Future of Canada

[bush_cheney2004]

.... The idea of the American Empire has been pumping up American national mythology since the country was founded; they just never had the guts to call it what it was.

That's because somebody else held the patent rights.

[Wilber]

How about Acadians and the "Great Upheaval"? Canada's past is wedded to such imperialism and fascism, same as its future.

Nothing to be proud of for sure but about a quarter of the number of native Indians forcibly moved west of the Mississippi by US governments.

[bush_cheney2004]

Nothing to be proud of for sure but about a quarter of the number of native Indians forcibly moved west of the Mississippi by US governments.

Not a question of magnitude...just policy. Hence, the new "fascism" as applied to the USA surely applies to the British Empire and its remaining spawn. Canada's future will look a lot like its past and present.

[nicky10013]

I guess you missed it....really messy!

Britain didn't cause German and Italian Fascism. Keep going. Around in circles it seems.

The USSR is defunct. Guess it didn't work out after all.

No, but it serves to prove a point that not everything written in a national document is the truth. The fact that you completely ignored the relevance of the point serves to prove that you can't come to grips with the fact that my original point might have been true.

So much for your original logic....so easily dispatched.

And what exactly was dispatched?

Thoughts are not clear here, but at least your feeling of superiority is intact, a royal trait that is so cute.

Sorry, I should've been more clear. YOU are like those idiots who call Obama Hilter and Stalin at the same time.

Successful for who? Where is this successful empire today?

The US is a democracy, no? Canada? India? Jamaica? Australia, New Zealand? All Empires collapse, it's what they leave in its place is what matters. True to the form of the British Empire, the Commonwealth of Nations was left behind. 54 countries, all former colonies. If the British Experience was so terrible, something tells me they wouldn't have joined.

It's not all about you...sorry.

No, it was supposed to be you answering my query. Still hasn't happened. Still waiting.

Edited January 30, 2010 by nicky10013

[bush_cheney2004]

Britain didn't cause German and Italian Fascism. Keep going. Around in circles it seems.

No, Britain was too busy trying to protect its interests from competition for that. You have earned another DUH!

No, but it serves to prove a point that not everything written in a national document is the truth. The fact that you completely ignored the relevance of the point serves to prove that you can't come to grips with the

...with the what? You should come to grips with your keyboard first.

And what exactly was dispatched?

Your logical fallacy.

Sorry, I should've been more clear. YOU are like those idiots who call Obama Hilter and Stalin at the same time.

And you are like those people who misspell "Hitler" while invoking Godwin's Law.

The US is a democracy, no? Canada? India? Jamaica? Australia, New Zealand? All Empires collapse, it's what they leave in its place is what matters. True to the form of the British Empire, the Commonwealth of Nations was left behind. 54 countries, all former colonies. If the British Experience was so terrible, something tells me they wouldn't have joined.

Membership was not optional.

No, it was supposed to be you answering my query. Still hasn't happened. Still waiting.

You have lots of queries...why is that? Keep waiting.

Edited January 30, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[Wilber]

Not a question of magnitude...just policy. Hence, the new "fascism" as applied to the USA surely applies to the British Empire and its remaining spawn. Canada's future will look a lot like its past and present.

Policy to be sure but what was the policy of the US toward the Acadians who wound up there?

Which nation used military force to end the slave trade? Great Britain. It pissed off a lot of people, but they did it anyways because the Royal Navy could. Name me one unilateral military American manoever that was as positive for the entire world as Britain using the Royal Navy to end the slave trade.

They did much more than that. The world we live in would not exist but for the Royal Navy. The US navy has taken over the job that the Royal Navy did for 100 years, keeping the world sea lanes open for ships of all nations. In doing so, they also piss off a few people.

Membership was not optional.

In the Empire, no. In the Commonwealth, yes.

Edited January 30, 2010 by Wilber

[nicky10013]

No, Britain was too busy trying to protect its interests from competition for that. You have earned another DUH!

If that makes them fascist you clearly have NO grip on what fascism actually means.

And you are like those people who misspell "Hitler" while invoking Godwin's Law.

A typo is a typo. What does it say about you who can only refute the point by pointing out a meaningless error.

You have lots of queries...why is that? Keep waiting.

My queries are to understand what type of hold you have on the material you think you know. Apparently, not much.

[nicky10013]

They did much more than that. The world we live in would not exist but for the Royal Navy. The US navy has taken over the job that the Royal Navy did for 100 years, keeping the world sea lanes open for ships of all nations. In doing so, they also piss off a few people.

What I meant by that is that the Royal Navy did something for over 100 years which was directly in contrast with the economic interests of the people at home. British merchants lost so much money with the ban on slavery throughout the empire. The Royal Navy upheld that law. Has there been such a self punishing yet utterly humanitarian action by a global super power since? Absolutely not.

[Wilber]

What I meant by that is that the Royal Navy did something for over 100 years which was directly in contrast with the economic interests of the people at home. British merchants lost so much money with the ban on slavery throughout the empire. The Royal Navy upheld that law. Has there been such a self punishing yet utterly humanitarian action by a global super power since? Absolutely not.

It was indeed but American Civil War was also somewhat self punishing.

[nicky10013]

It was indeed but American Civil War was also somewhat self punishing.

The notion that the civil war was about abolishing slavery is another one of those myths that inconveniently don't fit the facts of slavery. The war was more fought to bring the states back into the Union. There was widespread racism in the north and a lot of people who believed in an institution such as slavery. The emancipation proclamation didn't come until halfway through the war as a propaganda measure to boost support for the war and it didn't quite work. The half-assed reconstruction effort which only led to jim crow and segregation is proof of that.

[bush_cheney2004]

Policy to be sure but what was the policy of the US toward the Acadians who wound up there?

Well, there was no "US" in 1755...expulsions over the next decades to mostly Louisiana resulted in what is now "Cajun culture". By contemporary standards, it was a lot better than their treatment "back home".

They did much more than that. The world we live in would not exist but for the Royal Navy. The US navy has taken over the job that the Royal Navy did for 100 years, keeping the world sea lanes open for ships of all nations. In doing so, they also piss off a few people.

Agreed....any glorification of the British Empire must embrace this reality. "Fascism" by any other name is still a rose.

In the Empire, no. In the Commonwealth, yes.

Without the Empire....there would be no Commonwealth.

[Wilber]

The notion that the civil war was about abolishing slavery is another one of those myths that inconveniently don't fit the facts of slavery. The war was more fought to bring the states back into the Union. There was widespread racism in the north and a lot of people who believed in an institution such as slavery. The emancipation proclamation didn't come until halfway through the war as a propaganda measure to boost support for the war and it didn't quite work. The half-assed reconstruction effort which only led to jim crow and segregation is proof of that.

And why did the South secede? There was widespread racism in the British Empire after the abolition of slavery as well.

[bush_cheney2004]

If that makes them fascist you clearly have NO grip on what fascism actually means.

Nor do I care...the new meaning for "fascism" is embraced by many opponents of classic "imperialism" and "corporatism". If it walks like a duck....

A typo is a typo. What does it say about you who can only refute the point by pointing out a meaningless error.

The point was Godwin's Law more than the typo....so quick were you to make that common jump.

My queries are to understand what type of hold you have on the material you think you know. Apparently, not much.

Your queries reveal your own lack of knowledge...and naivete about the attributes of empire, whether they be British, Spanish, French, Japanese, .....or American.

[Wilber]

Well, there was no "US" in 1755...expulsions over the next decades to mostly Louisiana resulted in what is now "Cajun culture". By contemporary standards, it was a lot better than their treatment "back home".

Wikipedia

Acadians were forcibly settled throughout North America: Quebec (2,000), Nova Scotia (1,249), Massachusetts (1,043), South Carolina (942), Maryland (810), Baie des Chaleurs (700), Connecticut (666), Pennsylvania (383), Île Saint-Jean (300), Louisiana (300), North Carolina (280), New York (249), Georgia (185), and along the St. John River (86). Another 866 were rejected by Virginia and subsequently sent to England. The Acadians in England were sent to France at war's end in 1763.

"Beausoleil" Broussard. Artist Herb RoeSome Acadians escaped into the woods and lived with the Mi'kmaq; some bands of partisans fought the British, including a group led by Joseph Broussard, known as "Beausoleil", along the Peticodiac River of New Brunswick. Some followed the coast northward, facing famine and disease. Some were recaptured, facing deportation or imprisonment at Fort Beausejour (renamed Fort Cumberland) until 1763.

The Acadians who were deported to what is now the United States were met by British colonists who treated them much like African slaves. Some Acadians became indentured servants. Massachusetts passed a law in November 1755 placing the Acadians under the custody of "justices of the peace and overseers of the poor"; Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Connecticut adopted similar laws. The Province of Virginia under Robert Dinwiddie initially agreed to resettle about one thousand Acadians who arrived in the colony but later ordered most deported to England, writing that the "French people" were "intestine enemies" that were "mudr'd and scalp'd our frontier settlers."

Seems they weren't too popular anywhere.

Agreed....any glorification of the British Empire must embrace this reality. "Fascism" by any other name is still a rose.

Not sure where "Facism" comes into it as neither are single party states.

Without the Empire....there would be no Commonwealth.

Or the world as we know it.

[bush_cheney2004]

Seems they weren't too popular anywhere.

Do you mean this as justification for the "Great Upheval"? What language did they speak? Oh yea...I remember...French.

Not sure where "Facism" comes into it as neither are single party states.

"Fascism" has been co-opted for contemporary political purposes, just like "torture" and "human rights". We don't get to neatly parse historical policies into buckets of degree separated by "isms", at least not from the perspective of those who were subjugated and "pissed off".

Or the world as we know it.

...may the best "ism" win.

[Wilber]

Do you mean this as justification for the "Great Upheval"? What language did they speak? Oh yea...I remember...French.

I'm not trying to justify anything, just pointing out that much of th US was not the great refuge that it likes to make itself out to be.

"Fascism" has been co-opted for contemporary political purposes, just like "torture" and "human rights". We don't get to neatly parse historical policies into buckets of degree separated by "isms", at least not from the perspective of those who were subjugated and "pissed off".

True, mostly by those who have never looked up the definition of the word or have any experience of what it means. Like "Police State".

...may the best "ism" win.

I believe the word is Imperialism but whatever one thinks of it, it formed the world we now live in.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm not trying to justify anything, just pointing out that much of th US was not the great refuge that it likes to make itself out to be.

I agree 100%...and have often stated as much. I embrace the good and the bad...even "fascism". That the British would do such things earns them a similar label....then we can fast forward to WW2 internment camps...in Norte America.

True, mostly by those who have never looked up the definition of the word or have any experience of what it means. Like "Police State".

Definitions can't be controlled that way anymore....it is the very essence of fighting back...including grammar and punctuation!

I believe the word is Imperialism but whatever one thinks of it, it formed the world we now live in.

That's fine, but the Chinese, or Native Americans, or even Philippinos may feel differently with rspect to such romantic labels.

Edited January 30, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[Wilber]

I agree 100%...and have often stated as much. I embrace the good and the bad...even "fascism". That the British would do such things earns them a similar label....then we can fast forward to WW2 internment camps...in Norte America.

That wasn't Fascism, it was racism.

Definitions can't be controlled that way anymore....it is the very essence of fighting back...including grammar and punctuation!

If you are going to fight back, at least use words that mean what you are trying to express. Calling someting "Fascist", which is plainly not, is hardly a convincing argument.

That's fine, but the Chinese, or Native Americans, or even Philippinos may feel differently with rspect to such romantic labels.

Whether the label is romantic or not is in the eye of the beholder. I'm not making a case for Imperialism but right or wrong, there is no question that if formed the world we now live in.

Edited January 30, 2010 by Wilber

[nicky10013]

Do you mean this as justification for the "Great Upheval"? What language did they speak? Oh yea...I remember...French.

"Fascism" has been co-opted for contemporary political purposes, just like "torture" and "human rights". We don't get to neatly parse historical policies into buckets of degree separated by "isms", at least not from the perspective of those who were subjugated and "pissed off".

...may the best "ism" win.

Just because it's been co-opted by idiots doesn't make it alright for you to use it. That makes you an even bigger idiot for knowing what it actually means and not using it properly

[bush_cheney2004]

That wasn't Facism, it was racism.

Interesting distinction...so...for instance....Saddam's regime was racist instead of fascist?

If you are going to fight back, at least use words that mean what you are trying to express. Calling someting "Facist", which is plainly not, is hardly a convincing argument.

But that isn't how the game is played. Evoking "fascism" is much more effective compared to the tattered and worn term "imperialism", and acceptance of imperialism's relative "benefits". The language of the left (or right) seeks attention first, not substance. Thus we get terms like "FemiNazi".

Whether the label is romantic or not is in the eye of the beholder. I'm not making a case for Imperialism but right or wrong, there is no question that if formed the world we now live in.

No argument there..."imperialism" is the current "ism" victor.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just because it's been co-opted by idiots doesn't make it alright for you to use it. That makes you an even bigger idiot for knowing what it actually means and not using it properly

I will use it as I please.... in contemporary "Bush is a fascist" context. If you don't like that, fine, but it doesn't make me an idiot. Who died and left you smart?

[Wilber]

Interesting distinction...so...for instance....Saddam's regime was racist instead of fascist?

Saddam's may have been both but as we only put the Japanese in internment camps and not Germans or Italians, it is pretty safe to say it was racist, IMO.

But that isn't how the game is played. Evoking "fascism" is much more effective compared to the tattered and worn term "imperialism", and acceptance of imperialism's relative "benefits". The language of the left (or right) seeks attention first, not substance. Thus we get terms like "FemiNazi".

A sure sign the user doesn't know the meaning of either. It is like playing the "Hitler" card. A sure loser in any intelligent debate.

[bush_cheney2004]

Saddam's may have been both but as we only put the Japanese in internment camps and not Germans or Italians, it is pretty safe to say it was racist, IMO.

Not true, as thousands of German, Italian, and other European "aliens" were relocated to such camps or faced zone restrictions.

A sure sign the user doesn't know the meaning of either. It is like playing the "Hitler" card. A sure loser in any intelligent debate.

Not altogether relevant...."Hitler" and "fascism" become the rallying cry for any cause, from clubbing seals to, strangely enough, invading Iraq.

[Wilber]

Not true, as thousands of German, Italian, and other European "aliens" were relocated to such camps or faced zone restrictions.

Very few Germans and Italians were interned during WW2 in Canada. Of the 20,000 Japanese who were interned or forcibly removed, 14,000 were born in Canada.

Not altogether relevant...."Hitler" and "fascism" become the rallying cry for any cause, from clubbing seals to, strangely enough, invading Iraq.

I don't dispute that the terms are used, just that they have little credibility for those who have an idea what they really mean.

[bush_cheney2004]

Very few Germans and Italians were interned during WW2 in Canada. Of the 20,000 Japanese who were interned or forcibly removed, 14,000 were born in Canada.

Just sayin'...it is a popular myth that ONLY ethnic Japanese were interned or restricted. In the USA, at least 11,000 Germans / children were hauled off to internment camps.

I don't dispute that the terms are used, just that they have little credibility for those who have an idea what they really mean.

Not relevant as long as it motivates unemployed anarchists to throw rocks at G8/G20 summits. Political polarization is more important than precision.

Edited January 30, 2010 by bush_cheney2004