MILITARY HISTORY ONLINE

User:  
Password:  
 
 General History
Page 90 of 114 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89    90    91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114 )
Message
scoucer
Berlin  Germany
Posts: 3269
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
9/11/2023 7:06:54 AM
Quote:
At the risk of sounding like a tiresome and sanctimonious opponent of “ Western - centric “ perceptions of history, we must remember that the huge scope of the Second World War was predicated largely on the war between Japan and China, which started in earnest with the Marco Polo Bridge Incident in 1937, and was to cause tens of millions of deaths and witness genocide on a scale that rivalled anything in modern times. Even on this September day in 1945, the Soviet Union was mopping up Japanese resistance as it consolidated control of Manchuria and islands close to the Japanese homeland. It’s not widely acknowledged in terms of its importance and scale.

Regards, Phil


Well said Phil. I agree. I would also add that the idea that WW1 ended in November 1918 also erroneous. Events and continued war in Eastern and South-western Europe seem to be filtered out as not part of WW1. This distorts our perception of the origins of WW2. And in my personal opinion, clouds what a disaster the various Treaties in Paris were.

Trevor
----------------------------------
`Hey don´t the wars come easy and don´t the peace come hard`- Buffy Sainte-Marie Some swim with the stream. Some swim against the stream. Me - I´m stuck somewhere in the woods and can´t even find the stupid stream.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/12/2023 9:35:42 AM
The second Québec Conference took place from Sept. 12, 1944 in Québec City. This conference was code named the Octagon Conference.

This was a high level meeting between FDR, WSC and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It was hosted by the Government of Canada and PM William Lyon Mackenzie King.

Canada, despite a massive contribution to the war effort, was denied any input on the strategic planning for the war. This caused PM King some embarrassment. However, Churchill felt that it was his job to keep the imperial Dominions informed and so there was no need for King to be present at any meetings. FDR was a great friend of King but he too did not want him at the table as he felt that other nations in the hemisphere had the same right to be there if King was invited. I would dispute that.

The two governments came to agreement on a number of issues:

1. The occupation zones in a defeated Germany
2. The plan to demilitarize Germany by destroying munitions and arms factories and converting the land to farmland.
3. Further lend-lease to Britain
4. how the RN would contribute to the Pacific War against the Japanese
5. Operation Neptune which was the naval phase of Overlord was part of the discussion
6. The use of the Mulberry Harbours was reviewed
7. The progress of Operation Dragoon, the invasion of southern France and the impact on the Italian campaign was also discussed
8. Repatriation of military personnel once the war was over


Details of the meetings at the conference may be found below in the link below

[Read More]

Cheers,

George



George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/12/2023 9:45:26 AM
Sept. 12, 1759

One of the most significant historical events in North American history was about to commence on this date. British forces under James Wolfe were gathered in numbers across the St. Lawrence River and the RN ships of the line and transports could be seen by French Gen. Montcalm from the citadel at Québec City.

The Battle of the Plains of Abraham was about to begin and with that New France would be finished and all those lands would be gobbled up and added to the British Empire. It would take until 1763 until a treaty was signed. Both General Wolfe and General Montcalm would die in battle on the Plains of Abraham.

New France in 1750



The course of history in NA was altered and the British colonies no longer would have to fear attacks by the French and their FN allies. And in 16 years, some of those British subjects would rebel against the British Empire to seek their independence.

Cheers,

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/12/2023 5:28:47 PM


Moving events from recent days to the new page, for easy replys!?

Checking on General History events, from 9-10!?

1608 John Smith chosen President of Jamestown, was this the colonies 1st election?? Anyone?

1813 US naval forces win the Battle of Lake Erie, paving the way for control of the Great Lakes!? Thanks George, for the posts!

Of course yesterday day 9-11 was the horrific terrorists attack on the twin towers, & Pentagon!? Does anyone have the new precautions that are in place by the US military, if its attempted again!?

1814 the USN defeat the British on lake Champlain! The RN seemed to have trouble winning naval battles on large NA inland lakes? Why?? Again thanks George.

1944 WSC & FDR meet in Quebec, what was planned?? Why no Soviets, or France? What say you?

2008 big fire in the Chunnel between GB, & France? What caused it? Anyone??

& today on 9-12

The German Commandos freed Benito Mussolini to Munich! How did they accomplish this? This is an imbarrisment to Allied prison security!? Or showing the brilliance of Nazi Commandos!? Anyone??

Any other new topics? Or discuss those above??
BTW these general world history topics come from Encyclopedia Britannica!

Here is 9-13 history,

1759 The British defeat the French in the Battle of Quebec! Both commanders were killed! How vital was this battle towards the future of Canada?? Any websites?

1971 prison revolt at Attica, NY is put down, why was it so destructive!?

& 9-14, the following occurred! Any new topics??

1814, the British are stopped at Baltimore's Fort McKinley, inspiring Francis Scott Key, with our national anthem! Was our flag still there? He'll yes!!! Just had to get that in!! ☺

1847 the Americans defeat Mexican forces near Mexico City! How was this a prelude to officers of the Civil War!? Name some? Anyone??

Regards,
MD


BTW George,

I talked to the area historian, & the term Michilimackinac is a Ottawa Ojibawa term used for the entire area around the Straits of Mackinac including the shore lines & islands of both sides of Lakes Huron, & Michigan! No wonder the British would use the term on both forts! Also the French had an early fortress in St. Ignace, called Fort de Baude, today everyone including the Rangers at the forts, call.the one on the Island Fort Mackinac, & the one on the southern side, (lower Peninsula) Fort Michilimackinac! I read a book on it entitled "3 Flags, the Forts of Mackinac, by Walter Havighurst! Because of French, Indian, British, & American histories it can be confusing!? So I guess everyone can be construed as right!

Peace,
MD

BTW it rained on my parade up there! But still.fun!!!
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/13/2023 7:08:59 PM
Quote:
Quote:
To your point, I can think of only two general histories of WW2 that incorporate the various stages of the Sino-Japanese wars into their WW2 histories. One is Total War by Peter Calvocoressi and Guy Wint; the other is World War II Almanac 1931-1945 by Robert Goralski, who predates your start date by some six years. Both books are rather long in the tooth (1972 and 1982 respectively), so I’m certain there are more recent volumes of similar scope available.


A few years ago I read a fascinating book on China in World War 2 called Forgotten Ally: China’s World War II, 1937-1945 by Rana Mitter.

Gary





Hi Brian, & Gary,

I remember in High School History class, the the Sino Japanese War was only briefly mentioned to point out the Japan was a bad guy aggressor!? That's it!?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
OpanaPointer
St. Louis MO USA
Posts: 1968
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
9/13/2023 7:11:14 PM
Pearl S. Buck and the Soong sisters kept it in the US newspapers.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/14/2023 8:12:15 AM
So true OP !

& today, 9-14, the following occurred! Any new topics??

1814, the British are stopped at Baltimore's Fort McKinley, inspiring Francis Scott Key, with our national anthem! Was our flag still there? He'll yes!!! Just had to get that in!! ☺

1847 the Americans defeat Mexican forces near Mexico City! How was this a prelude to officers of the Civil War!? Name some? Anyone??

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/15/2023 7:12:57 AM
Moving on to today in world history, 9-15, check out the following!

1821 Central American countries granted independence from Spain! Was this done without bloodshed?? What's the story??

1862 Stonewall Jackson takes Harper's Ferry from the Union!, the town was almost impossible to defend! & exchanged hands 8-10 times!? Why?.anyone??

1916 the Tank was 1st used as A weapon in WWI by the British! Who invented the Tank, & how effective was it in the World Wars? What say you??

1935 Hitler passes anti Jewish laws, anyone on why Germany & others hated the Jews so much??

1950 the Allies land on Inchon, SK. Who was behind this brilliant move to stem the tide against the North Korean Communists!??

1963 the KKK bombs African Americans and their churches in Birmingham, Al.! How prelivant is the Klan today? Or have they filtered into other hate groups? What say you?

& tomorrow in 9-16 check this out, comments, anyone?

1320 Charles V dies after leading France in the 100 yrs war! Was it really 100 years, any comments on the full history of the conflict, It's other name, & its effect!? Anyone??

& 1620 the Mayflower leaves for the New World, How would this effect New England!? Comments? Anyone??

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/16/2023 8:04:40 AM
Is anyone out there????

More to discuss, anyone?? On yesterday's 9-15 topics?

1821 Central American countries granted independence from Spain! Was this done without bloodshed?? What's the story?? Thanks George, the big picture here effects the new world history, your right!

1862 Stonewall Jackson takes Harper's Ferry from the Union!, the town was almost impossible to defend! & exchanged hands 8-10 times!? Why?.anyone??

1916 the Tank was 1st used as A weapon in WWI by the British! Who invented the Tank, & how effective was it in the World Wars? What say you??

1935 Hitler passes anti Jewish laws, anyone on why Germany & others hated the Jews so much??

1950 the Allies land on Inchon, SK. Who was behind this brilliant move to stem the tide against the Commies!?? We complain about MacArthur, but this was a brilliant military strategy! Comments on Korea, anyone?

1963 the KKK bombs African Americans and their churches in Birmingham, Al.! How prelivant is the Klan today?? What say you? Thanks Brian & NYG, I agree oddly enough not only is the Klan racially bias, but religiously as well, good responses!

& today in 9-16 check this out, & comment!?

1320 Charles V dies after leading France in the 100 yrs war! Was it really 100 years, any comments on the full history of the conflict, It's other name, & its effect!? Anyone??

& checking tomorrow, 9-17 in history we find these!?

1787, 39 delegates sign the US Constitution! Do you think today, some of the Constitution is outdated for modern situations!? Anyone??

1849 Harriet Tubman escapes slavery, & starts the Underground RR, does this effect Canada, as well.as the US?? What say you??

1862 the Union defeats the Confederate ANV in the battle of Antietam, after finding Lee's battle plan! Comments on it's effects? Anyone??

1939 USSR invades Poland! Why? Was Poland a Russian enemy? Then why invade them? What say you??

1991 both North, & South Korea admitted to the UN!? How is this working out??


Sieze the day!
MD

BTW Lee is invading the North again! Not Robert E., but Hurricane Lee heading for the New England, & Atlantic Canadian coast's! Stay out of harms way! With global warming are these Cat. 5 canes, something we can expect more of?? Predictions are for an especially harsh winter!? What say you??
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/16/2023 8:56:12 AM
Quote:
1849 Harriet Tubman escapes slavery, & starts the Underground RR, does this effect Canada, as well.as the US?? What say you??


Canada was affected in several ways as, as a British colony, slavery had been abolished since 1833. And so the colonies were attractive as safe havens for those trying to escape from bondage.

There are a number of small towns in my province of Ontario that became termini for escapees who had been helped along the way by well meaning Americans who had organized well enough that a series of safe houses were available for slaves en route. The Quaker movement was involved in this Underground Railroad and I believe that other free black Americans may have been more influential than Harriet Tubman in developing the escape routes.

Canada also found itself in a political and legal battle with the US. The US did not wish to see Canada keeping escaped slaves because that offended slave owners who were also voters. British law protected these runaways. If a slave was travelling with his master in Canada, that slave was considered to be free if he chose to leave.

The Fugitive Slave Law also saw bounty hunters entering Canada to scoop the former property. In some cases they were successful. In other cases they were surrounded by angry mobs who threatened them with bodily harm if they did not release the former slave that they had captured in Canada.

As well, slave owners would petition their politicians to request extradition on the pretence that their property, the slave, had stolen from them as they escaped. The theft could include a horse or even the clothing on the backs of the slave which was also considered the property of the slave owner. The charges were a ruse of course. The objective was to return the escapee to his master as a slave.

As early as 1819 the Attorney-General of Upper Canada (later the Chief Justice), John Beverly Robinson had written the definitive statement on escaped slaves. And he concluded that as Upper Canada had adopted the laws of England that slave owners or their agents were not permitted to enter Canada with the sole purpose to capture and return escaped slaves to their life of bondage. The escaped slaves were considered to be free men.

There was a number of landmark court decisions in which the Canadian courts decided not to extradite and some where they did if it was determined that the escaped slave had committed an extraditable offence while escaping. It was a difficult decision and in some cases if the Governor of Michigan had written that Slave "A" had been charged with aggravated assault and was wanted in Michigan, the Upper Canada courts would determine that the use of force to effect an escape was not a crime in Upper Canada. Michigan was a free state but if the escaped slave from say Kentucky had assaulted someone while trying to escape, he could be charged in Michigan. In some cases the slave owners would pressure a governor in a state like Michigan to do so.

In one famous case, the Governor of Kentucky had requested extradition of an escaped slave by the name of Jesse Happy. Happy had stolen his master's horse and escaped to Detroit and then to Canada. Four years later his extradition was requested and the Upper Canada courts deliberated and then authorized compliance. But the decision was sent to Britain for further deliberation and the advice returned was that no evidence of a crime had been presented and in any case the escaped slave had not stolen the horse but had appropriated it for a length of time and then released it. They recommended to the Upper Canada authorities that Jesse Happy should be freed from jail and permitted to go about his business. And so it was and as a precedent setting decision, the number of extradition cases from US authorities declined.

The arrival of escaped slaves in numbers did pose problems for the judiciary and decisions had to be made as to how these newcomers would be treated when their owners came calling to reclaim property. And it seems that the Canadian courts made many creative decisions that prevented the return of escaped slaves to their masters.

30,000 to 40,000 slaves did make their way to Canada, settling in already established towns or establishing their own towns with permission of the government. Of that number about half came to Upper Canada or Canada West as it was known from 1841 to 1867. The presence of these black people did cause some social upheaval as Canadians were concerned that the newcomers would take jobs away from Canadians. As well, there certainly was racism in these colonies and some did not wish to see the black people come at all.

Towns and cities like St. Catherines, Buxton, Windsor, Hamilton and even Toronto received escaped slaves.

Note the most common escape routes. Not all led to Canada.




The following is an interesting chapter in a book written by an esteemed justice in Ontario who died in 1945, still practising law at the age of 93. His name was William Renwick Riddell and in this book, he describes the legal perils that escaped slaves experienced in Upper Canada and the decisions made in their favour or otherwise.

[Read More]

Cheers,

George



Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
9/16/2023 2:13:02 PM
That really is interesting and informative, George, thanks.

How many descendants of slaves live in Canada now , if we include both fugitives from the USA and the diaspora from the Caribbean ?

An unfair question, perhaps, but it intrigues me.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/16/2023 3:23:02 PM
Quote:
That really is interesting and informative, George, thanks.

How many descendants of slaves live in Canada now , if we include both fugitives from the USA and the diaspora from the Caribbean ?

An unfair question, perhaps, but it intrigues me.

Regards, Phil



I have not been able to find the exact number. Despite the influx of black people into the country via the underground railroad, many did not stay. With emancipation some returned home. Some returned to fight in the civil war.

Today only 4.3% of the population identify as black. Statistics Canada estimates that the number of black people in the country could double by 2030 from the current 1.5 million. Total population of the country is apparently just over 40 million.

We know that many black Canadians in Preston and Shelburne, Nova Scotia can trace their roots back to people held in bondage. These people were brought here by the British when the revolutionary war was lost. Most boarded ships in New York harbour and were transported to NS. They had been promised their freedom for aiding the British during the war. Their departure was opposed by some Americans including George Washington. One of his former slaves was on one of the ships. But that group comprised only about 3000 people and their names were written in a document kept by the British called the Book of Negroes. I must add that not all were former slaves and a few were still slaves as their white Loyalist masters brought them to Nova Scotia with them.


We have also received Jamaican Maroons. That was in 1796 and only numbered about 500. Most were eventually moved to Sierra Leone.

So I cannot answer your question, Phil. The data must have been collected somewhere. I suspect that black community organizations would have information of the sort that you seek. There are also Black Loyalist Heritage Societies that explore the genealogy of black Loyalists who were promised free land and support in Nova Scotia. The Heritage Society in NS is compiling a registry of people who were freed during the American Revolution and brought to Canada as Loyalists.

Incidentally, the NS government, in 2017, began a programme whereby reparations were paid to descendants of black Loyalists who did not receive what they were promised. The government was spurred into action when a UN report highlighted the existence of systemic racism toward black people that existed and apparently still exists in Canada.

We now receive black people from the Caribbean but also from Africa and very few from the US.

So after all of that Phil my answer is I don't know.

Cheers,

George

Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/16/2023 7:16:06 PM
Quote:
Quote:
1849 Harriet Tubman escapes slavery, & starts the Underground RR, does this effect Canada, as well.as the US?? What say you??


30,000 to 40,000 slaves did make their way to Canada, settling in already established towns or establishing their own towns with permission of the government. Of that number about half came to Upper Canada or Canada West as it was known from 1841 to 1867. The presence of these black people did cause some social upheaval as Canadians were concerned that the newcomers would take jobs away from Canadians. As well, there certainly was racism in these colonies and some did not wish to see the black people come at all.

Towns and cities like St. Catherines, Buxton, Windsor, Hamilton and even Toronto received escaped slaves.

Note the most common escape routes. Not all led to Canada.




Cheers,

George



George,

How has this African descendents, escaped slave movement into Canada effected the percentages of African descendents in Canada?? When I visit your country, with the exception of inner downtown Toronto, I haven't seen many black Canadians?? What are their percentages, & where do they mostly reside? Nothing racial meant, just curious??

Regards,
MD

BTW nice map, here in Muskegon we have a famous champion of the over the seas railroad, Captain Jonathan Walker. As the captain & owner of his own boat. He would take boatload of 7-10 escaped Florida slaves to safety of the British West Indies,! He was eventually caught & they (no not slave hunters & owners, but the US Government!?) branded his hand with the double S, brand! Meaning slave stealer! You gotta admire a guy like that!? He's burried in a cemetery near us with a great headstone!! Check out & post if you could post the wiki article on the "abolutionist, Johnathan Walker," its a great story! Anyone??

Also I have been reading a great book on "the secret voyage of Sir Francis Drake!" What's really cool is I open-ed the front flap & it's signed by Drake himself!!!! ☺
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4805
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
9/16/2023 9:15:52 PM
Phil and George, just a minor addition, based more on “common” regional knowledge than anything else.

In the Colony of Vancouver Island (and, later, of British Columbia) the rule of law was needed for a host of reasons. The BNA/USA border was vague at best; a new “gold rush” in the Fraser River was bringing a flood of US 49ers into the colony; Chinese labourers (largely coolies) were being accepted (without any hope of citizenship). Japanese would start appearing by the 1860s. We certainly had a relatively large black population, largely but not exclusively from the US.

With this combination of races and values, the Colony of Vancouver Island adopted and did not waver from British legal precedents and procedures. One could paraphrase and say it was harsh, rigid and quick.

On one of the (now known as Canadian) Gulf Islands – Saltspring Island, some 30 miles north of Victoria – a black community of some sophistication was generated, centred IIRC on the port of Ganges. It was not exclusively black, but blacks owned shops and were teachers and doctors and the like. Even their law enforcement (I believe the title used was sheriff) was black.

I spent a great deal of time on Saltspring in the 1980s, helping a friend build his home, and these stories were largely rumour and pub gossip. I have heard (not having been back on Saltspring very often since then) that there was a colonial history which has uncovered much of the impact of this black community, and I’ve found a few articles about the situation. But I don’t know if Saltspring itself has incorporated this into their cultural and social history.

Cheers
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/16/2023 9:22:53 PM
Quote:
George,

How has this African descendents, escaped slave movement into Canada effected the percentages of African descendents in Canada?? When I visit your country, with the exception of inner downtown Toronto, I haven't seen many black Canadians?? What are their percentages, & where do they mostly reside? Nothing racial meant, just curious??


The influx of 30-40 thousand black people over a short period in the 18th century would have a had an impact. But there have been black people of African descent in Canada for a long time. I believe the the first black slave was owned by a French person in Québec in the early 1600's.

69.8% of the population identifies as caucasian.

The breakdown for other racial groups is as follows:

South Asian (7.1%)
Indigenous (5%)
Chinese (4.7%)
Black (4.3%)
Arab (1.9%)
Latin American (1.6%)
Southeast Asian (1.1%)
West Asian (1%)
Korean (0.6%)
Japanese (0.3%)
Multiracial/Other (3.2%)

The percentage of non-white people in the city of Toronto is 51%. Immigrants tend to flock to big cities for jobs.

As I mentioned in a previous post, Canada's population is just over 40 million. 1.5 million of those identify as black. In 2011, the number of black people was 1.2 million. Canada is accepting a lot of immigrants and refugees and you can see from the list above where they are coming from.

And where do they come from?

Right now Jamaica is the largest source of black immigrants followed by Haiti and Nigeria.

Cheers,

George







Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
9/17/2023 4:20:12 AM
Thanks for indulging my question, George.

A fundamental reason for my interest is the impact slavery has had on succeeding generations of its descendants: the difference between the experience of - and perceptions of - people from Nigeria, for example, and those from, say, Alabama and Jamaica.

The effects of slavery linger through the generations.

Forgive me for stating the obvious.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/17/2023 8:20:12 AM
Today, 9-17 in history we find these not yet commented on?

1787, 39 delegates sign the US Constitution! Do you think today, some of the Constitution is outdated for modern situations!? Anyone?

1862 the Union defeats the Confederate ANV in the battle of Antietam, after finding Lee's battle plan! Comments on it's effects? Anyone??

1939 USSR invades Poland! Why? Was Poland a Russian enemy? Then why invade them? What say you??

1991 both North, & South Korea admitted to the UN!? How is this working out??

Regards,
MD

BTW Thanks George, for your reply on where slaves settled in Canada, here in the US we have about 4 times 12-14% citizens of African decent, than Canada's 4.3%. Does It reflect how prevalent slavery was in the US! What say you??
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/17/2023 8:28:23 AM
Quote:
Thanks for indulging my question, George.

A fundamental reason for my interest is the impact slavery has had on succeeding generations of its descendants: the difference between the experience of - and perceptions of - people from Nigeria, for example, and those from, say, Alabama and Jamaica.

The effects of slavery linger through the generations.

Forgive me for stating the obvious.

Regards, Phil


We here in Canadian are reminded quite frequently by both new black immigrants and by those with two or three centuries of roots in this country that slavery did exist in Canada. The numbers were not huge because the type of economy that sustained the country did not demand masses of labour. But indeed there were black slaves brought to Canada. The French brought a few in though it was much more common to trade for an Indian slave who had been captured by another Indian tribe and who traded with the French. These slaves were commonly called, "panis".

It seems that the First Nations tribes in Québec often raided the Pawnee and transported them back to Québec. They were much less expensive to buy than were black slaves from Africa. Panis was adopted as the term to describe any First Nations slave irrespective of their true tribal name.

I was just reading an article about some French-Canadians who "pass as white" but can trace ancestry to some of the black slaves brought into New France in the 1600's.

We suspect that a good number of Canadians who hail from the former sugar islands of the Caribbean may have had ancestors who were slaves. I believe that at least 85% or more of the black people scooped from Africa were sent to the Caribbean. The rest went to the British colonies on mainland North America and later the US of course.

The numbers quoted suggest that about 4000 black slaves were brought to Canada from the time of New France in 1629 to abolition in 1834. Numbers ballooned with the arrival of the United Empire Loyalists who brought their slaves with them.

Quote:
By the 1790s, approximately 1,200 to 2,000 African slaves lived in the Maritimes (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island). Around 300 slaves lived in Lower Canada (Quebec). About 700 slaves lived in Upper Canada (Ontario).
. source: Canadian Encyclopaedia



Intergenerational trauma related to slavery and experienced by black Canadians seems to be a popular topic right now. Some of our black community leaders tend to conflate the experiences of black slaves in the southern US with the experiences of black slaves in Canada. I am not sure that the comparisons are fair given that the relatively few numbers of slaves in Canada were not employed in the type of back breaking work that plantation workers were. Most were house servants and were called just that, "servants". They were slaves and we have to admit to that. And apparently there were physical, psychological and sexual abuses taking place in Canada though I have not found a definitive study on that matter.

That doesn't make the establishment of an institution like slavery in this country more palatable but context is important.

I believe that many black Canadians are sometimes overly sensitive because of the inter-generational trauma associated with slavery. The buzz word used right now is "systemic racism" which is blamed for everything from poor health outcomes among some black communities to the failure of black youth in the education system to failure to receive promotions at work. I am not convinced that systemic racism can be blamed wholly for failures though I acknowledge that poverty places all people of all skin tones in situations where success may be compromised in any endeavour. And there are too many black people living on the edge financially. That is a problem.

Cheers,

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/17/2023 9:34:59 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Thanks for indulging my question, George.

A fundamental reason for my interest is the impact slavery has had on succeeding generations of its descendants: the difference between the experience of - and perceptions of - people from Nigeria, for example, and those from, say, Alabama and Jamaica.

The effects of slavery linger through the generations.

Forgive me for stating the obvious.

Regards, Phil


We here in Canadian are reminded quite frequently by both new black immigrants and by those with two or three centuries of roots in this country that slavery did exist in Canada. The numbers were not huge because the type of economy that sustained the country did not demand masses of labour. But indeed there were black slaves brought to Canada.

We suspect that a good number of Canadians who hail from the former sugar islands of the Caribbean may have had ancestors who were slaves. I believe that at least 85% or more of the black people scooped from Africa were sent to the Caribbean. The rest went to the British colonies on mainland North America and later the US of course.

The numbers quoted suggest that about 4000 black slaves were brought to Canada from the time of New France in 1629 to abolition in 1834. Numbers ballooned with the arrival of the United Empire Loyalists who brought their slaves with them.


Cheers,

George



Phil, & George,

As you stated the real reason for slavery in both countries is economical. Imagine getting your labor for free, & not only that but a prime slave was worth well over $1,000.00! The Loyalists who migrated with their slaves to Canada, after the war, were doing so not so much that they loved the mother country, but because of the wealth they carried with them!

What say you??
Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/18/2023 7:40:55 AM
MHO,

& today in world history 9-18 comments, or new posts?

Scotty Bowman great NHL coach was born, 1933! He won 9 Stanley Cups! Was he the best hockey coach? I was lucky to personally talk to Coach Bowman!

1898 Sir HH Kitchener is advancing in the Sudan! Later he is responsible for some horrific set backs for the Brits.! What say you? Was he a good commander or not??

1931 the Japanese sieze parts of Manchuria! Why? & could they have been stopped?? Anyone?

2014 Scottish voters reject becoming an independent country!? I thought the Scots always wanted freedom, Why then? Anyone??

2020 Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsberg dies, she begs the coming lame duck President to wait for a more fair replacement, & is rejected! Is today's SC fair & balanced, at 6-3 for a minority party? Should judges serve a life long placement? Comments?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/18/2023 8:01:50 AM
Quote:
Phil, & George,

As you stated the real reason for slavery in both countries is economical. Imagine getting your labor for free, & not only that but a prime slave was worth well over $1,000.00! The Loyalists who migrated with their slaves to Canada, after the war, were doing so not so much that they loved the mother country, but because of the wealth they carried with them!

What say you??
Regards,
MD


MD, I can't agree with your contention that the Loyalists left just to keep slaves.

Too many of them had been persecuted in their own towns. Safety committees harassed them. They were physically abused. Many lost property and businesses when they were forced to leave their towns. Many lost everything and received little in compensation from the states that they were forced to leave. They did receive some from a British commission created to investigate losses.

And they supported the British crown, its laws and institutions that enforced the laws and would not support the insurrection. Many chose to fight against the rebels. Others just kept their mouths shut and carried on as best they could. Both slave owners and those who opposed slavery fought in Loyalist regiments.

It is true that some joined the rebel side because they feared that the British would emancipate their slaves. These owners were also upset when the British offered freedom to any enslaved person who escaped to support the British side.

When the US chose to invade the British colonies in 1812 many of the leaders of the colonial militia were United Empire Loyalists. They had no love for the republic that allowed them to be abused.

I don't believe that they would have left just to maintain control of a slave.

Cheers,

George


Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/18/2023 8:35:26 AM
George,

I guess I was looking at the long range situation where these same southern slave owners would become the fire-eaters of the mid 1800's instigating the Civil War! Earlier timeframes like the Revolution, & 1812 War, these enemies of the new US had different perspectives!

MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/18/2023 9:18:36 AM
Quote:
George,

I guess I was looking at the long range situation where these same southern slave owners would become the fire-eaters of the mid 1800's instigating the Civil War! Earlier timeframes like the Revolution, & 1812 War, these enemies of the new US had different perspectives!

MD


MD, I believe that the greatest number of Loyalists that came to Canada were from the New York colony. Pennsylvanians also came north. And there were some southerners of course. But Loyalists also headed to British colonies in the Caribbean where slavery was maintained anyway.

In 1783 the British took 3000 black people who had supported them in the revolution to Nova Scotia. They were promised freedom. In addition about 1200 black slaves arrived with their white masters. But the number of white Loyalists who came to Nova Scotia numbered 30,000 so by far, most did not bring slaves.

Several hundred black people arrived in Upper Canada either while the war was raging or just after. About 7,500 white Loyalists came to Upper Canada (now Ontario) with 2500 heading to Lower Canada (now Québec).

About 500 black slaves arrived in Upper Canada with their white Loyalist masters. This actually shocked the governor of UC who was John Graves Simcoe who had distinguished himself during the revolution. He was a staunch abolitionist and in 1793 would bring about legislation that stopped the importation of slaves to UC although those in bondage would remain so unless freed by their owners. Children of these slaves became free at the age of 25. Simcoe wanted a complete ban but had to temper his enthusiasm for abolition as the Loyalists were adamant that they must keep their property.

About 300 black slaves arrived with their Loyalist owners in Lower Canada.

So I think that we can probably surmise that most Loyalists did not come to Canada just to ensure that their could keep their property.

Cheers,

George

EDIT: I found this list and biographies of Loyalists and their sons who participated in the War of 1812 on the United Empire Loyalists Association of Canada website. Their places of birth are interesting. So many New Yorkers.

[Read More]
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/19/2023 7:19:56 AM
MHO,

Today, 9-19 in history,

1796 George Washington warns the US to stay out of foreign affairs! Have they listened?? Comments?

1863 the battle of Chickamauga is won by the Rebs. Or was it!? Who won & How did they manage??

& tomorrow, on 9-20 in history the following occurred, any new topics, anyone??

1519 Magellan starts his circumnavigation of the world he is killed in the Philippines! What happened??

1792 France has it's 1st Republic! What is this about? Anyone??

1854 the French & British beat Russia in the Crimea! What's it's significance? What say you??

2017 Hurricane Maria strikes Porto Rico, Is our world messed up by climate change causing this radical weather or are things normal?? What say you??

Regards,
MD

As always, Sieze the day! BTW thanks George, for your take on the Loyalists & their slaves in Canada!
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
9/19/2023 8:15:13 AM
Chickamauga was won by the Rebels on the 20th September, 1863 : the second day of very heavy fighting. This day - the nineteenth- the yankees had held things together. The rebels won on the following day because the yankees mistakenly allowed their centre to open up, and Longstreet stormed the gap with his command and the Union army was routed. The defeated Federals managed to make an epic stand to cover their retreat and inflict huge casualties on the enemy, making Chickamauga a pyrrhic victory for the South.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
9/19/2023 9:29:43 AM
Chickamauga was a tactical victory but a strategic defeat, as the purpose of the campaign was to stop the momentum being built by the Union in the West. The High Watermark had passed; the Confederacy was doomed to defeat unless the Union lost heart.

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
9/19/2023 9:39:57 AM
Dave,

Quote:


1796 George Washington warns the US to stay out of foreign affairs! Have they listened?? Comments?



I would say the US has always had a foreign policy, much like all other nations. Where the US differed from the European nations is that, at times, actively sought to avoid formal entanglements except as it expanded westward. In its 'Monroe Doctrine', the US respected the status quo of European control of colonies in the Americas, but would tolerate no expansion or attempts to regain lost colonies, such as those of Spain and Portugal in South America. However, enforcement of this doctrine proved very difficult until the 1890s, when the US finally had a front rank navy.

There is an argument, for which I have sympathy, that US foreign policy from the 1890s was little different from that of the European powers. The US gained territory and exerted its influence, often at the point of a gun. Was the US occupation of the Philippines markedly different from the rule in a European colony of the time? I think not.

Quote:


1854 the French & British beat Russia in the Crimea! What's it's significance? What say you??



The war went on until 1856, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. During the war we saw the first widespread use of the minie ball (the bullet), to which the militaries of many nations failed to pay heed; iron-plated ships (but quite not true ironclads as would emerge in the American Civil War); telegraph for communications enabling more civilian input into military affairs; war correspondent journalism, giving rapid news to the populations in Britain, France and beyond; and a revolution in battlefield medicine. If the American Civil War was the dawn of modern warfare, the Crimean War was the first hint of it on the horizon.

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/19/2023 8:03:25 PM
Quote:
Chickamauga was won by the Rebels on the 20th September, 1863 : the second day of very heavy fighting. This day - the nineteenth- the yankees had held things together. The rebels won on the following day because the yankees mistakenly allowed their centre to open up, and Longstreet stormed the gap with his command and the Union army was routed. The defeated Federals managed to make an epic stand to cover their retreat and inflict huge casualties on the enemy, making Chickamauga a pyrrhic victory for the South.

Regards, Phil




Hi Phil,

Was that epic stand by the Union, led by Gen. George Henry Thomas, the infamous Rock of Chickamauga!? Care to share what you know about this heroic event??

Is a rock as strong as a stone wall??
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/19/2023 8:09:30 PM
Quote:
Dave,

Quote:


1796 George Washington warns the US to stay out of foreign affairs! Have they listened?? Comments?



I would say the US has always had a foreign policy, much like all other nations. Where the US differed from the European nations is that, at times, actively sought to avoid formal entanglements except as it expanded westward. In its 'Monroe Doctrine', the US respected the status quo of European control of colonies in the Americas, but would tolerate no expansion or attempts to regain lost colonies, such as those of Spain and Portugal in South America. However, enforcement of this doctrine proved very difficult until the 1890s, when the US finally had a front rank navy.

There is an argument, for which I have sympathy, that US foreign policy from the 1890s was little different from that of the European powers. The US gained territory and exerted its influence, often at the point of a gun. Was the US occupation of the Philippines markedly different from the rule in a European colony of the time? I think not.

Quote:


1854 the French & British beat Russia in the Crimea! What's it's significance? What say you??



The war went on until 1856, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. During the war we saw the first widespread use of the minie ball (the bullet), to which the militaries of many nations failed to pay heed; iron-plated ships (but quite not true ironclads as would emerge in the American Civil War); telegraph for communications enabling more civilian input into military affairs; war correspondent journalism, giving rapid news to the populations in Britain, France and beyond; and a revolution in battlefield medicine. If the American Civil War was the dawn of modern warfare, the Crimean War was the first hint of it on the horizon.

Cheers,

Colin



Hi Colin,

Very astute responses to both events, often when the US took over an area, didn't they set s date when the territory would be given back to independence of the country they occupied? Like Panama, & also the Philippines, & I think others as well??

Also I never realized how the timeframes, and war technology were so close between the Crimean War, (1856), & the Civil War, (1861), they were a like, after all? & not just that they were both CW's either!!? Any one care to elaborate on their similarities? Or differences? Anyone??

Thanks,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/19/2023 8:22:41 PM
Quote:

From George, Loyalist website;

EDIT: I found this list and biographies of Loyalists and their sons who participated in the War of 1812 on the United Empire Loyalists Association of Canada website. Their places of birth are interesting. So many New Yorkers.

[Read More]




Thanks George,

I can see from this website how your country cherishes its Loyalists background! In away they mirrored how many Canadians felt about the British, & the new fledgling US? What say you??

Thanks for sharing!
Neat website!

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/20/2023 7:24:41 AM
Last year 2022 at this time was the Royal Funeral of Queen Elizabeth II, below a few pics! Quote:


Representatives of the militaries of Canada, Australia and New Zealand marched in the processional.

Australians


New Zealand



And it was led by these men and women.




Apparently the Queen had considerable input as to the arrangements for her funeral. And she requested that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police be involved. The Queen was quite the horse lover and over the years the RCMP has given her a number of horses, many of whom were trained to be part of the RCMP Musical Ride. The Queen rode one of those horses at special events for years. The horse's name was Burmese. I believe that the four horses that the Mounties were riding had been gifted to the Queen.

I don't suppose that one should feel pride at seeing one's countrymen serving as part of a funeral procession but hell yes, I was.

So the Commonwealth was there to honour their Queen and Canadian Forces personnel commented that they were honoured to do so.

Cheers,

George


How has the British Monarchy done since her absence? Anyone??

God save the Queen!
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/20/2023 8:43:38 AM
Quote:


Thanks George,

I can see from this website how your country cherishes its Loyalists background! In away they mirrored how many Canadians felt about the British, & the new fledgling US? What say you??

Thanks for sharing!
Neat website!

Regards,
MD


For most of us if we pay attention at all, the Loyalists are just part of our history. I wouldn't say that they are honoured today in any meaningful way. Their stories are kept alive by Loyalist associations nationally and provincially. There is a regional element to their story after all. The Loyalists came to the maritimes, primarily Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. And they came to Upper and Lower Canada which has an active Loyalist society. There are even Loyalist chapters in the province of Québec today.

The west and the north were unorganized territories when the Loyalists came north and I would guess that Loyalist history is of minimal interest in those provinces that are now part of what was the hinterland.

In 1789 Lord Dorchester, better known as Sir Guy Carleton the Governor of the Canadas, issued a proclamation that said in part:

Quote:
“Those Loyalists who have adhered to the unity of the Empire, and joined the Royal Standard before the Treaty of Separation in the year 1783, and all their children and their descendants by either sex, are to be distinguished by the following capitals, affixed to their names: U.E. alluding to their great principle the unity of the Empire.”


Today ancestors of the original Loyalists may apply to the Loyalist Association of Canada to affirm their status as descendants of Loyalists and they receive a status statement attesting to their right to place the letters UE after their name. UE stands for Unity of the Empire.

I have yet to see any signature or meet any person who places UE post nominally. I suppose that it is a matter of personal pride to have traced one's family history back to the revolutionary war period and the Loyalist migration to Canada.

As for our current feelings about the US I would not say that they are influenced by the events of 1776-1783 or by 1812-1814 or by the Fenian Raids. There would have been a time in the aftermath of those events that great anger and fear would be engendered by the thought of invasion from an unruly republic.

For the more politically astute there is always a feeling of annoyance that some of our domestic policies and foreign policies are influenced by our alliance with the super power to the south. That is a reality that we must accept.


Today we are friends and allies and for some Canadians we despair at the political circus that has developed in the US and fear that some of the worst of it has crept north. I should think that we share those sentiments with many Americans too.

Cheers,


George


Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
9/20/2023 9:13:19 AM
Quote:
Last year 2022 at this time was the Royal Funeral of Queen Elizabeth II...

How has the British Monarchy done since her absence? Anyone??

God save the Queen!
MD


King Charles III has had a fairly low-key start to his reign, but there has been much political turmoil since then. A wise man keeps his head down when the bullets are flying - which I guess the King has learned rather quickly.

There is a growing resignation and expectation here that the various Commonwealth realms are going to jettison the monarch as their Head of State sooner rather than later. Now a year has passed, which seems respectful enough in terms of mourning HM Queen Elizabeth II, I would expect the republican movements in many Commonwealth realms will start to move their pieces on the board. The Commonwealth would do well to embrace this change and elect a leader who is not King Charles III or his successors(s).

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/20/2023 12:48:49 PM
Thanks for that post Colin. There is an anti-monarchy group in Canada but I would also guess that there is some antipathy toward republicanism. From its inception the US has been observed in Canada and initially Canadians were quite wary of the motives and practices of republicans. I am not sure that many Canadians would support true republicanism with a directly elected President as we see to the south.

There are many Canadians who would prefer to see the British monarch removed as head of state. Some of these people may have emigrated from countries whose relationship with the crown has been fraught.

But the discussion has not gone beyond the removal. We hear little of the process to do so and even less of the type of government we will have. Will we be able to maintain a Westminster style of government in which the leader of the government, the PM, is also the head of state? Personally I think that this style of government has served us well though I would hope for electoral reform so that the elected government is more representative of the voters. First past the post seems rather flawed to me.

I am not sure that the anti-monarchists have considered the formal process to eliminate the King as head of state. A poll released in May indicated that 64% of those surveyed would prefer to see the monarch dropped as head of state. 36% would approve of the status quo.


But the role of the monarch is enshrined in the constitution and constitutional reform is a difficult process. The last two times that we have tried to amend the constitution resulted in political upheaval in Québec. The Québec separatist movement seems to be encouraged when we attempt constitutional reform. But the western provinces also indicated that they were upset with some aspects of Confederation. The First Nations people say that they made solemn treaties with the British crown and the Canadian state cannot alter that.

To remove the King as head of state would require unanimity among the provinces and territories. Federally the Senate and the House of Commons would be required to give assent. The legislative assemblies of all the provinces and territories would have to give their approval.

Some say that Canada is a stable democracy because the crown provides a bedrock which allows disparate groups to live together in harmony in this country. I tend to agree and I think that all hell would break loose should we try to change our head of state to a Canadian citizen. And I would be concerned should a referendum be considered as it would not be binding and I never feel encouraged by populist decision making.


Cheers,

George






Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4805
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
9/20/2023 10:47:38 PM
Second try at a post to Colin’s: Quote:
King Charles III has had a fairly low-key start to his reign, but there has been much political turmoil since then. A wise man keeps his head down when the bullets are flying - which I guess the King has learned rather quickly.

There is a growing resignation and expectation here that the various Commonwealth realms are going to jettison the monarch as their Head of State sooner rather than later. Now a year has passed, which seems respectful enough in terms of mourning HM Queen Elizabeth II, I would expect the republican movements in many Commonwealth realms will start to move their pieces on the board. The Commonwealth would do well to embrace this change and elect a leader who is not King Charles III or his successors(s).

While I accept your anti-monarchial stance, are you playing fairly with Charles in this post.

Word I’m getting out of Britain is that there is mass disillusion with the current social health of the nation, the apparent lack of leadership and integrity provided by the governing Tories, the increasingly catastrophic condition of the NHS, the safety of schools, the honour of the police and the ability to heat the homes and feed the inhabitants of the nation. Whether these ongoing disasters are a result of the economic, social and political idiocy of the Tory-supported Brexit movement might be a matter of opinion, but I see every current reduction in value to British standards of living as politically driven. It scares the hell out of me.

Where does Charles fit in as Britain goes down the toilet? Personally, I thought he fitted in nowhere. He has nothing to do with the disaster Britain has become. He is not a political being; he is (by inheritance, admittedly) a Head of State, just as folks like Cameron, Johnson and the like (I can’t remember all their names, to be honest) are heads of government but with no real position in the realm of statesmanship.

I’m not a strong supporter of Charles. But that isn’t the real issue. Charles is merely the current designated representative of a long-going monarchical value scheme. He can’t do much to either improve or worsen his nation; he can’t do much to impact political direction. In fact, he can only present himself as the current holder of an ancient (and hopefully ongoing) set of values that, theoretically at least, represent British cultural values.

You say, “A wise man keeps his head down when the bullets are flying”. Broadly, that’s true, and maybe Charles is being wise. I might question, however, whether he is acting as a Head of State. He has no means of input into the current political/social/financial destruction Brexit has wrought. But he has a role to play to demonstrate Britain’s better values. I’m thinking, e.g., of his grandparents’ actions, which were of such significance to Britons in 1940. Is this where Charles is failing?

The other point, of course, is that if one rejects monarchy as a titular head of state, what does one replace monarchy with?

Cheers
Brian G



----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/21/2023 8:37:07 AM
Hey guys,

Lets check out new dates & history! Like 9-21, again I'm heading up north again, won't be able to post!!

1823 Joseph Smith Starts the Mormon Church when he sees a Angel!? What say you about the Mormons??

1931 England goes off the Gold standard! How did this effect the worlds economy back then!? Comments?

1950 comedian Bill Murray is born! Personally I think he's 1 of the best at his trade!? What is your fav. BM movie? I really liked, "What about Bob"!! ☺

1981 Belize becomes independent from GB! How & why did this happen?? Anyone?

9-22 events!??

1609 Moors driven out of Spain! Why didn't Muslims & Catholics get along back then? How's it going today?? Comments?

1692 the last of the Salem Witch Trials! How could they really believe in witches at this time!? Anyone??

1776 Nathan Hale a US officer executed by the British! He said I only regret that I have only 1 life to give to my country! He then became an immortal hero to the US cause! Why did the Brits kill such a brave man? Anyone??

1980 War between Iraq, & Iran begins! Just who was the bad guy in this war!?? What say you??

2002 the beginning of banning Fox Hunting in Great Britain! What was wrong with A bunch of royal rich dudes killing foxes!?? Comments?

On 9-23 first day of Fall! check these out! Comments?

1779 off the British Coast US naval officer, John Paul Jones sinks the enemy ship Serapis! becoming an American hero! What say you?

1806 Lewis & Clarke return from mapping the new Louisiana Purchase! How accurate were they? One of them died controversial, soon afterwards? Who & what happened?? BTW were They were fair to the British?? Anyone?

1862 Otto Von Bismarck comes to power! Was he an aggressive war leader!? Was this the beginning of a military based government in Germany!? Anyone?

1949 Rocker Bruce Springsteen was born! Was he really the Boss!? What of Elvis, he was the King after all!!? & others? Anyone??

& finally today 9-24 these events! Please comment on any!??

1755 there are 9 justices in the Supreme Court! Is serving their lifetimes really right? Do they reflect the majority of all US Citizens? What say you?? How can the Court be more fair??

1960 1st Nuclear power sub, the USS Enterprise is launched! Does she still serve? Anyone on her history??

2015 thousands of pilgrims died in Mecca! How could this possibly happen in a religious place!? Anyone??

Now I go to all the trouble to post such a huge thread, please comment on as many events that interests you!?

Regards,
MD

BTW please continue you discussion on today's British Monarchy??
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/21/2023 9:16:18 AM
Quote:
1755 there are 9 justices in the Supreme Court! Is serving their lifetimes really right? Do they reflect the majority of all US Citizens? What say you?? How can the Court be more fair??


There are no perfect selection processes but many US political scientists describe the US selection process as flawed and perhaps not the way to do it at all.

Ideally, the outcome of a case accepted at the SC of any country should not be realized before the case is even heard. But that is the case in the US. The ideological bent of the majority on the SC makes almost every upcoming decision a fait accompli. There seems to be little impartiality in the system.

Not for me to tell the US how to pick their courts of course but I think it would be worthwhile to examine the selection processes in other countries.

I would suggest that the President should never be the person who selects an SC justice. In many countries there are appointed panels whose members may include private citizens and esteemed members of the judiciary. Keep the vetting process as far removed from the legislative and executive branches as possible.

In many countries, prospective candidates must apply to the vetting panel and must present their bone fides. I find it rather alarming that a Presidential candidate would announce while campaigning that he is going to reform the Supreme Court and stack it with people of whom he approves.

Here is a short piece from the Washington Post. It illustrates the importance of the examination of other systems if people in the US truly believe that their SC needs reform.

[Read More]

As for lifetime appointments, I am not sure how many countries would approve of that. Many have adopted an age limit of 75. If nothing else, that allows for a faster turnover and an introduction of newer ideas a little more quickly.



Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
9/21/2023 9:38:37 AM
George,

Other countries including Canada definitely have a more unbiased method! Here in the US we are more fair with picking Refs for sporting events when 2 teams are playing for a bowl or playoff the officials come from another conference! Sad no one is more political than a president, & he picks??

BTW I can't see the Washington post article without subscribeing to the post!??

Thanks on the reply,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
9/21/2023 10:13:17 AM
That's odd, MD. I can see it and I don't subscribe. There are multiple articles on the topic though. It seems that the bias of the Supreme Court and the selection process is of concern to many Americans.

Some of your states have vetting processes for the judiciary that could be applied to the appointment of federal judges and SC justices.


[Read More]

[Read More]

Cheers,

George
DT509er
Santa Rosa CA USA
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
9/21/2023 12:09:11 PM
Quote:
It seems that the bias of the Supreme Court and the selection process is of concern to many Americans. George


Oh boy, not sure I should go here, but the bias of Supreme Court Justice selections is of course biased, biased against the political hackery of liberalism/political activism attempting to write laws and/or alter them in the Supreme Court versus ensuring adherence, lawfully to laws already established which is the purpose of the Supreme Court.

This bias you mention George comes from left leaning media, news and political establishments hell bent on forcing the US republican government to bend over and take all that they wish to dish out; apologies if that is a crude explanation but, it's true. This quote clearly states the role of the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court plays a very important role in our constitutional system of government. First, as the highest court in the land, it is the court of last resort for those looking for justice. Second, due to its power of judicial review, it plays an essential role in ensuring that each branch of government recognizes the limits of its own power. Third, it protects civil rights and liberties by striking down laws that violate the Constitution. Finally, it sets appropriate limits on democratic government by ensuring that popular majorities cannot pass laws that harm and/or take undue advantage of unpopular minorities. In essence, it serves to ensure that the changing views of a majority do not undermine the fundamental values common to all Americans, i.e., freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and due process of law.

The Supreme Court and its Chief and Associate Justices are entrenched for life if they so choose to stay that long; in many instances throughout US history, a justices' stay has been predicated on politics; see Ginsburg and how the left absolutely lost their minds when she bailed out on them, plus there are many other such "adjournments" of which I believe during the US Civil War there is a similar situation but I am going off what I believe versus what I know regarding that matter, or maybe what I think I know.

"various Acts of Congress have altered the number of seats on the Supreme Court, from a low of five to a high of 10. Shortly after the Civil War, the number of seats on the Court was fixed at nine. Today there is one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices of the United States Supreme Court."

When President Trump held office, the left, such as the Washington Post you cited were frothing at the mouth and brain, this is when the battle calls for increasing the size of associates started again but to do so in favor of the left. Anyone who believes that it was meant to be "fair and balanced" is not naive but is either a leftie or disingenuous, at best.

Personally for me, the phrase, "Constitutional Judge" rings loud, clear and appropriate; naturally it is another mater if that judge or judges actually adhere to the principals of such but, the application of a "Living Constitutional Judge" allows for manipulation of the law to fit a political agenda. IMHO, this is winging it and that must be avoided at all costs as the example of winging it we see nearly everyday in the House and Senate; and that demonstrates the strength of the Supreme Court and American Republicanism, no one branch has or can have absolute authority.

The wax and wane of associates on the court pleases then displeases, much like the US Presidency but unlike the Representatives and Senators in the House. The Supreme Court works well, so long as the associates ensure the law is adhered to while avoiding or altering law while ensuring written/enacted laws, etc., do not violate laws already in place or the rights of.


Dan


----------------------------------
"American parachutists-devils in baggy pants..." German officer, Italy 1944. “If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.” Lord Ernest Rutherford
Page 90 of 114 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89    90    91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114 )

© 2024 - MilitaryHistoryOnline.com LLC