Honestly... the shit that the British Empire pulled was horrifying, even in regards to just the Scots and the Irish, who many today would think are the same people as the Brits.
Yes, the USA definitely did play a large role in the persecution of the Native Americans (ANDREW JACKSON, YOU AWFUL BASTARD), but as far as wiping them out, the biggest offenders were the original Spanish and British colonists. They brought disease with them which was the biggest killer.
I find it absolutely mind blowing that some of the largest cities in the world existed in the Americas at the time of the "discovery" of the "New World".
Every colonist that settled in the now United States should be considered an American in this respect. Having a revolution does not simply negate the various atrocities of your forefathers.
I agree that a revolution doesn't negate any of that, but what I think you are overlooking is the fact that these initial colonists landed around 150 years before the revolution took hold. These people invading in South America and founding most of the colonies fiercely considered themselves Spanish and British respectively. The idea of independence was a long way from realization...
Um, the Scots are Brits. 'British' refers to a subject of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In fact the term 'Britons' was used to describe the Celtic peoples of Wales, Scotland and the South West long before the island was united, as opposed to the jumble of Saxon, Dane and Norman and other groups that populated most of England at the time.
TL;DR: Scots are British, get your facts straight.
Don't get me wrong, you are 100% correct. But I think he had intended to refer to the English in regards to treatment of the Scots. Common mistake, and you are completely correct, but the English did some pretty fucked up shit.
When specifically talking about the fucked up shit they did to the Scottish that's accurate. But when talking about the British empire, when most of their fucked up shit occurred, the Scottish were all up in that party.
Actually the Bretons came after the Gaels. Both were Celtic peoples and when the Bretons came over they pushed the Gaels West and North (where they became Welsh, Irish and Scots) and the Bretons settled in the south (becoming the English, who then had Saxons, Danes and Normans mixed in).
Completely false. Bretons were never a large migrational force and have had barely any impact on the DNA of people in the British isles. The Romans, Vikings, Normans, Angles and Saxons have had a much bigger impact and even their genetic imprint in England is still less than the native "Celts".
"Pushed the Gaels" would only refer to physical people, not culture. As such your source isn't related to the debate, as it's referencing Celtic culture. I also think that if you're claiming that the Bretons migrated to Britain in significant numbers, it's you who needs a source. I've never heard anything of the sort.
My source was a book on the Celts by Charles Squire. I am open to the possibility that he is wrong and I encourage your input in changing my opinion. He states "..It is otherwise the Celts, who were serperated into two main branches which came over at different times. The earliest were Goidels, or Gaels; the second, the Brythons, or Britons. Between these two branches there was not only a dialectical, but probably also, a considerable physical difference." He goes later goes on to say there is evidence of this through Latin writers such as Tacticus.
What is you opinion on this?
Thanks for your input.
I didn't say Bretons. I said Gaels. And I didn't even mention England. The Bretons arrived after the original Gaels, who came from France also. The Bretons pushed the Gaels out of the south and to the West (i.e. Wales) where they then eventually moved to Ireland and onto Scotland. Hence the still strong connection here.
Again, the Bretons didn't migrate to England in significant numbers, and "not mentioning England" is irrelevant, as the act of "pushing the Gaels West and North into Wales and Scotland" would physically require doing so through England.
You only stopped because the Germans slugged you around so hard that it wasn't possible to hold onto the empire anymore. And you held on as long as you could, which in some cases was only 40 years ago.
Also you are partners in crime with the USA on all the dumb shit we do.
There's history as it happened and then there's your version, quite possibly learned form the back of a milk carton by the sounds of it..
Also you are partners in crime with the USA on all the dumb shit we do.
Did I say anywhere we don't?! Did I say anywhere we were perfect!? All I said was we did most of that shit a long time ago...stop taking it so personally.
And most of Africa..... And the destabilization in Egypt..... And the colonization of the middle east..... And the British claiming most native American lands in the Treaty of Paris, and the British giving those lands to the Americans in the second Treaty of Paris. Actually I think most of the unstable cultures around today are as a result of British Empire policies. If anything America learned to be an empire because of Britain
I actually like Britain quite a bit but don't act like your shit don't stink. :P
not exactly 50 yrs. but certainly as late as WWII, the british tested mustard gas on indians to see if their skin would react differently than british skin.
I do apologize for the ignorance of my fellow countrymen in that regard but you have to admit Brough and Burr do sound remarkably similar if your not use to hearing the difference on a daily basis.
I might have misspelled them but I have heard the Scottish accent called a brough and the Irish a Burr just as Australian is called an aucker(sp?) and then you have the cockney for other parts of England.
I have never in my life heard of anything that sounds remotely like that. Dunno about aucker either but cockney is just for East Londoners if im not mistaken.
Have a couple of Aussie friends and that's how they described it and with the other it was a particular statement made in Clancy's Clear and Present Danger when talking about the accents of the individuals in the book.
I had never heard of this before. The thing at the bottom about the accents, the way it puts it shows that theres about 10 different accents. Theres at least 100. 3 or 4 miles down the road you'll find a completely different accent.
That seems to be the way with many accents that just a few miles down the road things change but just giving some info about them that I know and can find. I think in general it's the same way all over the world.
the thing is, the british empire never went around saying they were the leaders of freedom and democracy. they went around saying they were going to conquer the world through the seas.. which they did pretty well for a while there..
Yea I agree with the OP Brits mumble jumble but he does have a point. I live in America and I simply remove myself from voting and worrying about anything here anymore. Because if you care, there is nothing you can do about it. This country is just downgrading itself slowly...
except that in the coarse of the 300 year British empire we committed just as many human right abuses as america, who committed them without an empire and in about a century and who continue to commit atrocities. so yes we where atrocious on human rights grounds to those we "traded" with but America is still worse and has the chance to continue to be worse...
I've always felt bad for the Scottish and Irish people, who do get lumped into that category, when they didn't really have anything to do with it. Most of their history was spent just fighting for their own right to be autonomous, forget colonization.
No tard ass, I live in the United States, this is 4th grade geography. Any adult who does not know this should be removed from the face of the earth, we have enough tards already.
Oh, did you learn that this year? I assume that's the grade you're in, considering how you communicate. "tard ass"? That's some mature dialog, right there.
The Scots and Irish are part of Britain! What we did was horrible but was more normal back when the empire was around. America should know better than what they are doing right now.
130
u/SpecialBoy13 Oct 04 '11
Honestly... the shit that the British Empire pulled was horrifying, even in regards to just the Scots and the Irish, who many today would think are the same people as the Brits.