight or die by his men’s hands and hope they don’t have the wish to kill him afterwards or that there wouldn’t be enough of them left to matter.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        That’s how running a revolution goes. You’re always hanging on by a string

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Well obviously but it’s at least a depiction of a real event that has been dramatized

            • Madison420@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Whitewashed bud, not dramatized.

              If I stub my toe and say my foot is ruined I’m being dramatic, if I say I’m a war hero when in reality my military career is mostly huge flops then I’m just a liar.

              • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago
                1. No one actually thinks the depicted crossing happened that way, with the top officer of the army leading the charge in a rowboat. My choice of the word dramatized implied it is fictional in it’s specifics. Hell that’s not even the Delaware depicted.

                2. Washington was not a “war hero” per se, and indeed had some big losses. But to suggest his military career was “mostly huge flops” is silly. He is roundly regarded as a highly successful general and strategist with an acknowledged average tactical record. On the balance there’s no way you can call him a flop general.

                There are really good books on this topic that strongly investigate his career and are not fluff/charity pieces.

                • Madison420@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  His plans were mostly flops often succeeding dispite himself and only through lower officers with actual competency. Re: the whiskey rebellion to see how badly Washington can fuck things up when left to his own devices.

                  Von stuben is a hero and largely responsible for Washingtons success and American victory generally.

                  • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    You really need to read more about him. His “genius” was not in battlefield command but in intelligence, recruiting, long game provisioning and politics. You say successes by lower officers, I and many historians and even Washington’s notes say “working as intended”. The whole thing was a slow burn with which he knew he was trading cash and political capital for time. He just had to keep the team together, continue to bring in stud officers who actually were battlefield geniuses and so on.

                    He rope a doped Britain, even using his own reputation as collateral in the game.