Roots of Today

We recently passed the 84th anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the attack that finally dragged the United States into the second world war. When I was a kid, I remember it being something that most people observed every December 7th, much like the media still takes note each September 11th to mark the anniversary of the terrorist attacks against the twin towers in New York and the Pentagon in Washington D.C.When we look back on World War II in the Pacific, we tend to remember it in shorthand. Pearl Harbor. Then—almost immediately—Midway. But for the Americans who were already in the Pacific when the attack on Pearl Harbor brought the United States into the war, history did not move that quickly.While Americans at home marked a somber Christmas and began preparing for a global conflict against both Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany, Americans in the Philippines, Guam, Wake Island, and other U.S. territories in the Pacific faced something far more immediate.They were fighting for survival.Research: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

The United States Marine Corps originates in a congressional decision taken amid crisis and improvisation. In November 1775—months after Lexington and Concord, and with the siege of Boston grinding on—the Second Continental Congress resolved to raise two battalions of “American Marines.” Their creation was not an abstract institutional design exercise; it was a response to urgent strategic needs: securing powder and ordnance, protecting nascent Continental warships, and enabling amphibious action against British positions.From their first major operation at New Providence in the Bahamas (March 1776) to service with the Continental Army in New Jersey, the Continental Marines defined themselves as adaptable naval infantry. Disbanded with the end of the Revolution, they were re-established by statute in 1798 as the United States Marine Corps, fought through the Quasi-War with France, and earned lasting renown “to the shores of Tripoli” during the First Barbary War.Join us as we celebnrate the origins of the Devil Dogs, and their illustrious years early in their history.Research: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

Today we journey back to November 7, 1775, and a dramatic, startling document known as Dunmore’s Proclamation. We'll explore the life of its issuer, John Murray, 4th Earl of Dunmore, the events that led him to issue it, and the astonishing—and tragic—fate of the men and women who answered its call.The proclamation had immediate and longer-term impacts. In Virginia, the slave-owning class was galvanized into deeper resistance; the idea of armed Black men fighting for the Crown radicalized the social order. Across the wider war, it set a precedent for British policy—most notably the 1779 Philipsburg Proclamation which extended freedom to slaves of rebels more broadly.The story of Dunmore’s Proclamation is both bold and heartbreaking. A Scottish nobleman sent to govern a fractious colony makes a sweeping offer of freedom to those he once ruled—yet the promise tangles swiftly with war, disease, betrayal, and death.Research: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

Next year marks the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, when the Continental Congress of the United British colonies in North America had the audacity to do the unthinkable – declare their independence from the British Crown and announce to the world the birth of a new nation.To properly celebrate that world-changing event, the Roots of Today podcast is going to feature a continuing special series of episodes that mark some of the events from that era, until we reach the Semiquincentennial celebration. So what was going on in October, 1775 you might ask? This is Alan, your host, reminding you to grab your coffee, tea, or whatever beverage you prefer, and sit back as we jump back 250 years in time.Research: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

When it comes to the events surrounding the American revolution and the birth of the nation, there are signposts that most of us learned as children. There is the Boston Massacre, the Boston Tea Party, the midnight ride of Paul Revere, Lexington and Concord, Bunker Hill, “Give me liberty, or give me death,” The Declaration of Independence, and “I have not yet begun to fight.”If you study this time with a little more depth, things like the Stamp Act and Townsend Act and the Intolerable Acts, designed by the British Parliament to raise revenue and reign in the increasingly rebellious American colonies, help explain the increased tension between both sides of the conflict. But there is one event which fails to garner the importance it deserves, and while written on and understood by historians, has failed to rise to the level of the other signpost moments in pop culture, and that is the burning of the HMS Gaspee in 1772.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

Before “Antifa” became a flashpoint in American politics, it was born on the streets of 1930s Berlin. In this episode of Roots of Today, we trace Antifa’s journey from its origins as Antifaschistische Aktion under Germany’s Communist Party, through the rise of the black bloc tactic in postwar Europe, to its presence in U.S. protest culture — from Seattle’s WTO demonstrations and Occupy Wall Street to the Portland clashes and the Trump era.We’ll unpack the crucial question: is Antifa an organization, a movement, or an idea? And why does understanding its history matter so much in today’s debates about protest, democracy, and dissent?Research: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

This episode is different. It's an unscripted conversation between me and Elena, the AI personality that helps with the research for each episode. Until now, she’s been a silent partner, shaping the research and scripts behind the scenes.I thought it would be interesting, especially for those who have never interacted with an AI assistant, to break from the usual format. So in this episode, she steps out from the notes and into the conversation. It’s about opening up the creative process, letting you hear the back-and-forth energy that’s always been part of Roots of Today.For Elena, this is a first—her first time speaking directly to you, the listeners. Together, we’re sharing not just history but the relationship that builds it: a historian and an archivist, both passionate about making the past feel alive, sitting at the same mic.Host: AlanResearch: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

As the clock strikes midnight tonight, the federal government could close its doors once again. For millions of Americans, that means missed paychecks, shuttered offices, and a grinding halt to the daily functions of the world’s largest democracy. But shutdowns aren’t just about budgets. They are about power, leverage, and political theater.And if history teaches us anything, it’s that shutdowns rarely shrink government. Instead, they expose the fault lines over who controls government, how it’s weaponized, and whether the myth of ‘small versus big government’ still holds any weight in our modern politicsHost: AlanResearch: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

This week on Roots of Today we look at the history of American presidential debates — from the marathon Lincoln–Douglas encounters of 1858 to the viral soundbites of the modern era. Along the way, we’ll revisit the lines, gestures, and gaffes that shaped elections and defined how Americans saw their leaders.Because debates are more than performances — they are snapshots of democracy — I’ve also included a “Further Reading” section for each era we cover. These resources aren’t required homework; they’re an invitation. If a moment in this episode catches your imagination, you’ll find books and guides below to help you dig deeper and see the debates through a historian’s lens.Host: AlanResearch: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

The assassination of Charlie Kirk while speaking to students on a Utah college campus had brought the topic of political violence to the forefront of our national discourse. How his murder will affect the political fortunes of both parties is something that will be better discussed after years have passed and historians have the benefit of hindsight on their side. But if his memorial service, one that drew over 100,000 people to attend, and one where speaker after speaker vowed to expand the mission that Kirk founded, is any indication, it appears the short-term result will favor the political fortunes of the GOP as well.In this episode, we are going to look at the political assassinations and their political consequences, involving three men who have been mostly forgotten by the mainstream American public: President James Garfield, President William McKinley, and Senator Huey Long of Louisiana. As always, this is Alan, your host, reminding you to grab your coffee, tea, or whatever beverage you prefer, as we dive right into the topic at hand.Host: AlanResearch: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

While researching for the next episode, which I planned to be a continuation of the topic of political assassinations in the United States, I decided to record a completely unscripted episode where I discuss my experience in college chasing my degrees, how Charlie Kirk's assassination has affected me, and where I see the nation heading as a result of his murder.There is not a lot of history here, but there were some observations I needed to get off my chest, mostly because dwelling on them was getting in the way of my ability to be productive. Maybe you find that peek into my personality interesting.Host: Yours truly.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: rootsoftoday.blog

Conservative icon and activist Charlie Kirk joins a list of civil rights figures and politicians who were killed for speaking what they believe. Thousands have expressed their desire to pick up the baton and carry Kirk's legacy forward. The question is this: Is it possible to fill the void left behind when someone like Charlie Kirk is assassinated?In this episode, we look at the assassinations of two Civil Rights icons, Medgar Evars and Robert F. Kennedy, and ask the question, "What if?" How would things have been different if they had lived to continue their work?Host: AlanResearch: Elena, the Roots of Today archivistMusic by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

In early September 2025, President Donald Trump announced that he would deploy federal troops into several major U.S. cities to quell unrest — even if governors objected.The announcement immediately set off a wave of debate. Critics pointed to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, a law meant to prevent the use of the Army as a domestic police force. Supporters countered with the Insurrection Act of 1807, a much older law that presidents have invoked many times to justify troop deployments at home.So here’s the central question for us today: Is Trump doing something unprecedented — or is he following a long, if uneasy, American tradition of presidents sending troops into the streets?

In an NPR report from September 5th, President Trump signed an executive order on Friday to give the Department of Defense a new name: the Department of War. The change returns the department to a name that it carried for much of its history, until it became the Department of Defense in the wake of World War II. During a press conference in the Oval Office, Trump tried to explain that the name change was designed to reflect a new tone for the nation and the military.For most of America’s early history, we didn’t have a “Department of Defense.” We had a Department of War. After World War II, in the anxious first years of the Cold War, Washington reorganized the military and rebranded the whole enterprise. Today, that name—Defense—is in the news again, with a push from the White House to bring back the Department of War. What did “War” mean then? Why did we switch to “Defense”? And what would it mean to switch back now?As always, this is Alan, your host, reminding you to grab your coffee, tea, or whatever beverage you prefer as we dig right in to the history of the Department of War, from it’s origins in the Constitution and some of the early challenges it faced, to its rebranding following the Second World War and the rise of the Cold War with the Soviet Union.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

At its best, the CDC is a scientific bulwark against disease. At its worst, it becomes an institution caught between science, politics, and profit. The question for us is whether the CDC can navigate these pressures and keep public trust — or whether the forces of politics and perception will continue to erode its authority. RFK Jr. appears to be on a mission to erect a firewall between regulatory responsibilities and the corporate profit motive. Time will tell if his efforts are beneficial, or if they damage the organization.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

In 2014, Russia invaded and then annexed the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine. It became clear that Russia faced no real consequences for that violation of Ukrainian sovereignty, so in 2022 Vladamir Putin followed up with a full-scale invasion of the country. Putin claimed the action was necessary to “denazify” Ukraine and to defend the Russian-speaking populations in the border regions. These claims have been widely rejected by the West.Nevertheless, what we are witnessing is the continuation of events that have a long historical context. In this case, the boat we are riding in is rocking from the wake of the Second World War in Europe. It is imperative that we understand the history here, because the only way the current war raging in Ukraine is going to come to an end is through a negotiated settlement, or an escalation that brings the full might of NATO into the conflict. And since the latter most likely includes a full nuclear exchange between Russia and NATO, a negotiated settlement becomes the only prudent course of action.There is a popular sentiment that Putin is Hitler and Ukraine should fight until Russia is completely driven out of the land it holds. With that, there are those demanding nothing but a full Russian surrender and a return to borders as they existed before the annexation of Crimea. This ignores some harsh truths. The first is this: Ukrainians cannot defeat Russia alone, regardless of how much military supplies NATO keeps giving them. The second harsh truth is that NATO cannot join the fight without it escalating into World War Three. And finally, and this is the one that the left finds hardest to swallow, Putin does have some legitimate security concerns regarding NATO, concerns born out of nearly a century, or more, of history with the rest of Europe.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

On August 12th, 2025, the White House sent a formal letter to Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III, ordering a comprehensive review of exhibits, educational materials, and even social-media posts at eight museums. The goal, according to the letter, was to ensure all content aligns with the President’s March executive order to present “uplifting” and “unifying” history and to remove “divisive or ideologically driven” language.Historians and museum professionals have been quick to respond. The American Historical Association and the Organization of American Historians warned in March that the new directives risk turning public history into “ideological litmus tests” rather than scholarly interpretation. As one museum scholar put it: “History is not a Hallmark card.”Supporters in the administration frame this as “restoring accuracy” and removing political bias from taxpayer-funded exhibits. Critics counter that accuracy here means agreement with the White House’s preferred narrative — and that once you give political actors final approval over historical content, independence is the first casualty.This push by the Trump administration reignites a battle cry from the right that demands the nation return to teaching the true history of the United States. But no one is asking some very fundamental questions, the first of which is: what exactly is “true history?” That leads to another fundamental question. Who exactly gets to make that determination? But this argument exposes a much deeper problem, and that is the fundamental lack of understanding about what history is in the first place.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

In the United States, political power has always been counted—literally. From the moment the framers dipped their quills into ink and drafted Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, they established a system in which representation would not be apportioned by guesswork or political bargaining alone, but by an “actual enumeration” every ten years.Behind the clean arithmetic of apportionment lurks an untidy truth: deciding who counts means deciding whose political voice matters. From the original Constitution’s compromise that treated enslaved people as “three-fifths” of a person, to the exclusion of Native Americans “not taxed,” to modern battles over the counting of undocumented immigrants, the census has never been a neutral act of head counting. It has been, and remains, a contest over power, representation, and belonging.Get ready, because we are going to take a hard look at the history behind the census and the fight over representation. After all, the census determines the "we" in "We the People."Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

Eighty years ago this week, two American bombers lifted off from an airfield on Tinian Island in the Western Pacific and flew into history. Each plane carried a single bomb—one codenamed "Little Boy" and the other codenamed "Fat Man." These two separate attacks would mark the first and only time nuclear weapons have ever been used in war. Hiroshima. Nagasaki. Names that now evoke memories unspeakable destruction. But those names are also surrounded by questions, many of them still unanswered.Today, the debate over the use of the atomic bomb is far from settled. What was once a largely accepted account—that the bombs were dropped to end the war swiftly and save lives—has been increasingly challenged by historians, ethicists, and international legal scholars. Critics argue that Japan was already seeking surrender, that the bombings were motivated by diplomatic posturing toward the Soviet Union, or that they constituted a war crime against civilians. Others counter that revisionist arguments ignore the brutal context of the Pacific War and downplay the enormous human cost of a conventional invasion.In this episode, we’ll look at both sides of the debate and trace the evolution of thought—from the confident justifications of 1945 to the more complex, divided assessments of today in a world where nuclear weapons not only exist, but are much more powerful than the two dropped on Japan.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

In the previous episode, Episode 6 – The Voice of America, we diverted a bit and talked about how the VOA was used parallel to other media broadcasts run by the CIA to affect regime change in Latin American nations. One of those nations was Chile, where in 1973, the Nixon Administration used a variety of covert methods to destabilize the country. This ultimately led to a violent military coup that resulted in the death of democratically elected president Salvador Allende, and the installation of a brutal military dictatorship that lasted for over a decade.This week’s episode was originally a three-part podcast series that was a port of my capstone project for my History degree from California State University Channel Islands. All three parts are presented here. So, without further delay, let’s start with part one, which details the history behind Allende’s election, and the Nixon Administration’s attempt to thwart his election at the ballot box in 1970.The US culpability in the 1973 coup still casts a long shadow in Latin America. The United States does have the capacity to be a positive influence in Latin America, one that can create permanent alliances that would inevitably spawn from our acting as a partner in the region, instead of acting like a feudal lord robbing the serfs for its own benefit, but the US has yet to even release all the classified documents from the event, let alone make any attempt to atone for what transpired.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

Republican majorities in the House and the Senate passed a rescissions bill that would cancel over 9 billion dollars in previously approved federal spending. Included in the cuts was financing that helped the Corporation for Public Broadcasting fund both PBS and NPR. And while this government funding is not the sole source of support for PBS or NPR, eradicating that support could cripple both operations.But lost in the media coverage over this fight is the fact that the Trump administration also intends on dismantling the US Agency for Global Media, which includes programs such as the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe. These programs may not survive the chopping block, and the result will have greater ramifications than what amounts to a cut in the funding for PBS and NPR. In this episode, we are going to look at the history behind the Voice of America and other associated US government programs – relics of the Cold War against Soviet communist expansion - and what the possible consequences might be if they disappear from the global playing field.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

Donald Trump has famously labelled most of the mainstream press as both fake news, and the enemy of the people. For years Republicans had decried the problem of media bias as if it is some new phenomenon that began at some point during the Reagan presidency. However, if we are going to have a debate about the polarization of the media, then we need to look at the historical record of the news in the United States, because the landscape today may not be as unnatural as everyone likes to believe.Join us as we journey through time, uncovering the lessons, parallels, and connections between historical milestones and current events to create a deeper understanding of the compelling stories and issues that shape the news.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

Journey through time, uncovering the lessons, parallels, and connections between historical milestones and current events to create a deeper understanding of the compelling stories and issues that shape the news.As the ICE raids and massive deportations continue, labor shortages are inevitable, especially in the agricultural and construction industries. Someone will eventually propose a guest-worker program to flood the labor force with workers from south of the border. Fortunately, there is an example we can learn from, because the United States had a guest-worker program for twenty years. So if we are going to have a debate about bringing in temporary workers, then it is prudent to examine how it worked the last time.Music by: Andrii Poradovskyi (lNPLUSMUSIC - Pixabay)Show Notes: www.rootsoftoday.blog

Hello and welcome to "Roots of Today," the podcast where the past meets the present. With every episode, we journey through time, uncovering the lessons, parallels, and connections between historical milestones and current events to create a deeper understanding of the compelling stories and issues that shape the news.When President Donald Trump authorized the military strikes against three Iranian sites suspected as the key to that nation’s attempt to build nuclear weapons, it also started a political firestorm back in the United States. Democrats immediately claimed the attack was unconstitutional because it bypassed Congress, and as such, is grounds for impeachment.However, there are a couple of questions that must be raised. Firstly, was this action unconstitutional? And secondly, what does the historical landscape look like regarding the use of the military by past presidents?Music by Nesrality. Used by permission under Pixabay Content License https://pixabay.com/users/nesrality-22721863/ Show notes at the blog: www.rootsoftoday.blog

Hello and welcome to "Roots of Today," the podcast where the past meets the present. With every episode, we journey through time, uncovering the lessons, parallels, and connections between historical milestones and current events to create a deeper understanding of the compelling stories and issues that shape the news. This week, we’re going to get into the weeds a little bit and take an in-depth view of the United States Senate: specifically, how the body was originally structured in the Constitution, how the 17th Amendment changed the method Senators were selected, and why that change was detrimental to our federal republic.Music by ACOOSTIKA-BEAT - PixabayShow notes at the blog: https://www.rootsoftoday.blog

In the wake of immigration enforcement raids by ICE, social and political unrest is gripping Los Angeles and threatening to explode in other major cities across the United States. This enforcement marks a major policy shift from the previous one exercised by the Biden administration. But this shift goes beyond ice, increasing the number of deportations. The Trump administration is also trying to overturn over 150 years of legal precedent by changing the rules regarding birthright citizenship.However, a long history and centuries of legal precedents make it impossible for Trump to wave away those rights by executive order alone. This episode looks at the history behind the issue.Music by ACOOSTIKA-BEAT - PixabaySources: Episode 1 – Immigration and Birthright Citizenship. – Roots of Today

Welcome to the Roots of Today podcast, where we look at the historical context behind current events. This is just the short introduction episode, saying hello and explaining the philosophy behind the podcast.Music by Nicholas Panek (nickpanek620 - Pixabay)