NationStates

Ethel mermania wrote:

Nuroblav wrote:Absolutely no idea what has gone on here but cool.

Or we could just name all the states Washington. Sounds like a good deal to me

That would be really tough on the post office. I think new jersey has like 6 Washingtons, plays hell with them.

New York has a town named Washington in Dutchess County and we have a Washington County.

The odd, self loathing tendency to hate one’s own country of birth - and all its traditions, notes, and history - seems to be limited to Western Anglophobe countries like the US, Canada, and UK. I find it all the more peculiar because the majority of the people ascribed to such beliefs - exempting displaced indigenous folk - are upper middle class whites who really have no reason to hate a country where everything under the sun is handed to them on a plate. It’s very puzzling. These are the same people who tell me “America was never great” despite the fact I moved here precisely because I believed it was the greatest country in the world, the people who tore down a US Flag I put up in our dorm - as if trying to erase the pride I take in being part of this country’s multicultural fabric despite their having been born and raised here - and the people who presumed to give me a long humorless lecture on native genocide when I made an innocuous remark about Thanksgiving.

I don’t understand it, and after watching this kind of sentiment grow over the past ten years of my life I’m not sure I really want to. Yes, every country has problems. Yes, every country’s government has done some disreputable things in its past. That doesn’t mean we should show our spite for every country and its traditions at every opportunity.

San Lumen wrote:

Ethel mermania wrote:
That would be really tough on the post office. I think new jersey has like 6 Washingtons, plays hell with them.

New York has a town named Washington in Dutchess County and we have a Washington County.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_Kentucky
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washingto ... y,_Alabama
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_Vermont

Almost every state has one Washington or more.

-Astoria- wrote:

Heloin wrote:You could change the name of Washington State to American Columbia, to differentiate it from British Columbia. That way you could have AC/DC.

Is it even a good band, though?

They were in the soundtrack to Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 4 which is proof enough for me.

Heloin wrote:

-Astoria- wrote:Imagine if it was renamed to Columbia; what'd be its state abbreviation?

CL?

You could change the name of Washington State to American Columbia, to differentiate it from British Columbia. That way you could have AC/DC.

Indeed.

Alternatively, we can go one step further and rename DC "Reagania" after the great American hero Ronald Reagan.

Luziyca wrote:

Heloin wrote:You could change the name of Washington State to American Columbia, to differentiate it from British Columbia. That way you could have AC/DC.

Indeed.

Alternatively, we can go one step further and rename DC "Reagania" after the great American hero Ronald Reagan.

Ethelopolis

Luziyca wrote:

Heloin wrote:You could change the name of Washington State to American Columbia, to differentiate it from British Columbia. That way you could have AC/DC.

Indeed.

Alternatively, we can go one step further and rename DC "Reagania" after the great American hero Ronald Reagan.

I was going to make a joke, then I realised I was thinking of John Wayne. Now all that is left is a dumb explanation of a joke that never was pilgrim.

it might help to avoid confusion with washington dc (or we could just keep it and rename washington dc to just district of columbia)

i don't really think any good precedent will come from making major geographical name changes on the basis of pressure from social justice activists

Cekoviu wrote:it might help to avoid confusion with washington dc (or we could just keep it and rename washington dc to just district of columbia)

i don't really think any good precedent will come from making major geographical name changes on the basis of pressure from social justice activists

I think it would make more sense to rename Washington DC as the District of Columbia, especially considering that is the official name of the territory.

Heloin wrote:

-Astoria- wrote:Is it even a good band, though?

They were in the soundtrack to Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 4 which is proof enough for me.

So they're trash

Kowani wrote:

Heloin wrote:They were in the soundtrack to Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 4 which is proof enough for me.

So they're trash

Take that back right the fuck now.

American Pere Housh wrote:

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:
At my high school US history class, they said that it was just a tantrum over taxes.

Hahahaha Taxation Without Representation my friend. King George III was a petty tyrant that treated the 13 colonies horribly by taxing the heck out of them so I say the American Revolution was justified.

1. The rebels only cared about representation for the rich people of the Colonies, not the working class, women, blacks, etc.
2. King George III was a [somewhat] Constitutional Monarch
3. It was Parliament under the leadership of Lord North and the Tory Party that introduced the taxes and other policies on the Colonies.

Celritannia wrote:

American Pere Housh wrote: Hahahaha Taxation Without Representation my friend. King George III was a petty tyrant that treated the 13 colonies horribly by taxing the heck out of them so I say the American Revolution was justified.

1. The rebels only cared about representation for the rich people of the Colonies, not the working class, women, blacks, etc.
2. King George III was a [somewhat] Constitutional Monarch
3. It was Parliament under the leadership of the Tory Party that introduced the taxes and other policies.

The British were still petty tyrants that treated American citizens like second-class citizens repeatedly and without remorse.

It basically went like:

"Hey, let's blockade their ports, dissolve their legislatures, try them in military courts, rip up charters, don't approve their laws, use military force to intimidate legislatures, and basically run the colonies like a totalitarian dictatorship!"

And then the Americans rebelled and the British were all .

Kowani wrote:

Heloin wrote:They were in the soundtrack to Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 4 which is proof enough for me.

So they're trash

You've made a mortal enemy today.

Atheris wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
1. The rebels only cared about representation for the rich people of the Colonies, not the working class, women, blacks, etc.
2. King George III was a [somewhat] Constitutional Monarch
3. It was Parliament under the leadership of the Tory Party that introduced the taxes and other policies.

The British were still petty tyrants that treated American citizens like second-class citizens repeatedly and without remorse.

It basically went like:

"Hey, let's blockade their ports, dissolve their legislatures, try them in military courts, rip up charters, don't approve their laws, use military force to intimidate legislatures, and basically run the colonies like a totalitarian dictatorship!"

And then the Americans rebelled and the British were all .

Again, that was the Tory Party. The Whigs (opposition party at the time) did not want that to happen. Read William Pitt the Elder's speech about the taxing of the colonies in the House of Lords, he was heavily against it.

One of the main problems the colonists had, as well, as that they could not send their own representative to Parliament. While the British claimed the colonies were being represented through British MPs, the colonists felt their voices were being ignored, especially when being given more/heavier taxes.

Western Fardelshufflestein wrote:One of the main problems the colonists had, as well, as that they could not send their own representative to Parliament. While the British claimed the colonies were being represented through British MPs, the colonists felt their voices were being ignored, especially when being given more/heavier taxes.

While Britain taxing the colonies was wrong, it was quite small compared to what the people of Great Britain paid. I think the colonists paid 1/10th of the tax compared to those of the homeland.

Celritannia wrote:

Western Fardelshufflestein wrote:One of the main problems the colonists had, as well, as that they could not send their own representative to Parliament. While the British claimed the colonies were being represented through British MPs, the colonists felt their voices were being ignored, especially when being given more/heavier taxes.

While Britain taxing the colonies were wrong, it was quite small compared to what the people of Great Britain paid. I think it was 1/10th the colonists paid compared to those of the homeland.

But they got some form of representation, the colonists didn't

San Lumen wrote:

Cordel One wrote:I've already explained why that's irrelevant to the fact that the Founding Fathers were horrible people.

By today's standards.What part of such beliefs were not consisted racist then and were widespread don't you get?

Anti-racism was a thing back then, but slavery wouldn't be justified if there wasn't a single person on the face of the earth who opposed it.

San Lumen wrote:where they sexist too because they didnt include women's suffrage?

Yes.

Western Fardelshufflestein wrote:One of the main problems the colonists had, as well, as that they could not send their own representative to Parliament. While the British claimed the colonies were being represented through British MPs, the colonists felt their voices were being ignored, especially when being given more/heavier taxes.

The taxes were light. The whole point was that the taxes were being levied without the consent of the Assemblies.

No taxation without representation is a point of principle.

Taxes are too high, everybody says that.

If USA hates Washington that much, let them rejoin the British Empire, you know, the Nation that abolished the Slave Trade.

Heloin wrote:You could change the name of Washington State to American Columbia, to differentiate it from British Columbia.

Bit of a mouthful, but sounds good if things get to that point. I sure hope not.

Saiyan Galactic Empire wrote:No, such a move would only be at the behest of the inward enemies of the empire

dude nsg is ooc

Cordel One wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
By today's standards.What part of such beliefs were not consisted racist then and were widespread don't you get?

Anti-racism was a thing back then, but slavery wouldn't be justified if there wasn't a single person on the face of the earth who opposed it.

San Lumen wrote:where they sexist too because they didnt include women's suffrage?

Yes.

Once again your stunning lack of knowledge of history shows. The Romans had slaves were they racists too?

Empirical Switzerland wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
While Britain taxing the colonies were wrong, it was quite small compared to what the people of Great Britain paid. I think it was 1/10th the colonists paid compared to those of the homeland.

But they got some form of representation, the colonists didn't

Nope. Until the Great Reform Act of 1832, only landowners had right to vote and be represented. The working class [around 80% of the population] had no voting rights or representation.