Funny... based on the photo they appear to be dressed like colonial Americans.
But the Tea Partiers weren't dressed like that.
For some reason, they were dressed like indigenous Americans.
Can't imagine why this reenactment left that key detail out.
Funny... based on the photo they appear to be dressed like colonial Americans.
But the Tea Partiers weren't dressed like that.
For some reason, they were dressed like indigenous Americans.
Can't imagine why this reenactment left that key detail out.
I'm sick and tired of it being called the 'American Revolution'. More like the "American under new management".
The rebellion was started over taxes to pay for a war, and the first thing the new government did was put down a rebellion started over taxes to pay for the war. We just traded one George for another and saved Americans from the subjugation and horror suffered by Canadians and Australians.
The truth is that England defeated all the European powers that could threaten the colonies and America said thanks for defending us, it's made you weak and us strong, now guess what?
The French, the Haitians, and the Bolsheviks knew how to throw a proper revolution.
The Haitian revolt while initially successful led to nothing but utter tragedy and disaster that continues to affect the country to this day. France extorted them into a debt that couldn't possibly be paid, and multiple other parties (including American banks that still currently exist) got in on the action. Haiti overthrew its slave masters and broke their chains only to spend most of its history with its former master's boot on its throat.
saved Americans from the subjugation and horror suffered by Canadians and Australians.
I'm sorry but I'm going to need a credible source from you to backup this claim and more clarification and context
I think that was satire and they were saying that Canadians and Australians ended up with better governance by gaining their independence via peaceful means rather than violent ones.
IE: When your founding narrative is the violence is the answer to problems, you continue to govern that way. When it is that peaceful negotiations that achieved independence, you continue to govern that way.
USA: presidents assassinated 4 and 2 more wounded in failed attempts.
Canadian PMs assassinated: Zero.
Australian PMs assassinated: Zero
The heroic American revolution: a terrorist campaign by slaveowning religious lunatics considered too extreme for society, offended by paying less than their share of a war fought on their behalf, who then immediately allied with the country that war was fought against.
Said newly birthed country then went on to commit a genocidal psychopathic blitz through an entire continent wiping out 99.9% of the native population justified by religious insanity.
Hell yeah.
When your founding narrative is the violence is the answer to problems, you continue to govern that way. When it is that peaceful negotiations that achieved independence, you continue to govern that way.
I was wondering what's the principal reason is that USA is so fucked up today. Clearly the main issue there is that they think USA is the best country in the world. This isolates them from the rest of the world, stops them from leaning from other countries, makes them unable to recognize their own faults and prevents them from ever improving their system. So economically the country is doing fine but the society is (and always has been) completely dysfunctional. But why? It clearly started with the revolution and myth that it was such a heroic fight for freedom but why were the American colonizers so susceptible to those lies? Why Canadians or Australians didn't fall for it?
Today I learned the East India Co. Still exists!
Are you kidding me? Of course it does. Too big to fail, ever.
I thought that would be the case, but I never hear anything about it ever apart from in a historical context.
I also would have expected a rebrand or two due to said history.
According to Wikipedia it dissolved in 1874. In what form does it still exist?
If BBC is to be believed, it's been surviving as practically just a name until 2005, when it was acquired by an Indian entrepreneur and turned into a luxury goods seller.
Yahoo seems to corroborate that this is the company in question.
Looks like this is their site: https://www.theeastindiacompany.com/
Read the article buddy.
Tea for the reenactment was supplied by the East India Co., the same British company that was at the center of the raucous dispute.
Reading up on the boston tea party is fascinating. Apparently, colonists were angry that their tea was too cheap.
Really sets the stage for the next 250 years of American politics. The working class believes making their rulers richer the fastest at their own expense is a good thing.
OK, I'm not American so I guess this hits differently, but it was a dispute about TAX. Like JFC
Nothing says entitled so much as throwing a valuable commodity into the ocean to celebrate someone who did the same thing for much more important reasons centuries ago. Could've just thrown empty boxes but they just wasted a tonne of tea for no reason.
Tea for the reenactment was supplied by the East India Co., the same British company that was at the center of the raucous dispute.
This isn't true. The EIC from 250 years ago disbanded in the mid-1800s. The modern EIC is a totally separate company founded by an Indian guy around a decade ago as a luxury consumer brand.
all 38 comments