|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 4, 2020 16:29:24 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2020 23:43:31 GMT
It's only treason if you don't get away with it.  |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 6, 2020 0:08:27 GMT
It's only treason if you don't get away with it. History is written by the winners? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 1:02:08 GMT
We used to have a British pilot that would walk around on July 4th saying Happy Thanksgiving. He laughed. We laughed. Someone brought out a musket and it got real.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 1:32:41 GMT
It's only treason if you don't get away with it. History is written by the winners? Usually. But on a more serious note, the claim of treason is somewhat overblown. The American colonies were perfectly willing to part amicably and had no interest whatsoever in harming the head of the British state or in replacing the entire British government with another. In fact, they'd have been happy to remain British and return to the de facto state of self rule that they had enjoyed for decades before England started trying to bring them under more direct control. It was that change (actually a series of changes) that caused the problem. Once you give people a taste of freedom, taking it back isn't likely to go over well. For their point of view, it was England that had broken faith with the colonies and they a decent amount of logic and evidence on their side. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 1:46:31 GMT
It's only treason if you don't get away with it. History is written by the winners? Incidentally, my wife just texted this to me (we're sitting in the same room).  |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Jul 6, 2020 2:40:17 GMT
Usually. But on a more serious note, the claim of treason is somewhat overblown. The American colonies were perfectly willing to part amicably and had no interest whatsoever in harming the head of the British state or in replacing the entire British government with another. In fact, they'd have been happy to remain British and return to the de facto state of self rule that they had enjoyed for decades before England started trying to bring them under more direct control. It was that change (actually a series of changes) that caused the problem. Once you give people a taste of freedom, taking it back isn't likely to go over well. For their point of view, it was England that had broken faith with the colonies and they a decent amount of logic and evidence on their side. Technically, England had broken faith with its own citizens when England found itself in over its head financially, trying to bail out the East India Company after the Company's dreadful mismanagement in Bengal, mostly laid at the feet of Robert Clive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Clive). |
|
