Still think the Civil War wasn’t fought over slavery? The Confederate states would disagree.

Was the Civil War fought over slavery or states’ rights? People love to debate this question, and many seem to believe it’s a matter of opinion. But the truth is there’s no debate to be had. We don’t have to conjecture. We know that the Confederate states’ primary motive was maintaining the right to enslave…

Array
ArrayPhoto credit: Ryan Schultz/Creative Commons

Was the Civil War fought over slavery or states’ rights? People love to debate this question, and many seem to believe it’s a matter of opinion.


But the truth is there’s no debate to be had. We don’t have to conjecture. We know that the Confederate states’ primary motive was maintaining the right to enslave black people because they said so themselves.

We have the primary documents that explain, in detail, why Confederates wanted to break off from the U.S., and they are eye-opening to say the least. Even those who already understand slavery to be the primary cause of the Civil War may be shocked to see how blatantly and proudly the Southern states announced their intention to defend white supremacy and their right to own black people.

MARCH 21, 1861 SPEECH BY VICE PRESIDENT OF THE CONFEDERACY, ALEXANDER STEPHENS

First let’s take a look at a speech given by Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederacy, just a few weeks before the Civil War officially began. After describing some details of the Confederacy’s Constitution, Vice President Stephens stated that slavery was the “immediate cause” of the South’s “revolution.”

“But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution, African slavery as it exists amongst us – the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the ‘rock upon which the old Union would split.’ He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact.”

I mean, he said it right there. Slavery of black people was the “immediate cause” of secession and the impending war.

But he didn’t stop there. No, he laid out the entire racist foundation of the new government in no uncertain terms.

The prevailing ideas entertained by him [Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away . . . Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the ‘storm came and the wind blew.’

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.”

Hmmm, so the South literally founded the Confederate government on the idea that slavery wasn’t just acceptable, but that black people were actually supposed to be enslaved. This was stated plainly and proudly.

Need a moment? Yeah, me too. Take a deep breath, because we’re just getting going here.

RELATED: This West Point colonel will tell you what the Civil War was really about.

Moving on, Stephens called the Northern abolitionists “fanatics,” saying, They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. . . .

There’s more.

With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system.”

Stephens then went on to explain how God designed humanity so that one race would be subordinate to another, and that going against slavery is going against “the ordinance of the Creator.”

It seriously could not be more clear: The Confederates were proud white supremacists who wanted to build a country around that ideal.

Lest anyone argue that this was just one speech or just one man’s opinion, or that maybe Stephens didn’t speak for the whole Confederacy (despite being Vice President of it), let’s look at what the Confederate states themselves said.

DECLARATION OF THE CAUSES OF SECEDING STATES, 1861

In addition to the Ordinances of Secession announcing the departure of each of the Confederate states from the U.S., a handful of Southern states issued a Declaration of the Causes of Seceding States, explaining in detail why they felt they needed to leave the Union.

You can read the document in its entirety here, but let’s take a look at some highlights. (The first thing to note is that some iteration of the word “slave” appears 83 times in these declarations. So, yeah.)

GEORGIA

Right out of the gate, Georgia let everyone know that slavery is at the forefront of its concerns. The second sentence of their declaration reads:

For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.”

Okay then.

As we read through Georgia’s lengthy history lesson of how the states got to this point, it’s worth noting that they rarely referred to the “Northern” and “Southern” states. Instead, they referred to “non-slaveholding states” and “slave-holding states.” That alone ought to be a clue as to their motivations.

But if that’s not enough, here’s where Georgia stated that the Republican Party’s anti-slavery stance justified its decision to leave the Union.

A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia. The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state. The question of slavery was the great difficulty in the way of the formation of the Constitution.

While the subordination and the political and social inequality of the African race was fully conceded by all, it was plainly apparent that slavery would soon disappear from what are now the non-slave-holding States of the original thirteen.”

Finally, they summed up how racial equality and the prohibition of slavery, being the primary concern of the non-slaveholding states, was something they simply would not abide.

The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers.

With these principles on their banners and these utterances on their lips the majority of the people of the North demand that we shall receive them as our rulers.

The prohibition of slavery in the Territories is the cardinal principle of this organization.

For forty years this question has been considered and debated in the halls of Congress, before the people, by the press, and before the tribunals of justice. The majority of the people of the North in 1860 decided it in their own favor. We refuse to submit to that judgment, and in vindication of our refusal we offer the Constitution of our country and point to the total absence of any express power to exclude us.”

Thank you, Georgia, for clarifying your position.

MISSISSIPPI

Again, right out the gate, Mississippi told everyone that slavery is their main reason for seceding. Here’s how their declaration begins, no sentences skipped:

“In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world.”

Once they made that clear, they explained how they simply couldn’t live without slavery because black people were made to tend their crops.

“Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin. That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.”

Mississippi just stated that their only choices were to give up slavery or secede. And if that still seems unclear somehow, here are some of the “facts” they included for why they couldn’t stay in the Union:

“It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.

“It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.”

“It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.”

“It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.”

“It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.”

How can anyone say that the war wasn’t about slavery at this point?

SOUTH CAROLINA

South Carolina’s declaration started off sounding like it was all about “FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES,” as they used that all-caps phrase repeatedly in recounting the history of why the colonies broke off from England. But when they got into their specific grievances with the Union, guess what they complained about. Yup, slavery.

The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution.

They went on and on about non-slaveholding states trying to control their “property” and “institutions.” We could guess what they meant by that, but we don’t have to because they told us.

“Those States have assume [sic] the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

They even got specific about states that passed anti-slavery laws, which they claimed went against the Constitution.

“The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.”

Again, South Carolina was clear that the North’s hostility toward slavery was what drove them to break away, thereby leading to war.

TEXAS

Ah, Texas. If you thought the deep south was the only place that gleefully celebrated the enslavement of black people, take a look at the Lone Star State’s declaration. It’s a doozy.

RELATED: A school assignment asked for 3 benefits of slavery. This kid gave the only good answer.

First, here’s how Texas described being accepted into the Confederacy:

“She [Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery—the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits—a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time.

So, not only is white people enslaving black people fine and dandy—it’s a subjugation that should go on forever and ever. Got it.

“In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color– a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.”

Sorry, I need to pause for a second. “Their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery”? And “the debasing doctrine of equality of all men”? The state of Texas said here that equality was not just unnatural but against God’s law. We all know that racism was the standard of the day, but I don’t think most of us were taught how deeply held these white supremacist beliefs were in the South’s own words.

And again, they weren’t done.

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.”

Still not done…

“That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations

“Mutually beneficial to both bond and free.” Oh yes, those lucky slaves, living just as the Almighty intended.

If you wonder why people see the Confederate flag as a racist symbol, this is why. If you wonder why honoring the leaders of the Confederacy with monuments and holidays is horrifically problematic, this is why.

We have it straight from the Confederates’ mouths. The Civil War was fought because the South wanted the right to keep slavery and the North wanted to abolish it. People can say it was about states’ rights, but it’s disingenuous to omit the primary moral, political, and economic right the South was fighting to maintain—the legal and systematic subjugation and enslavement of black people.

They seriously could not have been any clearer about it.

  • Grocery store’s produce section concerts give indie musicians a live venue. People want more.
    A band plays in the produce section of Fiesta Fresh Market. Photo credit: Fiesta Fresh Market/YouTube
    ,

    Grocery store’s produce section concerts give indie musicians a live venue. People want more.

    “We need this right now in the world…Real humans doing real human things.”

    On the outside, Fiesta Fresh Market looks like just another neighborhood grocery store in New Castle, Delaware. Inside the produce section, however, customers can listen to local bands perform their latest songs live and in person. These “Mercadito Sessions” have since evolved from a simple community offering into a full-fledged live music event.

    While grocery stores and live music don’t typically mix, at Fiesta Fresh Market, it’s part of the family. The Aguilar Garcia family, who run the store, have music in their roots—especially co-owner José Luis Aguilar Garcia, who works in the music industry.

    In the hope of helping Mexican American bands gain more exposure, José and his family offered their produce section as a space for Latin musicians to perform for customers. They were inspired by National Public Radio’s “Tiny Desk Concerts,” which feature artists performing live in a confined space.

    These produce section mini-concerts, dubbed “The Mercadito Sessions,” initially puzzled customers. Over time, however, shoppers came to welcome and enjoy the live music, with some even visiting just for the performances. Then, posts on the store’s social media featuring the bands began to go viral.

    “The idea is to highlight independent artists from the area,” José told CBS Philadelphia. “Because it’s getting more attention online, people are excited. They’ll ask when we’re doing the next one.”

    Commenters on the store’s Instagram celebrated the market’s concert concept:

    “This is so cool. Not everyone wants to go to bars and/or have to stay up late to hear live music. I love this so much.”

    “Honestly this is the absolute coolest thing ever.”

    “Amazing music scenes going on everywhere, love the magic being shared.”

    “We need this right now in the world…Real humans doing real human things.”

    “Such an innovative and creative idea! 🥹💫”

    @fiestafreshmarket

    Just put the bananas in the bag bro @erre6ixx

    ♬ original sound – Fiesta Fresh Market

    While the Mercadito Sessions showcase Mexican regional music, they are open to any genre. As the series gained attention online, many bands reached out to Fiesta Fresh Market to get booked. Several acts have come to perform and record as customers pick out fresh fruits and vegetables.

    Concerts for the community, by the community

    Musicians and customers alike say these concerts provide a sense of community among Latin Americans living in Delaware. They not only celebrate their culture, but also showcase it to others in New Castle.

    “It gives us a platform to portray who we really are,” musician Jesús Beltran Méndez told CBS Philadelphia. “There’s a lot of misconceptions about who we are. There are bad people. There are good people. We are just human.”

    @fiestafreshmarket

    @Los K-Bros “Ya No Me Llames” (Unreleased) live desde Fiesta Fresh Market

    ♬ original sound – Fiesta Fresh Market

    Demand for the music has grown so much that the grocery store is now hosting and promoting a full-fledged concert event. What was once a place to buy groceries has become a spotlight for the community—all by offering a small space in an aisle.

  • A ‘gentleman’ reveals 4 reasons why men suddenly stopped wearing fancy hats in the ’60s
    Men wearing hats speak in the 1930s.Photo credit: Mitchell Library, State Library of New South Wales/Wikimedia Commons
    ,

    A ‘gentleman’ reveals 4 reasons why men suddenly stopped wearing fancy hats in the ’60s

    Men and women once went out wearing hats, and then suddenly, they disappeared.

    One of the most striking things about real-life footage of Americans from the advent of the camera until around 1970 is that nearly all men, and many women, are wearing hats. In footage from the 1940s, for example, men boarding the subway to go to work are almost always seen in fedoras, trilbys, or homburgs. Earlier clips show them in bowlers and top hats.

    It’s as if, before TV turned color, Americans were a nation of conformists who all dressed the same way. So how did men across the Western world go from wearing hats every day for decades to suddenly going bareheaded? Preston Schlueter of the Gentleman’s Gazette outlines four reasons in a YouTube video with more than 2 million views.

    Four reasons why men stopped wearing hats

    1. Climate control

    “One of the biggest reasons for the loss of hat-wearing is likely that we now have better control over our indoor climate than we used to,” Schlueter says. “This is also why men can now go in and out of doors wearing sometimes fewer than two layers of clothing, and why things like gloves and scarves aren’t as popular as they used to be.”

    2. Social class

    “Social class was an incredibly important aspect of Western society, and people were absolutely expected to know their place,” Schlueter says. “But, after the horrors of war brought every social class just a bit closer, we began to focus more on the individual, rather than on the class in which they resided. As a result, then, the practice of wearing clothing and, particularly, hats to signify yourself as part of a distinct group has become largely extinct.”

    hats, vintage hats, old-timey fashion, top hat
    A man and woman wearing hats at the turn of the century. Photo credit: Adományozó/Wikimedia Commons

    3. Highways and cars

    Back in the day, when transportation consisted of subway cars, trolley cars, horse-drawn buggies, or horseback travel, there was plenty of headroom, even for someone wearing a top hat. However, with the advent of the automobile, headroom in vehicles changed drastically.

    “Look up at the ceiling in your own car. How much headroom do you have there? The answer is probably not much, perhaps even for a relatively soft or short hat style,” Schlueter says. “Simply put, modern cars aren’t built to accommodate the hat styles of old.”

    bogart, bacall, the big sleep, classic films, movie stills
    Lauren Bacall and Humphrey Bogart in The Big Sleep. Photo credit: Warner Bros./Wikimedia Commons

    4. The Internet

    “In the last decade and a half or so, hats like the fedora and trilby have gained an increasingly negative reputation thanks to Internet memes from websites like 4chan, Reddit, and Tumblr,” Schlueter says. “Indeed, for some younger members of our audience, when we mention fedoras, they might first think of the infamous ‘tips fedora’ meme. Because there are now thousands of these easily spreadable memes all over the Internet, the fedora, in recent years, took on a decidedly less-than-cool reputation.”

    Hats are due for a comeback

    In the end, there are many reasons people stopped wearing fancy hats every day. It appears to be a confluence of historical events, technological progress, and social pressures that influenced this major shift in fashion. But that doesn’t mean the era of the hat is gone forever. If one thing is certain, what goes out of fashion is always bound to come back.

  • Comedian Jack Shep steals new ‘SNL UK’ scene with impeccable Princess Diana impression
    Comedian Jack Shep as Princess Diana in a "Saturday Night Live UK" sketch. Photo credit: Sky TV/YouTube

    Saturday Night Live UK debuted over the weekend on Sky TV (and Peacock in America), and already, one performer is a fan favorite.  In a skit titled “David Attenborough’s Last Supper,” the famed naturalist, played by George Fouracres, invites several of “history’s greatest Britons,” who have been resurrected thanks to his brother Richard Attenborough’s “Jurassic Park technology.”

    Naturally, the sketch featured a slew of impressive celebrity impersonations, from Freddie Mercury to Winston Churchill to Agatha Christie. But even in a sea of notable performances, it was comedian Jack Shep’s Princess Diana who really stole the show.

    Watch:

    While Shep’s Diana does speak here and there—thanking Attenborough for the invitation and reassuring Freddie Mercury that if a menu item “has an asterisk next to its name, then it comes with free rice”—most of the laugh-out-loud moments come from her coy, flirtatious glances at the camera while others are speaking. The People’s Princess has, after all, long been a queer icon. But this takes things to a whole new level.

    Reactions

    One leisurely scroll through the YouTube comments makes it clear that Shep was a fan favorite. Many are eager for Diana to become an SNL UK staple.

    @gaytimes

    Saturday Night Live UK premiered last night and we can’t stop thinking about Jack Shep’s impersonation of gay icon Princess Diana! The British version of the long-running US sketch show debuted with host Tina Fey and musical guest Wet Leg. ‘The Last Supper with David Attenborough’ saw a dinner party featuring a number of resurrected British icons, including Princess Di, Freddie Mercury and Elizabeth I 👏 #snl #princessdiana #diana #tinafey #saturdaynightlive

    ♬ original sound – GAY TIMES

    “The way he was eyeing the camera was hilarious.”

    I hope that Diana becomes a regular that randomly pops up in episodes to steal the show as she/he does here.”

    “Princess Di was to die for.”

    “I loved Princess Di but that Jack Shep impression was the funniest thing I’ve seen in ages.”

    “Hope she’s a recurring visitor…”

    “The Diana impression is an instant classic. Absolutely spot on.”

    “The star of this show is definitely the person that played Princess Diana.”

    Perhaps this comment says it best:

    “Princess Di was uniquely special in real life and this actor does do her memory justice even though it’s a silly comedy skit. I feel she might have had a good laugh about the whole thing and it’s not disrespectful at all.”

    Though Shep undoubtedly helped win favor among viewers, the overall reaction to an across-the-pond version of SNL has been mixed.

    Some things, like host Tina Fey’s opening monologue and the edgier “Weekend Update” segment, have been mostly well-received.

    However, some critics have lambasted the show as a “tepid cosplay” of its American predecessor, arguing that it copies the format without adding a unique touch. Still, even those critics seem to agree that certain elements need time to develop before the show can be fully assessed.

    One promising sign is that, much like SNL in the U.S., SNL UK can give relatively unknown comedians like Shep a chance to share their gifts with the world. That certainly seems like a win-win for everyone.

  • Brit shares the one-word ‘dead giveaway’ that American actors can’t do in an English accent
    Peter Dinklage on "Game of Thrones"Photo credit: Warner Bros Discovery
    ,

    Brit shares the one-word ‘dead giveaway’ that American actors can’t do in an English accent

    “There is one word that is a dead giveaway that an English character in a movie or a TV show is being played by an American.”

    When it comes to actors doing accents across the pond, some Americans are known for their great British accents, such as Natalie Portman (“The Other Boleyn Girl”), Robert Downey, Jr. (“Sherlock Holmes”), and Meryl Streep (“The Iron Lady”). Some have taken a lot of heat for their cartoonish or just plain weird-sounding British accents, Dick Van Dyke (“Mary Poppins”), Kevin Costner (“Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves”) and Keanu Reeves (“Bram Stoker’s Dracula”).

    Some actors, such as Tom Hardy (“The Drop”) and Hugh Laurie (“House”), have American accents so good that people have no idea they are British. Benedict Townsend, a London-based comedian and host of the “Scroll Deep” podcast, says there is one word that American actors playing characters with a British accent never get right.

    And no, it’s not the word “Schedule,” which British people pronounce the entire first 3 letters, and Americans boil down to 2. And it’s not “aluminum,” which British and American people seem to pronounce every stinking letter differently.

     
    @benedicttown

    The one word American actors aways get wrong when doing an English accent

    ♬ original sound – Benedict Townsend

    What word do American actors always get wrong when they do British accents?

    “There is one word that is a dead giveaway that an English character in a movie or a TV show is being played by an American. One word that always trips them up. And once you notice it, you can’t stop noticing it,” Townsend says. “You would see this lot in ‘Game of Thrones’ and the word that would always trip them up was ‘daughter.’”

    Townsend adds that when British people say “daughter,” they pronounce it like the word “door” or “door-tah.” Meanwhile, Americans, even when they are putting on a British accent, say it like “dah-ter.”

    “So, top tip if you are an actor trying to do an English accent, daughter like a door. Like you’re opening a door,” Townsend says.

    Townsend later confirmed in a follow-up video that he and his wife identified the American actor in Netflix’s “A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder” within moments of hearing her speak. He also noted in an interview that “America” itself may be one of the hardest words for non-Americans to pull off convincingly in an American accent — which adds a pleasing layer of irony to the whole thing.

    As it turns out, the problem runs both ways.

    Some American commenters returned the favor by sharing the word that British actors never get right when using American accents: “Anything.”

    “I can always tell a Brit playing an American by the word anything. An American would say en-ee-thing. Brits say it ena-thing,” Dreaming_of_Gaea wrote.

    “The dead giveaway for English people playing Americans: ‘Anything.’ Brits always say ‘EH-nuh-thin,’” marliemagill added. “I can always tell an actor is English playing an American when they say ‘anything.’ English people always say it like ‘enny-thin,’” mkmason wrote.

    What is the cot-caught merger?

    One commenter noted that the problem goes back to the cot-caught merger, when Americans in the western US and Canadians began to merge different sounds into one. People on the East Coast and in Britain pronounce them as different sounds.

    “Depending on where you live, you might be thinking one of two things right now: Of course, ‘cot’ and ‘caught’ sound exactly the same! or “There’s no way that ‘cot’ and ‘caught’ sound the same!” Laura McGrath writes at DoYouReadMe. “As a result, although the different spellings remain, the vowel sounds in the words cot/caught, nod/gnawed, stock/stalk are identical for some English speakers and not for others.” For example, a person from New Jersey would pronounce cot and catch it as “caht” and “cawt,” while someone from Los Angeles may pronounce them as “caht” and “caht.”

    To get a better idea of the big difference in how “caught” and “cot” are pronounced in the U.S., you can take a look at the educational video below, produced for a college course on linguistics.

    American actors owe Townsend a debt of gratitude for pointing out the one thing that even the best can’t seem to get right. For some actors, it could mean the difference between a great performance and one that has people scratching their heads. He should also give the commenters a tip of the cap for sharing the big word that British people have trouble with when doing an American accent. Now, if we could just get through to Ewan McGregor and tell him that even though he is fantastic in so many films, his American accent still needs a lot of work.

    This article originally appeared last year.

  • One seemingly simple question stumped all three Final Jeopardy contestants in 1984
    "Jeopardy!" contestants ready to competePhoto credit: Rosemaryetoufee
    ,

    One seemingly simple question stumped all three Final Jeopardy contestants in 1984

    It was only Alex Trebek’s second day on the job when all three contestants gave the same wrong answer and all ended up with $0.

    The popular game show “Jeopardy!” originated in 1964, and for six decades it has stumped contestants and viewers with tough trivia questions and answers (or answers and questions, to be more accurate). Competing on “Jeopardy!” is practically synonymous with being a smartypants, and champions win lifelong bragging rights along with whatever monetary winnings they take home.

    To win “Jeopardy!,” you place a wager in the Final Jeopardy round with whatever money you’ve collected through the first two rounds. All three contestants write down their wagers based solely on the category given, then they have 30 seconds to write down the question for the same answer after it’s revealed. Very rarely do all three contestants get the Final Jeopardy wrong.

    But in 1984, on Alex Trebek’s second day hosting the show, a deceptively simple Final Jeopardy answer resulted in all three contestants making the same wrong guess and ending the round with $0 each.

    The category was “The Calendar,” and after the contestants placed their bets, the answer was revealed: “Calendar date with which the 20th century began.”

    The 20th century was the 1900s, as most of us are aware, and all three contestants wrote down identical responses: “What is January 1, 1900?” But they were all incorrect. And unfortunately, all three had wagered their entire amount, leaving them with nothing across the board.

    “Oh, I don’t believe it!” exclaimed one of the contestants as they all laughed at the absurdity. “I’m at a loss for words,” said Trebek.

    A member of the audience asked what the correct answer–or question— was, and Trebek shared that the correct response would have been “What is January 1, 1901?”

    If that seems confusing, it’s probably because we all made a huge deal about the year 2000, marking it as the end of the 20th century as well as the turn of the millennium. But basically, we were wrong. Some people did point it out at the time, but the excitement and momentum of celebrating Y2K had us all in a frenzy and no one was going to wait until January 1, 2001 to celebrate the new millennium.

    jeopardy!, alex trebek, jeopardy! host, uso gala, trebek
    “Jeopardy!” host Alex Trebek at the 2016 USO Gala. Credit: Jim Greenhill/Wikimedia Commons

     

    Why should we have? It all comes down to the fact that in the Gregorian calendar, the first year wasn’t 0 A.D., it was 1 A.D. The first century spanned from 1 to 100 A.D., the second century from 101 to 200 A.D. and so on, leading up to the 20th century officially being from 1901 to 2000. So January 1, 1901 is actually the date that the 20th century began, despite how unintuitive it feels.

    To be fair, you’d think a “Jeopardy!” contestant might recognize that the question seemed awfully simple for a Final Jeopardy round, but only having 30 seconds to think under pressure is tough. And it’s not like these people lived in the internet era where random trivia questions like this regularly go viral, making us more aware of them. And this episode aired over a decade before the “Seinfeld” episode where Jerry explains the “no year zero” thing to Newman, who had planned a millennium party.

    As one person pointed out, the calendar answer is technically correct, but it’s not the way the average person thinks of centuries, just as a tomato is technically fruit but the average person thinks of it (and uses it) as a vegetable. Even though there were some sticklers about the year 2000, most of us just went along with seeing it as the turn of the millennium because it felt like that’s how it should be. It’s kind of wild how most of us can think of something incorrectly but we just sort of collectively accept our wrongness about it.

    The 1984 episode, making a viral comeback, also prompted people to share how much they missed Alex Trebek. The beloved, long-time “Jeopardy!” host died in 2020 at age 80 after an 18-month battle with pancreatic cancer. He worked up until the point where he couldn’t anymore, even while undergoing chemotherapy. His final episode included a touching tribute honoring his 37 seasons with the game show, the end of an illustrious and iconic era.

    Ken Jennings, former “Jeopardy!” champion with the record for the longest winning streak, has been the sole host of the show since late 2023, after previously sharing hosting duties with Mayim Bialik.

    This article originally appeared last year.

  • When an autistic 12-year-old showed up to back his mom in court, his reactions to her violations stopped the room
    A judge presiding over the courtPhoto credit: Canva

    A clip from Caught in Providence, the nationally syndicated courtroom show that made Judge Frank Caprio one of the most beloved figures on the internet, captured a hearing that stopped the room cold in the best possible way.

    A woman named Michelle Verdayo had come to the Providence Municipal Court to answer for four red light violations. She brought her 12-year-old son Arion, who is on the autism spectrum and has ADHD. Arion introduced himself the moment they arrived.

    “I am Arion. A-R-I-O-N. I am 12 years old, I’m in the seventh grade.”

    Caprio, already won over, asked what Arion wanted to do after school. The boy said he was still deciding, but that he definitely wanted to be successful. “It’s hard to decide,” he told the judge. “When you’re at that age, you don’t know what you wanna do. At some points you wanna do what you wanna do but you don’t want to disappoint your family in any way.” Caprio looked at him for a moment. “You are speaking with the maturity of an adult,” he said.

    Then they pulled up the footage.

    As Caprio walked through each violation, Arion watched alongside his mom, offering live commentary. Some of the red lights, he allowed, seemed fairly minor. Then came the clip of his mom nearly hitting another car. Arion gasped. “How dare you!?” The courtroom broke.

    “You think you know your mom,” he said, shaking his head, “and she goes out and blatantly does that.”

    Caprio turned to Michelle with a grin. “You are being chastised right now, and rightfully so. You’ve got a great kid.”

    A woman testifies in court. Photo credit: Canva

    When Caprio asked about Arion’s autism, Michelle was candid. It had been hard, she said, especially with his father out of the picture. As she spoke, Arion stepped in, not to deflect but to reframe it entirely. He told Caprio that despite being teased, he had never seen his diagnosis as a problem.

    “I’m proud to have my autism because it makes me who I am now.”

    Caprio paused. “I am so impressed.”

    He invited Arion up to the bench, shook his hand, and asked for his verdict. The boy picked up the gavel, brought it down, and announced: “Case dismissed.”

    (L) 12-year-old Arion Verdayo speaks to the judge. (R) Judge Frank Caprio speaks during hearing. Photo course: Facebook | Caught In Providence

    “You won your case,” Caprio told Michelle. “Your boy presented you well.” He closed by echoing something Arion had said earlier: “Just because you’re different doesn’t mean that you should be treated differently, because we’re all human beings.”

    Judge Frank Caprio presided over the Providence Municipal Court for nearly four decades and built a YouTube following of close to three million subscribers through Caught in Providence. He died on August 20, 2025, at 88, after a battle with pancreatic cancer. He was remembered widely as the nicest judge in the world. It is not hard to see why.

    This article originally appeared two years ago.

  • A Navy veteran died with no known family to claim him. Then hundreds of strangers showed up.
    A sailor stands on the deck of a ship; (Inset) mourners pay their respectsPhoto credit: Canva
    ,

    A Navy veteran died with no known family to claim him. Then hundreds of strangers showed up.

    When they put out a public invitation to honor him, they hoped for a respectable turnout. They were not prepared for what arrived.

    On the morning of March 10, the Tennessee Department of Veterans Services was hoping enough people would show up that a Navy veteran named Lonnie D. Wayman wouldn’t have to be buried alone.

    Wayman, who was 74 when he died on February 21, had no known living relatives. After no family members came forward to claim his remains, officials at the Middle Tennessee State Veterans Cemetery listed him as an “unclaimed” veteran, a designation that applies to roughly 2,300 veterans per year across the country, according to Department of Veterans Affairs data. The Tennessee Department of Veterans Services put out a public Facebook invitation asking community members and veterans to attend Wayman’s 9 a.m. service and “ensure he receives the farewell he deserves.” Country singer John Rich amplified the post to his followers. Local news station WZTV covered the call the day before.

    By the time the service began, the chapel was full. People stood along the walls. Others filled the hallway. More were still arriving outside as the ceremony started.

    A spokesperson for the Tennessee Department of Veterans Services described the turnout as “absolutely amazing,” and said they had never seen anything like it. The Gallatin Police Department, 30 miles northeast of Nashville, sent representatives. Veterans groups, community members, and military personnel stood in rows as prayers were offered and full military honors were rendered.

    The VA representative who spoke at the service addressed the word that had appeared on Wayman’s paperwork. “When the paperwork for Lonnie Wayman came across my desk, it was marked as an unclaimed veteran,” he said. “But I say that’s incorrect. I say that’s a misnomer. Thanks to the support of the United States military, the good folks at Gupton Mortuary, and all the support I see here today, we are able to claim our honorable veterans and provide them the dignity and honor that they have earned.”

    VA Chaplain Conard Donarski, who had met Wayman at the hospice before his death, presided over part of the service. A priest offered prayers. A naval honor guard folded an American flag and presented it over the casket. The service ended with a dove release at the cemetery’s flagpoles.

    Journalist Cabot Phillips posted video from outside as the crowd continued to grow, writing: “Hundreds of strangers have shown up for the funeral of a Tennessee veteran who died with no known relatives. This is America.”

    Wayman was laid to rest in section P of the Middle Tennessee State Veterans Cemetery. The site is open to visitors.

    This article originally appeared earlier this year.

  • A record store owner sat on a lost Beatles audition tape for years without knowing it. Then Paul McCartney got involved.
    Record store owner in his shop; (Inset) the BeatlesPhoto credit: Canva
    ,

    A record store owner sat on a lost Beatles audition tape for years without knowing it. Then Paul McCartney got involved.

    Rob Frith could have auctioned the 1962 Decca tape for a small fortune. Instead, he said, he got paid in a different way entirely.

    For roughly a decade, a reel-to-reel tape labeled “Beatles Early Demos” sat behind the cash register at Neptoon Records, a beloved independent record shop in Vancouver that Rob Frith has owned since 1981, Antique Reader reported. He assumed it was a bootleg. He never played it.

    In March 2025, Frith brought the tape to the studio of his friend Larry Hennessey, who had the equipment to play it. When the tape started rolling, they both stopped what they were doing. The sound was clean, present, and immediate, not the murky quality of a copied bootleg but something far closer to the source. What they were hearing was a master-generation recording of the Beatles’ failed audition for Decca Records, taped on January 1, 1962, eight months before Ringo Starr even joined the band. “It was like the Beatles were in the room with us,” Frith said.

    Decca had famously passed on signing the group that day, with executives reportedly telling their manager that guitar bands were on their way out. The 15-song tape (including early Lennon-McCartney originals like “Like Dreamers Do” and “Love Of The Loved”) had been considered lost in master form for decades. Bootleg copies had circulated since the late 1970s, but nothing with this clarity.


    The Beatles wave to fans after arriving at Kennedy Airport February 7, 1964. Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

    When Frith posted a clip online, the reaction was immediate and international. A representative for Paul McCartney reached out. On September 18, Frith traveled to Los Angeles with his wife Vicki and their two sons, including Ben, who helps manage the store. McCartney invited them to lunch and to a rehearsal with his band. He greeted Frith’s wife by name. “I thought I saw her soul exit her body right about then,” Ben said.

    Frith handed over the tape. McCartney signed albums and photographs in return, including black-and-white prints from the Beatles’ early years. For context on what Frith walked away from: a single reel of the same Decca audition tape, from the estate of Beatles manager Brian Epstein, sold at Sotheby’s in 2019 for £62,500 (roughly $81,000). Frith had been offered the chance to auction his. He declined.

    “I told Paul, ‘You changed my life as far as music,’” Frith said. “‘Basically, that’s why I have a record store, because of the influence from you guys.’”

    His son Ben had put it plainly before the meeting happened: “That tape would have sat in some millionaire or billionaire’s basement never to be looked at again.”

    Frith came home with signed memorabilia, photographs from the visit, and what he described as “certainly the best 24 hours I can remember.” He also came home without the tape, which is exactly what he wanted.

    “I got paid because I got to meet Paul McCartney,” he said. “So that was good enough for me.”

    This article originally appeared earlier this year.

Pop Culture

One seemingly simple question stumped all three Final Jeopardy contestants in 1984

Culture

When an autistic 12-year-old showed up to back his mom in court, his reactions to her violations stopped the room

Science

You were born with a playlist already in your soul: Why science says musicality is hardwired

Culture

A Navy veteran died with no known family to claim him. Then hundreds of strangers showed up.