YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #astronomy #nightsky #newyork #physics #moon #astrophysics #fullmoon #supermoon #planet #zenith #wolfmoon #moonafteryule #coldmoon #privacy #supermoon2026
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Day mode
  • © 2026 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode toggle
Community
New Posts (Home) ChatBox Popular Posts Reels Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore
© 2026 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Hot Air Feed
Hot Air Feed
1 y

Frontier Airlines Flight 'Bursts Into Flames' Upon Landing in Vegas
Favicon 
hotair.com

Frontier Airlines Flight 'Bursts Into Flames' Upon Landing in Vegas

Frontier Airlines Flight 'Bursts Into Flames' Upon Landing in Vegas
Like
Comment
Share
NewsBusters Feed
NewsBusters Feed
1 y

FLASHBACK: After Hamas Massacred Israelis, the Media Attacked Israel
Favicon 
www.newsbusters.org

FLASHBACK: After Hamas Massacred Israelis, the Media Attacked Israel

One year ago (October 7, 2023), Hamas terrorists invaded southern Israeli communities and murdered nearly 1,200 individuals, the vast majority of whom were civilians, including babies. According to Human Rights Watch, Hamas and its partners committed “numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity,” including the “willful killing of people in custody; cruel and other inhumane treatment; crimes involving sexual and gender-based violence; hostage-taking; mutilation and despoiling bodies; use of human shields; and pillage and looting.” Despite the savagery of the attack, some in the American media found ways to defend the indefensible. “Hamas is saying, well, if nobody is able to defend, what is happening for Palestinians in the West Bank or East Jerusalem — with the home demolitions, the arrests, the children being killed, the desecration of holy sites — if they’re unable to do that, then we only have the ability to do it with military might and crude weapons and military,” MSNBC’s Ayman Mohyeldin rationalized on his network’s Velshi that morning. “American politicians and other politicians think they can just ignore the context in which all of this is happening: the fact that Israel is an occupying power, the fact that Israel has violated international law as well as Palestinian rights,” a Palestinian political analyst, Nour Odeh, charged on the same program. “I really want to caution your viewers not to be dragged into the good guy vs. bad guy equation. We have to look at the bigger picture.” CNN viewers heard pretty much the same thing: “While this attack was deplorable, and deeply unprecedented, it did not happen in a vacuum,” CNN International reporter Nada Bashir insisted on CNN Tonight October 9. “This has come after decades of what Hamas and other Palestinians view to be occupation of Palestinian territory. It comes after decades of violation of Palestinian rights and decades of which is where the rights groups and U.N. Human rights experts have characterized as policies and practices which amount to apartheid.” Never mind that Gaza, where Hamas ruled, hadn’t been “occupied” by Israel since 2005. And Hamas wasn’t particularly respectful of “Palestinian rights,” either — a 2015 report from Amnesty International found the group guilty of “a brutal campaign of abductions, torture and unlawful killings against Palestinians accused of ‘collaborating’ with Israel and others” after the 2014 Israel-Hamas war. It was breathtaking how quickly some in the American media pivoted to making Israel the villain of the story, recasting Hamas as plucky underdogs. “I’ve made frequent trips to Gaza and have spoken with several Hamas leaders,” CBS’s Imtiaz Tyab recounted on CBS Mornings October 10. “What they lack in fire power, they make up for in ideology and sheer determination.” Journalists warned each other not to accept Israeli-supplied information. “The only source for ‘Hamas beheaded babies’ appears to be the Israeli military, which is widely known to spread lies and disinformation,” Los Angeles Times investigative reporter Adam Elmahrek tweeted on October 10. “Don’t amplify unverified, sensational info.” “Last night, I asserted that this report indicated that babies were beheaded. This was an overstatement. I should have said that the report established that babies were found headless, a fact that lends plausibility to claims of beheading, but which does not prove them,” tweeted New York magazine Intelligencer feature writer Eric Levitz on October 22. While refusing to accept Israeli claims, journalists showed themselves to be more gullible when it came to Hamas. On October 17, a Palestinian rocket pointed toward Israel malfunctioned, landing in the parking lot near the al-Ahli hospital in Gaza. Hamas falsely claimed Israel had bombed the hospital, and inflated the death toll to “hundreds.” In spite of the fact that the hospital building was quite intact, journalists quickly repeated the anti-Israeli propaganda. “Israeli Strike Kills Hundreds in Hospital, Palestinians Say,” screamed the New York Times. That night’s CBS Evening News pushed the same falsehood with the huge headline: “Hundreds Dead at Gaza Hospital.” “Hundreds Killed in Hospital Strike,” ABC’s World News Tonight echoed. Dozens of other news organizations followed suit, as NewsBusters’ Curtis Houck painstakingly documented the next day — all wrong. During the 30 days following the October 7 massacre, NewsBusters’ Bill D’Agostino found fully two-thirds of ABC, CBS and NBC evening news broadcasts cited Hamas as a source for their Gaza reporting. D’Agostino compiled a video showing several instances of the inflammatory and wrong anti-Israeli charges that resulted:     The terror organization promoted an always-rising, impossible-to-confirm death toll that refused to acknowledge casualties among Hamas’s fighters. The networks ate it up. “In Gaza, it’s the youngest who are paying the ultimate price — tiny bodies covered in blood as exhausted doctors try to save their lives,” CBS’s Imtiaz Tyab recounted October 12. “The death toll in the besieged Palestinian territory has surged past 1,000 in just five days, and on nearly every street, scenes of anguish as rescue workers gathered the remains of the dead.” “Night after night, the bombs rain down with the Israel defense forces saying they have now surrounded Gaza City,” CBS’s Debora Patta mourned on November 6. “But around the world, people are recoiling in horror at the staggering civilian death toll, with calls for a ceasefire growing louder.” NewsBusters Executive Editor Tim Graham noted how the Associated Press instructed their correspondents not to call Hamas “terrorists.” In an October 2023 explainer, the AP offered this guidance: “The terms terrorism and terrorist have become politicized, and often are applied inconsistently. Because they can be used to label such a wide range of actions and events, and because the debate around them is so intense, detailing what happened is more precise and better serves audiences.” Yet as journalists pushed to soften their description of Hamas, hundreds of journalists advanced a petition insisting upon harsher language for Israel: “To use precise terms that are well-defined by international human rights organizations, including ‘apartheid,’ ‘ethnic cleansing’ and ‘genocide.’ To recognize that contorting our words to hide evidence of war crimes or Israel’s oppression of Palestinians is journalistic malpractice and an abdication of moral clarity.” As if on cue, PBS host Christiane Amanpour trotted out the “G-word” on her November 16 show, asking one guest: “What do you make of the killings in Gaza, which so many people are now beginning to talk about it as a genocide against Palestinians.” “Would you describe Israel’s campaign in Gaza as a genocide?” CNN’s Abby Phillip queried left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore on her February 23 program. Three days later, she pounded the same drum with another left-wing figure, California’s Democratic Representative Barbara Lee: “Do you consider what Israel is doing in Gaza to be genocide, and do you consider the President, as a result of that, to be complicit in a genocide?” Less than six months after the October 7 attacks, the transformation of an unconscionable war crime against the Jewish people into a viciously anti-Israeli media narrative was complete. Hosts now compared Israel’s Prime Minister with some of the worst butchers in history. “It is increasingly looking like Benjamin Netanyahu had a plan to force famine on the Palestinian people, on the Gazan people,” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough seethed on April 5. He claimed: “You’re starving women and children in Gaza....They’re now having to grind up dog food and cat food and....drink salt water....It’s savage conditions, and it’s calculated....It’s calculated just like Stalin’s starvation of Ukrainians was calculated.” The war in Gaza continues only because Hamas, beaten by all conventional measures, refuses to surrender and end the suffering of civilians caught in the crossfire. And Israel, having seen the moral depravity of their enemy on October 7, understands that it is impossible to live side-by-side with a merciless terror group bent on their destruction. Worst of all, the media probably know that their one-sided hammering of Israel only rewards the cynical strategy Hamas set in motion with their bloody attack one year ago. For more examples from our flashback series, which we call the NewsBusters Time Machine, go here.                          
Like
Comment
Share
The Blaze Media Feed
The Blaze Media Feed
1 y

How a beloved children's cartoon turns fathers into mothers — and what the Bible says about it
Favicon 
www.theblaze.com

How a beloved children's cartoon turns fathers into mothers — and what the Bible says about it

As the Western world catches collective amnesia around the profile of the historic father, we’ve begun to move past portrayals of fathers as the bumbling idiot of shows in the 1980s and 1990s to a new kind of engaged, empathetic, and present father. There’s only one problem with this new ideal father: He embodies almost all of the elements of the traditional mother, purged of the essence of elements from the historic father. The poster child for this new depiction can be found in the mega-popular kids program "Bluey." The dad, Bandit, is seen as a constantly nurturing, always-present playmate to his two daughters, Bluey and Bingo. He’s so present, in fact, that fans of the show often joke about when Bandit finds time to work, and in the show, it’s clear that the mother has less time to play than the dad. Our culture LOVES this depiction of fatherhood. It empties the father character of all the elements of the traditionally masculine father we’ve grown uncomfortable with, and at the same time, it provides freedom for the mother to get out in the world and explore her individual passions. Everyone wins, right? Well, it depends. God created the concept of male and female to create the kind of family that would maximize fruitfulness and multiplication and that over generations of collective effort would subdue and rule the created order. It depends on whether there’s an objective ideal of fatherhood and motherhood, and if there is, then symbolic depictions seeking to reverse these objective profiles are problematic. Embracing these kinds of portrayals, especially in a highly symbolic medium like in a cartoon, will go a long way in shaping our intuition around the essence of these roles. Now today, almost no one thinks there are objective ideals to these archetypes, and if they are right — and they personally resonate with the father, mother, and daughter depictions in "Bluey" — then everything I’m about to say will be dissonant and probably offensive. So let me say from the outset that, even in the conservative Christian world, my position is a tiny minority, maybe less than 1%. So feel free to stop reading if you’re getting triggered. Let me lay out three premises I believe about this topic, and if you disagree with any of these, you’ll likely disagree with my conclusion. Masculinity and femininity are not social constructs or primarily biological concepts but are family concepts designed to create a certain dynamic and to construct a highly functional multigenerational family team. The Bible presents meta descriptions of masculinity/fatherhood and femininity/motherhood through symbolic characters primarily rooted in the story of Genesis. Meta depictions of these roles are good and necessary to give culture at large something concrete to aim at even, though all of us as individuals will find some elements of these roles dissonant with our desires or even our innate wiring. I derive my first premise from the theological principle of first mention. When God created male and female, he actually revealed the purpose for gender, and that was to create a certain kind of family team. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth" (Genesis 1:27-28 ESV). God created the concept of male and female to create the kind of family that would maximize fruitfulness and multiplication and that over generations of collective effort would subdue and rule the created order. Genesis 1 does not yet give us content around the different male and female roles, only that male and female combine to achieve the purposes of the family. The second premise is that Genesis gives meta descriptions of the various parts of the family, and these meta roles can be seen in the Hebrew names given to the people. "Adam" = Man or Humanity "Eve" = Giver of Life But since we’re focusing here on fatherhood, the most important person comes when we meet a man named Abram. "Abram" = Exalted Father Abram is literally described in our language as a meta father. As he progresses in this role, his name is elevated again to Abraham, or father of many nations. One struggle that Greek-minded people often have is to think "meta" means ideal or model. Abram is not the perfect father. He’s the meta father. We understand the elements of how God interacts with both the specific father Abram and the concept of fatherhood through the Genesis narrative. I’ve learned that this idea is highly intuitive to people native to the Middle East but endlessly confusing to Western thinkers. That’s why of the three “Abrahamic religions,” Christianity is the one least influenced by Abraham’s depiction of fatherhood — and this is the West’s primary source of fatherhood confusion. Jesus, in one of his parables, referred to Abraham as “Father Abraham,” but — besides a particularly annoying youth group song — Christians do not think of Abraham through the lens of fatherhood. We see him more as an individual historic man of faith. This lack of a symbolic depiction of fatherhood has untethered the concept of fatherhood and masculinity from anything objective and leaves us vulnerable to following the ever-changing depictions of fatherhood and masculinity invented by modern cultural sensibilities. This brings me to my third premise and back to "Bluey." I first heard of red flags in "Bluey" from my two teenage daughters, who watched an episode after hearing from so many Christian families who loved the show — and they immediately saw what was happening. You might think that 'Bluey' is a wonderful depiction of fatherhood, but please don’t be naive about the power of symbolic depictions, especially ones aimed at children. Their first statement was something like, “They treat their dad like a plaything.” I then watched one three-minute clip on YouTube from a different episode and saw what they were so alarmed by. There are hundreds of interesting elements of fatherhood that one can glean from studying how God interacts with the meta father (Abram), but I’m pretty sure Bandit is in no way tethered to this understanding of fatherhood. And this tethering is not hard to do. When I’m in the Middle East, I see it everywhere. All the good and toxic depictions of fatherhood I see from those native to this region I recognize as coming from these Abrahamic stories. It’s increasingly hard to see in the Christian West. We need to get into the details of the beautiful biblical balancing of the life-giving presence of motherhood and the training, territory expanding, and leadership of fatherhood. But let me say one more thing that concerns me. One reaction I’ve received is from people who think it’s absurd to criticize a cartoon. You might think that "Bluey" is a wonderful depiction of fatherhood, but please don’t be naive about the power of symbolic depictions, especially ones aimed at children. We spend almost one-third of our lives experiencing symbolic depictions in our dreams, and most of our entertainment is created by watching stories filled with meta characters and what they symbolize. Symbols tend to bypass our conscious awareness and form our intuitions about the nature of truth and reality. These symbols include things like numbers, colors, animals, objects, shapes, and storylines. The Bible is full of these kinds of symbols, and most Western Christians are totally unaware of their power. When Jesus says things like “how many baskets did we pick up” after the feeding of the 5,000 and 4,000 and the disciples reply, "12" and "seven," he expected his disciples — and us — to immediately get the symbolic significance of what he did. But we don’t. And in the same way, creating a daughter named Bluey using the color blue is totally lost on us. It goes right past our conscious awareness. If we do think about it, we think it’s cool that they’re reversing the gender stereotype of colors. We’re playing checkers with those who are playing chess, and we’ve been checkmated over and over again. Editor's note: This essay was originally published by Jeremy Pyror on his Substack and was republished with permission.
Like
Comment
Share
The Blaze Media Feed
The Blaze Media Feed
1 y

AI has shown us the face of Christ. Will it bring more to the faith?
Favicon 
www.theblaze.com

AI has shown us the face of Christ. Will it bring more to the faith?

Every generation gets to choose whether or not to abandon Christianity. In 2,000 years, no generation has fully walked away. The irony is hard to miss: The very tool we feared might render faith obsolete has given us the most human image of Jesus yet. Science, thought to replace God, is now part of the process that brings us back to Him. Christianity isn’t merely a story that’s been retold for millennia; it is the story. It’s the one that never grows old, never fades with the times. Sometimes, the new chapters of this story come in the most unexpected ways. A recent example is how the Shroud of Turin — a centuries-old relic long thought to be a medieval hoax — found its way back into the public conversation. Best of all, it wasn’t a miracle that rekindled interest in the cloth. It was science. From skepticism to wonder For decades, modern skepticism relegated the Shroud of Turin to the realm of medieval forgery, debunked by carbon-dating tests in the 1980s. Science was supposed to bring clarity, to expose the myths that faith had built. But here we are again. The Shroud has returned, and this time, it is technology itself that has reignited the mystery. Former "Saturday Night Live" star and recent Catholic convert Rob Schneider was so inspired by his encounter with the relic that's he's making a movie about it. "It breathed life into me," he explains. It’s not just Schneider. The Shroud’s reappearance on the world stage reveals something far bigger. Science, which was once so sure it could unmask religion’s mysteries, is now revealing new layers. Tiny particles of pollen, identified through advanced equipment, suggest that the cloth’s origins trace back to the Middle East — specifically Israel. New scientific methods like wide-angle X-ray scattering dated the Shroud far earlier than previously thought — around A.D. 55. The lines between myth and reality are blurring. Science, once believed to be Christianity’s greatest adversary, is suddenly taking a seat at the table of faith. AI gave us the face of the Lord But it’s not just relics like the Shroud that are undergoing a digital transformation. Technology is now playing a central role in how we encounter faith. The face of Jesus — something people have dreamed of, imagined, and painted for millennia — has been recreated by artificial intelligence. Using data from the Shroud and other sources, AI systems have attempted to render what may be the most accurate depiction of Christ’s face. It’s a face that’s both familiar and new. The long hair, the beard, the haunting eyes — eyes that seem to look into not just the world but each of us, individually, deeply. The irony is hard to miss: The very tool we feared might render faith obsolete has given us the most human image of Jesus yet. Science, thought to replace God, is now part of the process that brings us back to Him. As we hurtle deeper into the digital age, we’ve been conditioned to seek meaning in data, in pixels and screens, in algorithms that shape our reality. And yet these same tools are leading us back to questions that are profoundly ancient. The face of Christ, now digitized and rendered in high definition, serves as a reminder: The divine is not so easily replaced. Back to the heart of belief For centuries, the Christian faith has thrived on a core paradox: to believe without seeing. When the apostle Thomas doubted the resurrection, Jesus appeared and offered his wounds as proof. "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed," He added (John 20:29). He was talking about us. You and me. Now, in the 21st century, science is offering glimpses of what once seemed impossible to prove. While we may never confirm the Shroud’s authenticity beyond a shadow of a doubt, the mere possibility forces us to grapple with something bigger. Faith isn’t about what’s seen — it’s about what transcends sight. And sometimes, when technology allows us to glimpse the mysteries of old, it invites us to marvel rather than dismiss. The resurrection has always tested human comprehension. It’s a story of victory over death, a promise at the heart of the Christian faith. As AI constructs the face of Christ and science re-examines ancient relics, the digital world and the divine collide in unexpected ways. We aren’t abandoning faith; we’re rediscovering it through the very tools meant to replace it, tools that allow us to stare deeply into that unmistakable face, those never-ending eyes.
Like
Comment
Share
Twitchy Feed
Twitchy Feed
1 y

FLAWLESS Victory! Tim Walz Just CRUMBLES During Shannon Bream's VICIOUS Fact-Check/Interview (Watch)
Favicon 
twitchy.com

FLAWLESS Victory! Tim Walz Just CRUMBLES During Shannon Bream's VICIOUS Fact-Check/Interview (Watch)

FLAWLESS Victory! Tim Walz Just CRUMBLES During Shannon Bream's VICIOUS Fact-Check/Interview (Watch)
Like
Comment
Share
Twitchy Feed
Twitchy Feed
1 y

'Buckle UP': Volunteer on the Ground in NC Shares DAMNING Thread of His First Direct Encounter with FEMA
Favicon 
twitchy.com

'Buckle UP': Volunteer on the Ground in NC Shares DAMNING Thread of His First Direct Encounter with FEMA

'Buckle UP': Volunteer on the Ground in NC Shares DAMNING Thread of His First Direct Encounter with FEMA
Like
Comment
Share
RedState Feed
RedState Feed
1 y

Stephanopoulos Repeatedly Tries to Play 'Gotcha' - Speaker Mike Johnson Refuses Delivery
Favicon 
redstate.com

Stephanopoulos Repeatedly Tries to Play 'Gotcha' - Speaker Mike Johnson Refuses Delivery

Stephanopoulos Repeatedly Tries to Play 'Gotcha' - Speaker Mike Johnson Refuses Delivery
Like
Comment
Share
History Traveler
History Traveler
1 y

Abranham Lincoln Versus a Polish Count: Slavery, War, and the President in the Eyes of Adam Gurowski
Favicon 
www.historyisnowmagazine.com

Abranham Lincoln Versus a Polish Count: Slavery, War, and the President in the Eyes of Adam Gurowski

Unlike many other Poles who took part in the Civil War on the Union side, Count Adam Gurowski was not a soldier or a commander, and his actions had no influence on the shape of the Civil War. He was primarily a publicist whose sharp views on the actions of Abraham Lincoln's government were so violent and uncompromising that the US president even treated him as a potential assassin. Rafal Guminski explains. Adam Gurowski.Count Adam Gurowski: History and Political Activity in EuropeAdam Gurowski was born on September 10, 1805, into a family of noble origins and a count's title. He was the oldest of seven siblings. His sister, Cecilia, was married to Baron Frederiks, general adjutant of Tsar Nicholas I, and his brother, Ignacy, married the Spanish Infanta Isabella de Borbón, daughter of the Duke of Cadiz, and became a Spanish grandee. As the oldest son, he received a good education. After completing his education at the provincial school, he began his studies in Berlin, Leipzig, Göttingen, and Heidelberg. He studied law, philosophy, history, and classical philology.After his studies, Gurowski returned to the Kingdom of Poland and joined a political party from the western part of the country, which sought to maintain the status quo and preserve the autonomy of the Kingdom of Poland. The count quickly left the organization, and in January 1829 he was supposed to take part in preparations for the so-called coronation plot, the aim of which was the death of the Russian Tsar Nicholas I. After the outbreak of the November Uprising, Gurowski became involved in organizing the insurgent administration and civil authorities, which, however, ended in failure. The count became a staunch critic of the insurgent dictatorship, and after its fall, he became a member of the Patriotic Society, on behalf of which he demanded the dethronement of Tsar Nicholas I as the King of Poland.Despite being blind in one eye, he joined the insurgents as an ordinary soldier and took part in battles, for which he was promoted to officer and received the Silver Cross of Virtuti Militari. After leaving the army, he became an envoy of the Patriotic Society to Paris, where in French magazines such as Trubine, François, National, Reformateur, La Révolution de 1831 and Le Globe, he undertook to criticize the authorities of the November Uprising. After the fall of the Uprising, Gurowski struggled with the instability of his political views and a tendency to sharp disputes, through which he quickly alienated people from his closest surroundings.The year 1834 was special for the Pole because of the radical change in his views and ideas. His statements began to include comments of a pan-Slavic nature with Poland as the unifier of the Slavic world. He also viewed the Polish emigration differently, whose activities for the liberation of the country he had previously assessed negatively. The change in the count's views is best seen in his interest in the postulates of French utopian socialism. The changes in Gurowski's worldview reached even such basic assumptions as nation and patriotism.The count's new views conflicted him with his family and Polish patriotic circles, but it was only the request for amnesty addressed to Tsar Nicholas I and the recognition of Russia as the country that was to lead the unification of Slavic nations that made Gurowski a national apostate. His stay in Russia turned out to be difficult. The state apparatus of the Tsarist regime forced him to reassess his views once again, and the complete isolation from his family and countrymen began to weigh heavily on him. A Polish Count on American SoilIn 1840, Gurowski returned to the Kingdom of Poland to sort out his property and family affairs. The attempt to recover his confiscated property ended in failure. Finding himself in a hopeless situation, the count decided to emigrate. In April 1844, he left the border of the Kingdom of Poland forever and went to the West. For some time, he lived in Bavaria, Hesse, and then in Belgium, Switzerland, and Italy. Unable to settle down permanently, the Pole decided to leave the Old Continent and emigrate to the United States of America. On December 2, 1849, Count Gurowski found himself in New York.The Pole's situation in America was quite stable at first. He had brought a supply of cash with him from Europe, and thanks to letters of recommendation, he had access to intellectual circles from the very beginning. After half a year, the count's financial situation began to deteriorate, which forced him to seek a source of support outside New York. In Boston, he was even offered a chance to lecture on law at Harvard University, but due to poor attendance, his lectures were quickly suspended. During this time, the Pole became keenly interested in the issue of slavery and took an active part in the life of the local intellectual social elite. He managed to get to know the leaders of American literature and poetry: Henry W. Longfellow and James R. Lowell, who, together with Gurowski, had in common a particular aversion to slavery and criticism of that institution.Eventually, the Pole returned to New York and in 1852 took a job at the New York Daily Tribune. He wrote a column on European affairs, criticizing the rule of Tsar Nicholas I. Despite his continued interest in European affairs, the Pole was fascinated by his new homeland, which he admired in many ways. He traveled extensively in the northern and southern states, and published his observations in “America and Europe”, which was warmly received by critics and praised for its impartiality and insightful observations. The Pole was greatly impressed by his new homeland and in many ways recognized its superiority over European countries. He paid special attention to the unique relationship between power and freedom. In his opinion, in Europe, these two forces competed with each other, while in America, they cooperated for the common good and development. The count was equally impressed by the class structure of American society. In his opinion, the superiority of the American system was the lack of class division dominated by the aristocracy. He noted with admiration that the law was created on the initiative of the people and for the people, and not by a privileged ruling group.Gurowski's relations with the New York Daily Tribune began to deteriorate significantly, and as a result, the count lost his job. From then on, for four years he supported himself by publishing articles in various magazines. During this time, he continued to write a book on the history of world slavery, which was published in 1860 under the title “Slavery in History”. Abraham Lincoln under harsh criticism from Adam GurowskiThe Pole, who was increasingly vocal in his criticism of slavery, decided to move to the US capital, Washington, where he hoped for greater understanding of his views. He wanted to seek support from politicians from the radical wing of the Republican Party. Thanks to his work in the New York Daily Tribune and his authorship of the books: “America and Europe” and “Slavery in History”, the Pole was already a well-known person in Washington. He quickly established important acquaintances, including Salmon P. Chase, the future chief justice of the United States, and John A. Andrew, Governor of Massachusetts. After the outbreak of the Civil War, he joined a volunteer unit under the command of Cassius M. Clay, which was to protect and patrol the capital. After the threat had passed, the Pole got a job at the State Department. His duties included reading the European press and preparing reports on articles of interest to the department. However, Gurowski lost his job after his diary, in which he criticized the government, the president, and the Union generals, fell into the wrong hands. Ultimately, he published the contents of the diary in December 1862. Thus began his crusade against Abraham Lincoln.Adam Gurowski should be considered the most ardent critic of the federal government and the president at the time. Although the Pole spoke positively about Lincoln's inaugural address, the government's lack of decisive action in the event of the attack on Fort Sumter and the riots in Baltimore ultimately confirmed his dislike of Abraham Lincoln. Gurowski stated that the current Union government "lacked the blood" to defeat the Confederacy, and calling up 75,000 volunteers was definitely not enough to defeat the Confederacy. He also believed that the situation overwhelmed Abraham Lincoln, who had no leadership skills and could not compare to George Washington or Andrew Jackson. He considered the president's greatest flaw to be his lack of decisiveness, and he saw it as the cause of the Army of the Potomac's defeats. Gurowski also criticized Lincoln's personnel decisions, especially the delay in dismissing General George McClellan from the position of commander of the Army of the Potomac. However, Gurowski was able to appreciate Lincoln. He praised the president's behavior after the defeat at Chancellorsville. The count accused Lincoln of manipulating election promises and making military decisions through the prism of politics, which was to result in the deaths of many soldiers. However, in the face of the president's re-election, Gurowski showed a shadow of support for him, fearing for the election of the hated McClellan and his pro-slavery lobby.There is no doubt that Gurowski's criticism of the president was often exaggerated, but in some aspects the Pole's opinion coincides with the contemporary opinion of historians. The count's attitude towards the president was dictated by his views and difficult, uncompromising personality. The Pole's most positive opinion of Lincoln was expressed after the president's death. In Gurowski's eyes, the murdered president became a martyr close to sainthood, who will go down in world history as a great and noble man. The site has been offering a wide variety of high-quality, free history content since 2012. If you’d like to say ‘thank you’ and help us with site running costs, please consider donating here.  References·       Carter R., Gurowski, „The Atlantic Monthly” 1866, t. 18, nr 109.·       Derengowski P., Polacy w wojnie secesyjnej 1861-1865, Napoleon V, Oświęcim 2015.·       Fisher L.H., Lincoln’s Gadfly, Adam Gurowski, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman 1964.·       Garewicz J., Gracz. Rzecz o Adamie Gurowskim [1805-1866], „Res Publica”, 2 (1988), nr 5,·       Głębocki H., „Diabeł Asmodeusz” w niebieskich binoklach i kraj przyszłości: hr. Adam Gurowski i Rosja, Arcana, Kraków 2012.·       Łukasiewicz W., Gurowski Adam, Polski słownik biograficzny, V.  9, Wrocław 1960-1961. ·       Stasik F., Adam Gurowski 1805-1866, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN ,Warszawa 1977.
Like
Comment
Share
NEWSMAX Feed
NEWSMAX Feed
1 y

VP Harris Veers Right on Immigration
Favicon 
www.newsmax.com

VP Harris Veers Right on Immigration

Vice President Kamala Harris appears to be trying to out-Trump former President Donald Trump on the border, arguing for harsher immigration policies in an about-face from her previous stance on the issue.
Like
Comment
Share
NEWSMAX Feed
NEWSMAX Feed
1 y

Year of War Creates Cracks in Israel's Borrowing Strength
Favicon 
www.newsmax.com

Year of War Creates Cracks in Israel's Borrowing Strength

Israel's economy has for almost a year ridden out the chaos of a war that risks spiraling into a regional conflict, but rising borrowing costs are starting to strain its financial architecture.The direct cost of funding the war in Gaza through August was 100 billion shekel...
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 60586 out of 105475
  • 60582
  • 60583
  • 60584
  • 60585
  • 60586
  • 60587
  • 60588
  • 60589
  • 60590
  • 60591
  • 60592
  • 60593
  • 60594
  • 60595
  • 60596
  • 60597
  • 60598
  • 60599
  • 60600
  • 60601
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund