Right Wing Discussion Thread XIX

[LRON]

No, I'm afraid colonial America was the equivalent to a manchild. Unsurprising given that it was composed of Puritans, criminals, and down on their luck third sons of nobles.

Surely then, the illustrious Royal Army should’ve been able to defeat a “petulant manchild”...

Well there were a number of factors at play. First, domestically Britain was hindered by pro-America politicians and figures. Secondly, there was the support given to them by the French and Spanish, to a lesser extent the Prussians and Dutch as well. Without foreign support they would have eventually floundered. It was Saratoga that really clinched it. After that it was a retreat to New York to stave off any French incursion and refocusing on the Southern colonies which were perceived as having more Loyalist sympathies. Also there is no Royal Army and there hasn't been one since the end of the Civil Wars.

[Pyrghium]

Surely then, the illustrious Royal Army should’ve been able to defeat a “petulant manchild”...

Well there were a number of factors at play. First, domestically Britain was hindered by pro-America politicians and figures. Secondly, there was the support given to them by the French and Spanish, to a lesser extent the Prussians and Dutch as well. Without foreign support they would have eventually floundered. It was Saratoga that really clinched it. After that it was a retreat to New York to stave off any French incursion and refocusing on the Southern colonies which were perceived as having more Loyalist sympathies. Also there is no Royal Army and there hasn't been one since the end of the Civil Wars.

Still, they succeeded. Not bad for “Puritans, criminals, and down on their luck third sons of nobles.”. I don’t disagree with your explanation given above, but I do disagree with your snobbish dismissal of the colonists as the British Empire’s lowlifes. That’s unfair and inaccurate.

[Pyrghium]

When I look back at some of the people I have met in my time, even if ever so briefly, I realize how there doesn't seem to be nearly as many giants as before. It feels very Late Antiquity like, when there were so few notable people compared to the Classical World.

There is a shortage of good men at the moment. The most disturbing thing is meeting not a few important people and realizing there is nothing there but a title.

It’s a result of the decadent society we find ourselves in. The Empire is nearing the precipice; and is in serious, perhaps terminal decline.

[LRON]

Well there were a number of factors at play. First, domestically Britain was hindered by pro-America politicians and figures. Secondly, there was the support given to them by the French and Spanish, to a lesser extent the Prussians and Dutch as well. Without foreign support they would have eventually floundered. It was Saratoga that really clinched it. After that it was a retreat to New York to stave off any French incursion and refocusing on the Southern colonies which were perceived as having more Loyalist sympathies. Also there is no Royal Army and there hasn't been one since the end of the Civil Wars.

Still, they succeeded. Not bad for “Puritans, criminals, and down on their luck third sons of nobles.”. I don’t disagree with your explanation given above, but I do disagree with your snobbish dismissal of the colonists as the British Empire’s lowlifes. That’s unfair and inaccurate.

Except they were, for the most part. The upper crusts in the north tended to be self-exiled Parliamentarians, whom prominently belonged to crypto-Calvinist low church denominations, and Puritans; in the south they were the excess sons of nobles. The lower classes tended to come from the criminal class that had been transported to the colonies as punishment. I believe more criminals were actually transported to America than to Australia! Let us go through some of the complaints: 1) Having to finally pay some taxes after decades of authorities looking the other way at smuggling to help pay off a war that the colonists started 2) Having to house troops to protect the colonies in the future, since they asked for more regular troops to be stationed there and the government was not in financial shape to build the necessary quarters at such a time 3) having to respect that the residents of Quebec were Catholic and would not be ethnically cleansed 4) that they could not continue their sweeping of Indian tribes. So let us repeat this in more basic terms: they were angry over not being allowed to smuggle goods, angry over being asked to pay for a war they started, angry over having to house soldiers they asked for, angry over not being allowed continue religious discrimination and angry over not being allowed to continue widespread ethnic cleansing and genocide.

Yes, I will think they happened to mainly be dregs. By Jove, they were practically a crypto-mafia!

[LRON]

You know what I do not get? Why does America tolerate the existence of Canada? I mean, does Canada really exist? At this point there is barely a difference between the two, barring Quebec. I mean the Anglophone parts are just a giant suburb of New England or California whilst Quebec is...well imagine if France's gypsy caravan parks spoke even worse French and then became a psuedo-country, another Quebec is what you would get.

[United Muscovite Nations]

LRON, I decided to read one of your posts in a posh voice because you're my favorite poster, how close is this to your actual voice: https://vocaroo.com/70jqVVhL4KQ

[The East Marches II]

A post for you lads in RWDT so you might know what those in power really think. From the former National Endowment of Arts chair to the (at that time) Chair of Clinton Campaign and former Bill Clinton White House Chief of Staff. I've linked the full email so you can see if I've not context manipulated anything.

And as I've mentioned, we've all
been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking - and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging.

Remember, you being aware of the goings on of your government and how it works is a problem. The failure of education system is a feature not a bug.

[Totally Not OEP]

A post for you lads in RWDT so you might know what those in power really think. From the former National Endowment of Arts chair to the (at that time) Chair of Clinton Campaign and former Bill Clinton White House Chief of Staff. I've linked the full email so you can see if I've not context manipulated anything.

And as I've mentioned, we've all
been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking - and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging.

Remember, you being aware of the goings on of your government and how it works is a problem. The failure of education system is a feature not a bug.

Liquidation of the intellectuals, of the financial and political elite, and many other groups is quite frankly necessary at this point and I hopefully look forward to the day these types end up in a jail cell to rot.

[LRON]

LRON, I decided to read one of your posts in a posh voice because you're my favorite poster, how close is this to your actual voice: https://vocaroo.com/70jqVVhL4KQ

Mhm hm hm hm hm. You are too kind, old chaperino.

[LRON]

Has anyone else had spiritual experiences before? Like meeting spirits and such? I've had a few. The most memorable was perhaps in, oh, 1988 in Hamburg. I was in the Reeperbahn with some colleagues at a sex show and I was running up the walls with peyote and other psychedelics when I swear I started interacting with spirits that were part of the audience and the show. Led to an interesting night. Or couple of nights. It was all a bit strange.

[Pyrghium]

You know what I do not get? Why does America tolerate the existence of Canada? I mean, does Canada really exist? At this point there is barely a difference between the two, barring Quebec. I mean the Anglophone parts are just a giant suburb of New England or California whilst Quebec is...well imagine if France's gypsy caravan parks spoke even worse French and then became a psuedo-country, another Quebec is what you would get.

With all due respect, your take from across the Pond is totally out of touch with reality on the ground. Much like the United States, there are many different “Nations” or “Regional Identities” within the larger Country; and this stems back to the different British Colonies that existed there, prior to their merger under Confederation (also called the “British North America Act of 1867).

(For your convenience, a map of Canada, so you can visually locate the different regions I’m speaking about, Above is pre-Confederation, Below is the way it looks today)

Ontario, for instance is strongly Anglo, as it was mostly settled by Loyalists fleeing the American Revolution, in the 1780s-90s; as well as immigrants from Britain, who came over in the 19th century.

The Prairie Provinces (Alberta, and Saskatchewan) were formerly part of the massive land grant leased to the Hudson’s Bay Company, in 1670, by King Charles II of England and Scotland (ruled: 1660 AD - 1685 AD), who granted them a 200 year lease to “Rupert’s Land” (see first map); and it was predominantly used during that time for the fur trade (beaver trapping, etc), and as a result, when it was acquired by the Canadian Government in 1870, after HBC’s lease ended, and they sold it to Ottawa, for some quick cash, it was very lightly inhabited (save by some fur traders, and the local Native peoples). In order to populate this vast new land, the Canadian Government brought in a lot of Eastern European immigrants - Poles, Germans, Russians, Ukrainians (a LOT of Ukrainians) - to settle these regions; with a smattering of Anglos as well. Heck, even some Americans came up to make their fortunes and stick around (especially in Alberta - which is why Alberta is probably the most American of the Canadian Provinces).

British Columbia was mostly settled by Anglos in the 19th century, I think, but you also had a large amount of Chinese who settled there, as well, especially in Vancouver. I don’t know that much about BC, to be honest, it’s literally on the other side of the Country.

In the Atlantic Provinces (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland) it was first colonized by the French, who called the region “Acadia”, and the French colonists who lived there, “Acadians”. During the French-Indian War/ Seven Years War (1756 - 1763), “Acadia” was conquered by the British. Fearing a revolt from the Acadians, the British Crown decided to deport most of the Acadians to Louisiana, where they gradually became known as the “Cajuns”. Meanwhile, the British brought in colonists of their own, and so you got a mishmash of Anglo, Scottish, Irish, and Protestant Germans, who settled the region starting in the 1760s, with a few Acadian communities surviving as well. Later, many of these Acadians came back from exile, and resettled their ancestral lands, particularly in New Brunswick, so what you got, especially there, was a truly bilingual, bicultural Province; where Anglo and French live side by side, and not people speak both languages.

Then you have Quebec, the bastion of Francophonie in North America. But even there, not all is uniform. After the American Revolution, a lot of the old Anglo elite, which used to be in New York, came up to Montreal, to continue their fur trading activities, banking, etc, in territory that was still under the British Crown. As a result, Montreal boomed into a massive commercial centre, with an Anglo elite, and a predominantly French working class. But even that was subject to change, for in the 19th century, a lot of others came over to settle in Montreal, including Irish, Jewish, German, and Polish immigrants; and later in the 20th century, Greeks, Italians, Portuguese, etc, Montreal became a multiethnic metropolis on par with New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore, etc. However, the Anglos still dominated everything; up until the rise of the Québécois Nationalist/Separatist movement in the 1960s and 70s, then a lot of businesses fled to a small town called Toronto, and the rest if history. The cultural impact of the heavy Anglo presence in Montreal remained, though. It is one of the only places in Quebec where you can actually get away mostly speaking English, but at the same time, it’s too French to be like the rest of Canada. It’s a very strange and unique City that doesn’t quite fit it with Quebec or Ontario, though it almost straddles the two.

So my point here is just to say, Canada, much like the United States, is not the same everywhere you go, it’s a vast and diverse Country, even without all the current immigration; which is exacerbating the situation (under the Trudeau Government, Canada is currently taking in 3x the number of immigrants of any other Western country). So it’s not “just a copy of the United States”.

[Salus Maior]

RWDT: Is there any way the American Revolution could’ve been avoided? And what would a British North America look like?

No, I'm afraid colonial America was the equivalent to a manchild. Unsurprising given that it was composed of Puritans, criminals, and down on their luck third sons of nobles.

I wouldn’t say parliament was particularly reasonable either. Even the king thought some of their measures were ridiculous.

[Arthenius]

Has anyone else had spiritual experiences before? Like meeting spirits and such? I've had a few. The most memorable was perhaps in, oh, 1988 in Hamburg. I was in the Reeperbahn with some colleagues at a sex show and I was running up the walls with peyote and other psychedelics when I swear I started interacting with spirits that were part of the audience and the show. Led to an interesting night. Or couple of nights. It was all a bit strange.

I wish I could meet up with the late Andrea True someday and ride on her piggyback.

[Bear Stearns]

The potato blight actually started in the United States. There was pretty large potato blight in the 1820s and 1830s, but since the US could produce other types of crops, it wasn't that big of a deal.

Essentially. The potato blight didn't decimate American access to food crops. I imagine the solution would have been to ship corn or wheat down South to laborers based on cotton, indigo, and tobacco plantations, though that might be giving the Southern Planters a bit too much credit given their historical record.

Fun fact: American slaves in 1860 were more literate and longer lifespans than Russian serfs.

[North German Realm]

Essentially. The potato blight didn't decimate American access to food crops. I imagine the solution would have been to ship corn or wheat down South to laborers based on cotton, indigo, and tobacco plantations, though that might be giving the Southern Planters a bit too much credit given their historical record.

Fun fact: American slaves in 1860 were more literate and longer lifespans than Russian serfs.

Yeah, why would you want to compare your country to the Russian Empire in the 19th century in any capacity?

[Bear Stearns]

RWDT: Is there any way the American Revolution could’ve been avoided? And what would a British North America look like?

British North America is a double-edged sword. On one hand, the colonies would have likely have been more cultural cohesive due to British immigration restrictions and our Eastern cities would likely be far wealthier due to free trade with the wider British Empire. Furthermore, overtime, North America would eventually become the center of power in the Empire, which means we become a superpower earlier.

On the other hand, the British likely would have limited westward expansion and we'd have to get involved in all of their colonial wars.

[Bear Stearns]

Fun fact: American slaves in 1860 were more literate and longer lifespans than Russian serfs.

Yeah, why would you want to compare your country to the Russian Empire in the 19th century in any capacity?

To break the idea that their descendants are the most uniquely oppressed people ever and deserve monetary compensation from taxpayers.

[Bear Stearns]

Well there were a number of factors at play. First, domestically Britain was hindered by pro-America politicians and figures. Secondly, there was the support given to them by the French and Spanish, to a lesser extent the Prussians and Dutch as well. Without foreign support they would have eventually floundered. It was Saratoga that really clinched it. After that it was a retreat to New York to stave off any French incursion and refocusing on the Southern colonies which were perceived as having more Loyalist sympathies. Also there is no Royal Army and there hasn't been one since the end of the Civil Wars.

Still, they succeeded. Not bad for “Puritans, criminals, and down on their luck third sons of nobles.”. I don’t disagree with your explanation given above, but I do disagree with your snobbish dismissal of the colonists as the British Empire’s lowlifes. That’s unfair and inaccurate.

The colonists were already well down the road to an ethnogenesis as a separate people before the Revolution even happened. There was already a strong sense of being New English after King Phillip's War and the Boston Revolt. The Southern colonies had their own thing going. And the French & Indian War created a strong identity of being American.

[Bear Stearns]

You know what I do not get? Why does America tolerate the existence of Canada? I mean, does Canada really exist? At this point there is barely a difference between the two, barring Quebec. I mean the Anglophone parts are just a giant suburb of New England or California whilst Quebec is...well imagine if France's gypsy caravan parks spoke even worse French and then became a psuedo-country, another Quebec is what you would get.

Because at the time when conquering Canada was a strategic goal of America, it was very dangerous to do so because it meant war with the British. When the British became an ally and no longer a threat, conquering Canada became kind of pointless and we decided it wasn't worth our time.

[LRON]

Snip snip snippity

Yes I am certain Canadians can tell the difference between each other, albeit barely but it is not the case for Johnny Foreigner who cannot tell any difference between Canadians and Americans. Even your dialect is close to that what you see in the northern Western states such as Minnesota and North Dakota. You have no accent that differentiates you from Americans to anyone else and when people find out that a certain famous person is Canadian the usual response is "Oh I always thought they were American". Sorry old chap, you have a Copy+Paste culture that is two updates behind!

You know what I do not get? Why does America tolerate the existence of Canada? I mean, does Canada really exist? At this point there is barely a difference between the two, barring Quebec. I mean the Anglophone parts are just a giant suburb of New England or California whilst Quebec is...well imagine if France's gypsy caravan parks spoke even worse French and then became a psuedo-country, another Quebec is what you would get.

Because at the time when conquering Canada was a strategic goal of America, it was very dangerous to do so because it meant war with the British. When the British became an ally and no longer a threat, conquering Canada became kind of pointless and we decided it wasn't worth our time.

Yes, but why not annex them now and take their resources? It's not like they would care.

[Genivaria]

Snip snip snippity

Yes I am certain Canadians can tell the difference between each other, albeit barely but it is not the case for Johnny Foreigner who cannot tell any difference between Canadians and Americans. Even your dialect is close to that what you see in the northern Western states such as Minnesota and North Dakota. You have no accent that differentiates you from Americans to anyone else and when people find out that a certain famous person is Canadian the usual response is "Oh I always thought they were American". Sorry old chap, you have a Copy+Paste culture that is two updates behind!

Because at the time when conquering Canada was a strategic goal of America, it was very dangerous to do so because it meant war with the British. When the British became an ally and no longer a threat, conquering Canada became kind of pointless and we decided it wasn't worth our time.

Yes, but why not annex them now and take their resources? It's not like they would care.

Did you not listen what was just said to you?

[Bear Stearns]

Because at the time when conquering Canada was a strategic goal of America, it was very dangerous to do so because it meant war with the British. When the British became an ally and no longer a threat, conquering Canada became kind of pointless and we decided it wasn't worth our time.

Yes, but why not annex them now and take their resources? It's not like they would care.

It's cheaper to do that economically than militarily. We need a free trade agreement with Canada that includes a common currency, i.e. the US dollar.

[LRON]

Yes, but why not annex them now and take their resources? It's not like they would care.

It's cheaper to do that economically than militarily. We need a free trade agreement with Canada that includes a common currency, i.e. the US dollar.

Ah the slow and steady process, I see. Britain did much the same in India. May I suggest creating a Most Honourable Canada Company?

[Genivaria]

It's cheaper to do that economically than militarily. We need a free trade agreement with Canada that includes a common currency, i.e. the US dollar.

Ah the slow and steady process, I see. Britain did much the same in India. May I suggest creating a Most Honourable Canada Company?

No those are two entirely different situations.
One is free trade of resources the other was exploitation of the resources with no consent of the locals.

[Salus Maior]

Essentially. The potato blight didn't decimate American access to food crops. I imagine the solution would have been to ship corn or wheat down South to laborers based on cotton, indigo, and tobacco plantations, though that might be giving the Southern Planters a bit too much credit given their historical record.

Fun fact: American slaves in 1860 were more literate and longer lifespans than Russian serfs.

Not thanks to Southern masters, but African American run churches which taught most slaves literacy in secret.

Also, serfdom in Russia was abolished in 1861.